Now available on z8rc.com. Please update your bookmarks. Enjoy.

INTRO
Along with my Align TREX 500E review, currently in progress, I’m going to add a 550E for those on the fence between these two awesome machines. Aside from significantly larger size, this helicopter differs from my 500 in that it is flybarless.
SPECS
- Length: 1042mm
- Height: 356mm
- Main Blade Length: 520mm
- Main Rotor Diameter: 1188mm
- Tail Rotor Diameter: 254mm
- Weight (With Motor): 1800g
- Flying Weight: Approx. 2800g
FEATURES
- Align 600MX 1220kV motor
- RCE-BL70G Brushless ESC
- Three Align DS610 digital servo's, one DS620 digital servo
- 520mm carbon fiber rotor blades
- 90mm 3K tail blades
- Align 3GX flybarless system
REQUIRES
- 7 Channel Radio
- 6S 5000 mAh LiPo
PAID
- $800
UPGRADES
- None Required
ON THE GROUND
The 550 is a pretty big boy and it looks great…
TREX 550E, TREX 500E, Blade 400, Blade SR, Blade CX3, Blade 130 X, Blade mCP X, Blade mSR, Blade mCX |
Component quality is industrial grade from nose to tail.
The 550 is only sold as a kit, so barring someone else doing the build for you, there is no such thing as an ARF or RTF version. Some might be put off by that, you are, my advice to you is not to get into serious RC helicopters. The reason is simple: one way or another, you are going to do some damage to the machine, so you will need to understand it, in and out, to maintain and repair it. Repairs take more time than assembly, because you usually have to disassemble first.
Perhaps Ironically, the closer you buy to RTF, the more likely the helicopter is to crash for reasons beyond your control (mechanical or electronic failure) because the amount of time required to put a quality machine together is cost prohibitive, unless you do it yourself.
Like many, I started out with an RTF Blade 400—back when they made those—I never crashed it, it crashed itself. The RTF Blade’s plasticy parts, from nose to tail did not last long enough to really learn how to fly. My advice to those breaking into larger helis is to skip ARF/RTFs entirely. The quality is not sufficient to get you from A to B, so in the long run, and even the short run, you’ll spend much more time keeping the heli maintained and airborne, not less.
Amazingly, Align twists the above discussion into good news. The TREX series of larger heli’s are surprisingly easy to build. The parts are counts is reasonably low and and assembly methods are simple. The 550 is a simpler, more elegant design even that a pretty small copter like a Blade SR. You can build a this kit in a day, start to finish. If the 550 is your first big heli, it could take some just to understand the basic concepts of a torque tube, etc, but learning time is time you’ll spend regardless of helicopter choice.
The basic 550 construction method is a thick carbon fiber frame sandwiching a few basic components, with plenty of room to route leads and cables. The servos are huge (metal gear digitals ) and come straight from Align, as does the matched 600 motor and ESC if you buy the complete kit. The torque tube is easier to build than a belt driven tail, and eliminates any tension calibration guess work, not to mention that it flies so much better.
My 500 review tests an “old fashioned” TREX with a flybar. This 550 is flybarless. Both fly beautifully. I actually slightly prefer the flybar’ed 500 for a little better inflight feel (I only do light 3D, due to lack of skill so I can’t comment on hard 3D feel). Torque is slightly more evident when maneuvering with a flybar than without, but it is so fundamental to heli flying that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
Where a flybarless design really shines is in ease of assembly and repair. Make sure all three servos control arms are level, the swashplate is level (unlike the photo, which shows the blades stowed), and connect two perfectly equal length control rods from the swashplate to create a level head, and the helicopter will be very close to mechanically set up right from the first hover. Easy peasy.
As the heli gets bigger, receivers seem to get smaller. I installed a Hitec Optima 9 to enable built-in voltage telemetry, give plenty of control, and immunize the high amp heli against receiver brownouts.
Applying some brightly colored, self-adhering monokote to the landing gear and tail section improves inflight visibility and helps with orientation. |
BLUF
GENERAL CONTROL
BALANCE & AEROBATICS
POWER SYSTEM
ADVANCED HANDLING CHARACTERISTICS
IN-FLIGHT ISSUES
APPROACH & LANDING
OVERALL
GRADES
Appearance: +
.
Aerodynamics: +
.
Power System: +
.
Build Quality/Durability: +
.
Value: +
.
Overall Grade: +
.
Individual model recommendations are based on an overall grade of B- or higher. This overall tabulation revealed that covers the 67th percentile and higher, of the top-to-bottom grading scale. Roughly the top 2/3rds of the RC universe was good enough to receive the Z8RC stamp of approval.
