Teksumo center-pod mod

Every five years or so a new generation of RC plane emerges.   The current "it" plane for this generation is the Sonicmodell AR Wing  If you fly FPV you'll love this plane. If you don't fly FPV, it may not be a plane you need. The last great "It" plane from the line-of-sight era when it came to cheap and readily available delta wings was the Popwing 900mm or Teksumo sold by Hobby King.   For some reason, the orange Teksumo was owned by everybody in that era.  It's a great plane, and loved by many.  And, unfortunately, most are locked away in dark garages.




After years of trying to modify this plane Hobbyking updated it with a better motor mount and a small spot for an FPV camera.   It didn't transition well.  The beautiful fish graphics were replaced with graphics that looked to be designed by a high school student.   The Teksumo's familiar orange color was replaced with red, blue, yellow and green.    Now it looks as though yellow has survived as the other colors are now discontinued.  Thus, I'm uncertain what the future holds for the Teksumo.  (Update, Hobbyking discontinued the Teksumo)



New design of the Teksumo in blue, now marked as "Discontinued."

The issue is that time have changed, and people are into FPV.   Even  if they can't get INAV going they can still figure out how to hook up a video transmitter and FPV camera.  The Teksumo went along for the ride for a while.  There were a number of attempts to drag the Teksumo into the next generation.   Today we'll look at one, the V4 Blunt section sold by Hanger Cats.  RCGroups still has the inception, life and eventual fizzle out of  the center section project.  One engineering-oriented hobbyist came up with it, and for a while, people were very into it.  Today, it's resurrected and given another go with INAV.  This means that it has flight stabilization and other interesting modes.

Omnibus F4 V3 Clone Flight Controller

I just so happened to have an older orange Teksumo that I got on sale a few years back sitting in my garage.  I ordered the pod, painted it orange and covered it with wood glue.  I ran two spars that glued into the cutouts on the bottom of the plane.  The spars cut into the very cramped pod making it even less usable, so this was a mixed blessing. The spars didn't run far enough into the plane to be of much use.  At best it helps hold the foam onto the pod a bit more.  The plane needs to be hung up when not flying because it will warp.   I put on what I believe to be a DYS 2822 1400KV motor.  It's okay for this application. It provides for a tame flying experience. The pod holds the 4S 1300mAh battery which is perfect for the CG.  I fitted a VTX and FPV camera onto it, and it seems to work well.  The camera and VTX were Eachine and the flight controller is a clone Omnibus F4 V3.    This is a low budget build.  The elevons were replaced with  1/4 inch (6mm) balsa wood.


The first build was with a BR2212 1400 KV motor.  I used a battery that was too heavy and this plane barely flew.  It needed a lot of speed and I did not enjoy it. I was debating removing the pod and calling the project a failure.  I decided to drop the motor weight  and try to keep the plane light and nimble.  This proved to work well.  Getting it to the point that it could take a flight controller led me to hand trim this plane.   There was enough space for a flight controller.

How it flies

The All Up Weight of this plane with the 1300mAh 4S battery is 19 ounces (538g) which is insane for a plane of this size.  The center pod is 76mm and takes the wingspan up to around 1 meter (approx 40 inches).   The center section adds to the wingspan without adding very much weight.  Thus, the plane is inclined to glide quite a bit.

This formula of weight and power worked.  The takeoffs are fine but there isn't a lot of excess power.   Climbs are a bit slower than what I am used to, but it's not that bad.   I put the plane into a stabilized mode.  Keep in mind, the Teksumo has the tendency to float if you build it light.  What I did was turned it into a plane that floats a bit better than before.   It is surprisingly stable in the air.  It would be a nice plane to shoot video with because it doesn't move around all that much.  When you cut the power it doesn't want to fall back to earth.   It's a nice slow glide.

If you're into relaxed FPV, this is the plane.  It's only downside is that it may be a bit too relaxing.  Large and stable,  simple to fly, maybe a good platform for beginners.  INAV has a few stabilized modes and  3D Cruise.    You can put this plane into a 3D cruise, walk back to your car, get something, perhaps use the restroom on the way back.  Don't worry, it's not going to fall out of the sky on windless mornings.  It will just float.  It's nice  if you're into large and  simple flying.

Thoughts

It's a nice plane, I do enjoy flying it.  I think I am a bit stuck with a motor that works but doesn't scream.  I am not exactly motivated to change things around for the time being because I am overall liking how this flies.

I just don't think this is the plane where you can throw in fat spars and huge motors without the center pod breaking apart with less than stellar landings. For me, this is as good as it gets.  