Congratulations to the corresponding top 2/3rds of manufacturers who’ve received a Z8RC Recommended overall rating, as measured by their objective review performance. Those manufacturers with fewer reviewed models are less statistically significant.
Z8RC is proud to be one of the only sources of objective RC ratings in the world today. Most if not all RC review sites, RC magazines, RC groups and RC forums, take sponsorship money and a host of other forms of legal consideration from the same manufacturers they pretend to review. IOWs, their model “reviews” are nothing but veiled, paid advertisements.
If you see paid advertisements displayed on an RC website that contains a supposed product review, that is not a review at all, it is a bought-and-paid-for sales pitch.
Update 9/24/2012: I decided to adjust the AS3X gains since my 130 seems slightly over-gained, with routine minor tail oscillations and an occasionally several spasm coming out of a flip. I followed Horizon’s printed guidance and reduced the rudder gain by one click...
The 130 was immediately un-flyable. It goes completely out of control on spool-up, well before getting airborne. Attempting to reverse the change or return to defaults does nothing.
I’m hoping it was a coincidental failure of the D-shape spindle interface on the tail gears, but who knows? At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s an unfixable quantum entanglement with the helicopter’s evil twin in a parallel Universe.
For now, bird dead. Again.
Update 9/23/2012: Z8RC B130 vibration fixes posted. See:
http://z8rc.blogspot.com/2012/09/blade-130-x-100-vibration-fix.html
Update 9/20/2012: All set to go with the new titanium tail pitch slider from MicroHeli. Run-up… massive vibration: tail shaft bearing gone bad; also may have widened the seating hole in the toy-cheap plastic tail casing, no doubt from being shaken to death.
Sweet Jeezus, make it stop.
Update 9/17/2012: In a mostly inexplicable bout of self destructive behavior, I finished a main blade grip replacement after a brownout dropped the 130 X onto pavement, like a dead duck.
But alas, after fixing it, it lost the bind and wouldn’t rebind.
Amazingly, and completely by accident I assure you, I figured out the unpublished (probably because it is unknown to Horizon) answer to my 130’s no-bind defect: move the rudder side to side during binding, full right then full left, repeat until bound. Will this work with all the 130’s out there that won’t bind to DX6i-X’s? I only wish flaky DSM-X was so predictable.
Happy to have the heli finally flyable again, I ran it up for takeoff. The ultra-flimsy plastic tail slider’s bottom alignment pin snapped due to the AS3X tail shaking resonance on run-up that Horizon has officially stated is “normal.”
I’m seriously wondering if this basket case is so criminally cheap that it is un-flyable for more than a few lucky sorties, period. The product is a disgraceful mess in stock form. But… since I have $400+ in it now, I’m going to throw more good money after bad and order some third party fixes from MicroHeli in an attempt to remedy Horizon Hobby’s bumbling design incompetence.
I’m also going to add a small BEC to try to fix the regular brownout and loss of control issues. Maybe it’ll help, or if not, hopefully my experience can be used to save others’ time, frustration and money.
I will post an update when complete. For now, the 130X is grounded for so many hazardous manufacturer design defects that it is an absolutely unsafe product as shipped, even if it could fly, which it cannot.
On a sad but related note, a Spektrum radio brownout terminated control of a 50-size (600) helicopter causing it to severely maul a young girl in Tampa. I predicted that would happen sooner or later. Disturbing, disgusting, shameful, criminal…
Horizon Hobby did not comment on the mishap, but their receiver instruction manuals acknowledge that their brownout design defect is now the leading cause of RC crashes: “Inadequate power systems that are unable to provide the necessary minimum voltage to the receiver during flight have become the number one cause of in-flight failures.”
And why should Horizon comment, when they’ve already stated this:
“HORIZON SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOSS OF PROFITS OR PRODUCTION OR COMMERCIAL LOSS IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE PRODUCT, WHETHER SUCH CLAIM IS BASED IN CONTRACT, WARRANTY, NEGLIGENCE, OR STRICT LIABILITY.”
Horizon knowingly, deliberately, and legally pins the tail of their design incompetence right on you, their customer. Unfortunately for Horizon Hobby the disfigured girl was not their customer so she could not have read the statement, so it has no effect on their liability for the event.
Update 9/17/2012: Ok, I tried to bend over backwards for this thing, but it was not to be. Downgrading to F
Update 9/15/2012: Today the 130’s motor started cutting out for a few seconds at a time, sporadically, in flight. It usually happens after high power has been applied for a while. Most likely the integral ESC is too small and is overheating UMX Gee Bee style. A major design flaw.
I will keep an eye on it and downgrade the 130 further if required.
Update 9/13/2012: The main shaft’s tail drive stripped today from a slight graze on a bedsheet. Gear shavings everywhere. There is no reason in the world a $300+ heli should be so poorly built. Lowering overall grade from C+ to generous
C-.Original review follows:
My last observation on the Blade 130 was that the newest Blade incorporates one of the best Z8RC mods--the mCP X boom truss. Finally the mCP X’s wobble woes were put to bed when Z8RC dicovered the micro heli’s crazy vibration problems were caused by boom-resonance artifacts amplified in an AS3X feedback loop. lade never wrote to thank me; not even a Christmas card. Talk about ungrateful. …but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Time to fly the indirectly Z8RC moded Blade 130:
SPECS:
- Approximate Flight Time: 4 minutes
- Battery: 7.4V 300mAh 2S 35C Li-Po (included)
- Completion Level: Bind-N-Fly
- Experience Level: Advanced
- Flying Weight: 3.77 oz (107 g)
- Height: 4.80 in (122mm)
- Length: 12.0 in (305mm)
- Main Rotor Blade Length: 135mm
- Main Rotor Diameter: 12.8 in (325mm)
PRICE:
- $280 with one proprietary battery
- $17 for second battery (required due to proprietary connector)
- Aluminum Tail Slider: $20 (required)
- Metal tail gear drive: $15 (required)
= $332 with required upgrades, see below
On the Ground:
With the 130X, Blade has wisely incorporated number of user-developed solutions in addition to my off-center, node-dampening boom truss. They shipped the heli with user invented rubber grommets on the swash ball connections, plus added a user base driven brushless ESC and motor.
I think it is a good thing that Blade is watching the community solve problems one by one, then incorporating these better designs into future offerings. What better product evolution model could they ask for than allowing people who actually know what they are doing, doing their design work for them? It’s less comforting that they seem fine with routinely releasing mostly untested products.
Blade did attempt to make minor improvements to the platform. The landing gear is stronger, and there is now a torque rod running through that much stronger Z8RC tail design, instead of including their habitually flawed electric motor tail drive.
Unfortunately, there are several well known deficiencies that Blade ignored or were incapable of tackling in their 130X release:
The 130’s servos are larger, more powerful versions of the same flawed design, and as such are still exposed-gear linear design Rube Goldberg specials prone to quickly acquiring the jitters as dirt coats the exposed contact strips and interferes with the critically delicate pickup wipers. The external gears on these lousy servos remain cheap nylon, giving them a very short half life even under the best conditions. Shockingly, the copter’s main gear is still pressed on using a friction mounting sleeve, allowing the classic Blade problem of a “shifty shaft” causing main blade pitch control to go stupid.
New problems were introduced, as well. The LHS rep suggested buying a metal $15 tail gear drive sold by Blade themselves, as the weak plastic gears strip instantly as a result of even the most minor tail strike or the first time inadvertently plopping the heli down in grass. Huh? Blade knows the helicopter is defective and decided to charge their customers to fix it?! See update, above.
The plastic tail slide is also universally hailed as a “must replace” part with a $20 Micro Heli CNC equivalent as it quickly binds slight causing 130X yaw control to be over the place.
I upgraded nothing for this flight review, frankly wondering if the heli would hold up for a while, or quickly fail.
The first failure was less spectacular and caught me off guard: simple failure to bind. Of course I googled it and found a parade of people with the same problem. After around the 50th attempt of trying everything, from taking the Tx into another room to sprinkling the antenna with Montreal Steak Seasoning (for the sake of clarity to the similarly frustrated: that was a joke) I either got unbelievably lucky or figured it out. The key may have been to input throttle subtrim of –100, input a throttle down-travel adjustment of 125%, and then trim all the way down. I tired each downward adjustment individually, and even in double-combinations, with no success. Only the triple solution worked. I couldn’t risk unbinding the heli to see if the triple-down solution was the ticket or if it just happened to work after a gazillion bind attempts. Frustrating, to say the least.
Add to the frustration that the triple-down-trim piece of the puzzle was quite a trick, since my DX6i’s trim button is broken like all DX6i and DX7 and DX7S trim buttons are broken or very soon will be. Luckily, I had an airplane memory stored with full down throttle trim, so I switched to that as a basis for the 130X and added the other two down adjustments in a last act of exasperation before re-boxing the POS.
With the Sun now long gone due to the 130’s QA and design shenanigans, I hovered the heli inside to at least get a taste of the thing before the next morning.
Wow, now I know why Blade adopted the Z8RC boom truss. Basic vibration and resonance is terrible. In fact, it is so bad around 35% throttle, that the steel rudder pushrod blurs into a frantic sine wave that becomes so big it clacks the tail boom! The tail’s thin plastic vertical fin resonates so badly it flexes wildly to become literally an inch wide.
I was reluctant to spin the head speed any faster, as the heli seemed to by ripping itself apart straight out of the box, but I pushed it harder with a twisted cringe, instinctivel squinting to protect my eyes if the pieces started to fly. At about 45% the heli smoothed out to reasonable, though hardly Align-smooth. Sheeze, that is some massive vibration for a supposedly “flight tested” out of the box sample. It’s hard to imagine 130’s shakes being much worse without acute damage, more insidious long term damage is a given. Above 50%, hovers were well controlled once I toned down Blades recommended low-rate travel to 55% instead of the manual’s too twitchy 85% recommendation.
After just a few minutes of basic control, I found the 130X both a delight and a huge disappointment. Allow me to explain.
The platform is clearly stable, surprisingly so, but only when the ball is balanced right on top of the seal’s nose. Excellent! Unfortunately, Blade’s ultra cheap analog linear servos utterly let the helicopter down. It doesn’t matter if the 130 is perfectly trimmed or not, any significant stick movement ruins any semblance of servo centering and the copter drifts with pace, from a little to a lot, in a never ending random walk. Uhg.
There is no way to achieve solid hovering behavior without manually inputting constant, high frequency tedious corrections. Once you finally coax the servos to center, the heli seizes a moment of greatness and you can feel the 130X’s terrifically stability. Move a stick positively, and its gone. The micro copter is back to acting like a pig on iceskates. What a shame, great digital micro servos cost a couple of bucks, retail. Why would Blade deliberately skimp on basic flight control to save a few pennies? Crazy.
In the Air:
The maiden flight of the 130X went as expected. The mini 130 flies much closer to a real helicopter than the underpowered and boggy 1-cell mCP X.
The second flight ended in a pre-mature auto-rotation after less than a minute (that went fairly well too) after a brand new E-Flight 300 mAh 2S battery died straight out of the bag. Unfortunately, this is predictable E-Flight LiPo performance - abysmal batteries that are wildly overpriced, usually defective, and often dangerous - every one of my LiPo fires have been E-Flite batteries.
Back to the initial flight –
After spending a little time in the hover with decent control, I pointed the small heli toward the big world. The 130’s lack of servo centering precision is less of a problem on the move. In fact, the helicopter is very cooperative in forward flight and doesn’t display any tendency to run ahead in either turn direction. Instead, the little Blade stays nicely controlled and is easy to bend around Figure-8s in reasonably symmetrical fashion and under solid control. If anything, the heli tends to lean back on its haunches and slow a bit without a positive command seeking forward airspeed. This kind of stability is sure to be welcomed by CP beginners.
It was easy to transition to Idle-Up to fly and flip the 130, but the increased head speed seemed to take the battery from solid to shaky, pretty quickly. Aileron rolls, loops, and flips all remained predictable within a cloud of quantum uncertainty defined by imprecise servo control.
The completion of each inverted maneuver resulted in the unwanted loss of a 5 feet or so of altitude (which is around 20% when flying with good visual distance for the tini copter) and about the same amount of random drift. There is noticeable motor bog, but the 130 is a lot better than the 1-cell mCP X’s boggy brushless. Also unlike the mCP X, the 130’s torque-driven tail holds.
The helicopter does have an issue with the tail control (the plastic slider) hanging-up unpredictably during positive rudder movement, but it is not overbearing (yet). Imagine an invisible finger tapping the tail every 5 seconds or so. Not too bad. Certainly not great.
Overall, the 130 is a great training platform for the big helicopter world. It is not without vice. It is not satisfyingly precise, but beginners could easily blame themselves and not notice for a while. It shines as a forward flight trainer. It is an adequately powerful negative pitch trainer with a firm tail gyro spoiled by a cheap plastic twitchy tail pitch slider.
Time for grades:
GRADES
Appearance: A
Great looking helicopter. Not the coolest but far from the ugliest.
Aerodynamics/Handling: B+
Exceptional inherent stability goes largely unrealized due to disappointing lack of servo centering precision. Intermediate-friendly general handling. Tail twang from unruly tail slider can make flips unpredictable. AS3X resonance wobble.
Power System: B
Good power for mild 3D but with noticeable motor bog at steep blade pitches. Nasty vibration and resonance. Weak unreliable proprietary batteries.
Build Quality/Durability: F
Solid airframe. Feeble tail gear set. Weak tail boom. Screw heads are way too soft (and the included screw driver is too big to fit!). Thin tail rotor shaft. Lousy exposed-gear servos with jittery dirt prone wipers. Alarming AS3X resonance issues. Flimsy canopy held together with sloppy Scotch tape. Recurring bind problems.
Value: D-
Eye-popping $332 price tag. Imprecise, delicate servos. Manufacturer refuses to fix known defects. Package finds the sweet spot for a front lawn 3D trainer. Flies bigger than other micros.
Overall Grade: F
Even with imprecision and inexcusable quality fumbles, I want to recommend the 130X but the ludicrous price tag makes that impossible. I could recommend the 130 X at an MSRP of $99.
Update 9/23/2012: The sailplane is ironed out and a wonderful, relaxing glider. It has become one of my favorite planes.
It is a much more efficient glider than my balsa and fiberglass E-Flight Ascent; the DG-1000 has a fantastic glide ratio. The EPO foam has proven to be extremely strong (not that I’ve ever tested it, with a nice smooth finish.
I cut a 0.5” x 12” thin aluminum landing skid and attached it using double sided indoor/outdoor mounting tape to the underside of the fuselage. The plane will actually do touch and goes off pavement, as well as takeoff from a standing start.
Average flight time from a 1300 mAh 3S is 25-30 minutes without thermals to ride. The DG-1000 easily climbs above 1000+ AGL in just a few minutes of motor run time, confirmed with an altimeter, so be sure to use a great full range Rx.
Landings are best accomplished from about a .25 mile flat final. Deploy some spoilerons to lose altitude, but not airspeed. When a few inches above pavement (or grass), slowly retract spoilerons and carefully begin to extend flaperons to hold a few inches of altitude while slowing slow the DG to a lightly skimming straight skid to a stop in about 10 feet. The wing tips stay level, and the plane usually stops on pavement with both tips still in the air.
My view is that this plane is well worth the hassle of adding metal gear servos, a workable ESC and a dedicated BEC.
Update 9/9/2012: Once fitted with all new electronics (only the stock motor remains) and set-up with some trial and error, the DG-1000 is a fantastic sailplane.
It’s a tough call to buy it for the airframe since the electronics change-out is not easy, especially the aileron servos which need to be soldered onto the existing leads. For those who don’t mind the challenge, the retracted motor design makes for exceptionally clean soaring.
Circling with some Buzzards (motor retracted) - thermals took the sail plane up to visual limits, along with the birds. Flight time was 55 minutes on a 1300 mAh 3S.
The following setup seems to be ideal:
- CG (motor in) on rearmost wing screws
- Switch X (on):
- Motor Extended (out)
- Elevator Mix 15% Up (flat offset curve)
- Switch X (off):
- Motor Retracted (in) with 4 second servo travel slow down
- Throttle Hold at 0%
- Elevator Mix Normal
- ESC Brake – Off
INTRO
As Z8RC regulars know, I tend to like and thus review aviation classics. I strayed a little from that philosophy my review of the Hobby King Deamon based on the potential of the airframe to produce an screamin’ 100mph+ sailplane. Come to think of it, my E-Flight Ascent review wasn’t exactly a scale classic, either.
This review gets me back on the classic airplane track!
I apologize in advance to those who’ve asked for a Parkzone Radian review. I thought about it. In the end, the ST Model(s?) sailplane offered a sport scale classic in a more interesting 6 channel package, with a retractable motor and dual ailerons allowing spoilerons. The Radian seems less interesting with only 3 channels and a non-scale airframe, both of which are hard to swallow given my 3 ch non-scale Ascent.
The ST DG-1000 RxR/PnP goes for around $120 street, the similarly sized 3 channel PZ Radian PnP is price-fixed by Horizon Hobby at $160 street. The generally less well received 5 channel Radian Pro PnP sells for $185 street.
The DG-1000 is more feature packed. For one thing, you get a gorgeous scale body. Another is ST Model’s retractable motor system (called RMS in most ads, but is called RPS on the box top), although it clearly impacts WCL (6.3) and it looks a little Rube Goldberg-ish from a reliability point of view.
Then again, folding props are notorious finicky to set up, ESC-brakes vary in capability and consume power, they are hard to balance and often don’t fold cleanly. Even when they are at the top of their game, folding props aren’t as streamlined and get beat up in landings. Another plus for the RMS is that a windmill can be inserted into the airstream (ESC brake – off) to work as an effective speed brake.
I have no idea how the ST DG-1000 is going to work out, if not so great, maybe the Radian will get a chance to play after all.
SPECS
- Wingspan: 79.1" (2010mm)
- Length: 38.2" (970mm)
- Flying Weight: 36.5oz (750g)
- Wing Area: 348.7 sq in (22.5 sq dm)
- Wing Loading: 10.9 oz/sq ft (33.3 g/sq dm)
- Wing Cube Loading: 9.6
Gliders - 1 to 5
Trainers - 5 to 8
Aerobatic - 8 to 11 <--ST Models DG-1000 = 9.6
Scale - 11 to 15
Racers - 15 and over
Fortunately, the manufacturer can’t do basic math. Here are the true, measured numbers including the following upgrades: 25A ESC, Castle 10A BEC, 4 x Metal Gear servos, removal 1.3 oz of nose ballast…
- Wing Area: 434 square inches
- Flying Weight: 33.1 oz (including a 4.0 oz 1250 mAh 3S LiPo)
- Wing Loading: 10.9 oz/sq ft (the blind squirrel found a nut!)
- Wing Cube Loading: 6.3
REQUIRES
- Receiver
- 1300 mAh 3S LiPo
PAID
- $120 (with Towerhobbies’ standard coupon)
UPGRADES
- NA
ON THE GROUND
UNBOXING
APPEARANCE / FIT N FINISH
The first thing I noticed about the appearance of the sail is the foam coloration. There is no paint, just raw EPO. The foam is white enough, but there were dirty marks in a lot of places, indicating the working environment in ST’s sweat shop probably doesn’t meet OSHA minimums, and giving the glider a 10% used look, right out of the box. Paint is always an option, but it adds significant weight.
ST’s EPO foam is the traditional, incredibly strong type, not like Horizon’s soft and spongy, relatively weak “Z Foam.” The surface finish is pretty hard and very smooth. If painted, it would be hard to tell if the glider was foam or fiberglass from 5 feet away.
The major pieces fit together beautifully. The only trick is to make sure the ESC wires don’t get pinched between wing halves as you push the wings in, or they won’t quite squeeze all the way together. The wings get a screw in the bottom which clamps the main carbon fiber spar, so there is no danger of the wings sliding out in flight.
The glider is a true RxR, all the servos are installed, as are all the pushrods and clevises. The only link that has to be made is to thread the elevator’s control horn on the pushrod’s z-bend as you secure it with a single screw. Assembling the big chunks is a breeze. Total time to flight ready, minus receiver set-up, is about 10 minutes. Fantastic.
BUILD QUALITY/SETUP
Receiver and battery installation, is where the fun stopped.
The receiver install was straight forward, including the automated retractable motor system. The retractable pylon is operated by a full size servo, and is implemented just like a landing gear servo and is appropriately labeled “Channel 5.”
There is a custom sequencer board that intercepts the ESC and motor pylon servo, with an input and output for each, including tiny pots for making end point adjustments (EPA). It worked, though I have no idea what’s going on inside the mind of the custom board. I prefer less magic. What if the custom board goes “Poof!” Then what?
I plugged in the battery, and… no motor arming, but the flight control servos worked. Unplugged and jiggled stuff, plugged back in, and, nothing. The heavy accent Chinese instructions were no help.
On a whim, I input put full down trim into the throttle. “Dooo dweeet,” the motor armed after about 5 clicks of throttle-down trim. The magic board’s EPA pot calibration is probably to blame.
Once armed, the motor worked well and was tremendously strong near full throttle—which I decided to forgo until airborne, since the pylon looked a little stressed under all the static thrust.
After tucking the motor in, something smelled funny. You know, that servo or ESC is burning smell. I popped off the nicely executed, chunky, positive snapping battery hatch to see what was going on while I pulled the battery. Battery out, more smoke. Uh oh.
Fortunately, the fire turned out to be the ESC that burned to a charcoal crisp (fortunate because I keep a stock of ESCs on hand). But yikes. That’s Made in China for you.
I have a rule here on Z8RC: If a plane burns during a review, it get’s an F overall. So that makes the overall grade easy.
What wasn’t so easy was replacing the ESC, since it was installed before the fuselage halves were factory glued together. After snipping all the wires to it, the crispy critter finally ripped out, still smoking.
New ESC installed; on came the battery. Nothing. The green LED on the magic board was no longer lit. Bypassing the custom board worked 100%. I guess when the ESC went “Poof!” so did the custom mixing board. Now what?
Disgusted, I walked away and did what I do best, thought for a while.
A solution hit me: make the switch to retract the motor a throttle cut-off switch and put a servo speed delay in the retraction to allow the motor to spin down, catch the physical prop brake, and stow cleanly.
Ta da! Works better than the original set up. After some experimentation, a 4 second retraction and instant extension seemed to work best.
That’s when I noticed the rudder servo quit. The rudder and elevator servos were also installed before the plane halves were glued. Rather than tear the plywood mounting bracket out of the plane to access the servo screws (both fuse servos are mounted to the plywood from the bottom, and sit nearly flush against the keel), I decided to take a different route. I cut a servo access hatch in the bottom of the fuselage. Both servos replaced with metal gear digitals after about 15 minutes.
Done.
That’s when the spring on the motor hatch door went “poing” and literally vanished from planet Earth. Rubber bands installed, again, better overall function than the original config.
Finally, the glider was RTF. It looks awesome. The instructions were right about one thing: “if you take your time, you will wind up with a well built model.”
Uhg.
GROUND ISSUES
- ESC caught fire with the throttle in idle
- Dead RMS sequencer board (probably killed by the ESC short)
- Dead rudder servo (probably killed by the ESC short)
- Motor hatch doors are finicky; one of the springs flew off into a Wormhole. It emerged in a Quasar some 12 billion light years away. Unusable.
IN THE AIR
BLUF
An excellent slope soaring airframe packaged with the worst electronics seen to date.
GENERAL CONTROL
Once all of the servos were replaced with metal gears, the DG-1000 is a joy to fly.
The sailplane is designed for high efficiency wings-level flight, and consequently does not roll well. Mixing 50% pro-rudder with aileron is very helpful for effective general control.
The various configurations of the sailplane take some getting used to, but are entirely predictable. Generalizing on each basic config:
BALANCE & AEROBATICS
Loops can be large with impressive speed in the dives. Barrel rolls are a little strained. Axial aileron rolls are not in the model’s portfolio.
Balance is more interesting than normal, since the retractable pylon shifts motor weight substantially.
It makes sense to balance the plane for best glide performance with the motor retracted. With the motor collapsed, the nose feels light and airy with the rearmost CG possible.
When the motor pops up, the CG becomes slightly nose heavy. Applying a lot of power drives the nose down somewhat, given the high mount of the thrust line. The sailplane has a strong tendency to climb as airspeed builds, so the motor-up/power-up flight character generally holds level as power is applied. If you gun the throttle in the bottom half of the airspeed envelope, the motor will actually drive the DG-1000 downhill until enough speed accumulates and the bird transitions into an arcing, strong climb.
Video shows a 1300 mAH 3S:
That said, I initially experienced two glitches; both were easily and fully solved.
** Because the full sized pylon extension servo needs 6V to pop up reliably under load, causing a power high drain on the servo bus along with a motor spool up load and potentially large control surface loads on the servos, this DG-1000 should not be used in stock form with Spectrum/JR radio systems. It will brownout the Rx and drop the link.
ADVANCED HANDLING CHARACTERISTICS
NA
APPROACH & LANDING
Easy landings are aided by a nice decent rate with spoilerons extended.
Motor-up and wind milling is another high drag landing option,even with spoilerons up. This landing config has the added benefit of easy go arounds or energy adjustments. Still, I prefer spoilers up and motor closed, because it is easy to mildly cartwheel big gliders as they eventually lower a wingtip into the grass or pavement; having the motor up would seem to increase the likelihood of damage from side loads.
IN-FLIGHT ISSUES
1. Servos glitched without a dedicated 6V BEC
2. Tail plane was cockeyed due to warped vertical stabilizer, possibly due to heat during shipping. A carbon fiber poker, coated with gorilla glue, jammed up the DG’s tail inside the foam straightened it out. That’ll teach it.
3. One cheap aileron servo died on the first flight from gear slippage. Replacing the aileron servos required snipping the servo leads and splicing-on a servo plug, since the existing plug is permanently embedded inside the wing. Change all 4 servos to metal gear before flying.
4. Motor pylon resonance was present at high throttle settings at low or no airspeed. Reinforcement with acarbon fiber truss solved the problem. Additionally, the nose-down moment of the extended motor is best combated with low power settings at low speeds, including during hand launching (40-50% throttle works well; see video).
OVERALL
Once ironed-out, the DG-1000 is a blast to fly and sure to become one of my favorites, especially in high wind. The RMS is a unique feature that adds a lot of utility and another level of required mastery, as the CG shifts and the high thrust line demands elevator anticipation and finesse.
The question is: how much ironing-out is required?
Answer: a lot! All of the electronics have to be replaced before flying and a 6V capable BEC must be added. Replacing the aileron servos is not plug and play since they have to be spliced-in.
The sailplane had no trouble handling todays 20 Gust 40 mph winds. Nothing else I own could’ve flown today, with the exception of the HK Deamon but it is less stable. Really quite amazing.
GRADES
Appearance: A+
Classic DG-1000 lines and proportions. Well done.
Aerodynamics: A
Quick. Excellent slope soaring and wind penetration. Best flown wings-level; poor roll agility. WCL is a little on the high side.
Power System: A
Surprisingly strong motor. RMS works very well but requires 6V servo bus voltage. 25 min flight times on a 1000 mAh 3S.
Build Quality/Durability: F
Worst electronic component quality seen to date. Super strong EPO airframe is almost worth the hassle.
Value: D
Consider the low price an airframe kit (not a PNP) with a motor included. The high level of completion goes unrealized.
Overall Grade: F
Super-fun sailplane, when a servo isn’t slipping or the ESC on fire.
Anyone who’s flown the Blade 103 X will tell you, the tail was botched badly.
The vibration problem:
Horizon Hobby wanted to use a Z8RC mCP X boom truss to limit 130 X vibrations, but bad implementation decisions drove them down a wrong path to disaster. In order to attach the truss to the boom, HH used a square cross section Carbon Fiber tail boom. The square x-section was a rookie mistake, as most people know CF isn’t that great in torsion rigidity in the first place; go to a square x-section and you’ve built a real twisting fool.
This means that any rotor imbalance (in blade lift or blade mass) will be magnified through the end of the twisty tail, and certain frequencies will resonate. HH made the rookie design error of attaching the truss mid-way down the boom, encouraging one octave higher harmonic resonance.
Before starting any fix, do a blade balance and see if the problem is reduced or eliminated. I was able to reduce, but not eliminate the vibration with balance. The rest went away with the fix below.
Balance both the tail blades and the main blades. There are two methods to balance heli blades. One is to start adding small pieces of tape to one side and do the “better or worse?” test. Repeat until it is as good as it gets.
The other is to remove the blades and use a single screw to attach both blades together through their mounting holes, fairly tightly. Do this with blades like they are on the helicopter, extending in opposite directions. Now you have a seesaw that can be balanced pretty easily, using tape, by setting the shaft of the screw on two raised blocks or drinking glasses, etc.
To fix the boom design, first, I added longer CF rods, CA’d into ball links to fashion larger trusses, then I inserted a small section of CF tube in the middle as a tensioner and a 3-point stiffener. The tail control rod needed to be bent a touch straighter, easy enough.
An invisible fix, in the photo above, was to stuff an aluminum tail axle spacer tube (from a 130 X tail gear kit) into the boom itself, to eliminate resonance inside torque tube. It is a perfect fit. Slide it almost, but not quite half way down inside the square carbon fiber tail boom. It will get stuck in there, from the natural squeeze of the boom. The torque rod passes through it perfectly.
The Blade 130 is a much more rigid flier with this Z8RC 100% vibration fix. Handling, tracking, and hovering are much improved! Flips are a lot more predictable. Now if I could fit up some digital servos, this little copter would really rock and roll.
INTRO
Prescision Aerobatics original 39” span/485 sq inch Addiction quickly gained a reputation as an outstanding 3D aerobat and trainer. PA’s Addiction X is a 50” span/744 sq inch second iteration. It doesn’t come cheap at $253 for the bare ARF airframe, or about $400 RTF.
Is the Addiction X worth the $400 price tag?
“The ground is the limit!” |
Gliders - 1 to 5 <—Addiction X = 3.7
Trainers - 5 to 8
Aerobatic - 8 to 11
Scale - 11 to 15
Racers - 15 and over
FEATURES
- Fiberglass and carbon cowling
- Balsa, ply, carbon fiber construction
- Carbon fiber landing gear
- Fiberglass and plywood wheel pants
- Slow Speed vortex Kit
REQUIRES
- Motor
- 50A ESC
- Servos
- Receiver
- 2200 mAh 3S LiPo
PAID
- $235 Addiction X Airframe Only
- $18 Addiction X Vortex Generators
= $253
UPGRADES
- Addiction X Vortex Generator Kit
ON THE GROUND
IN THE AIR
GRADES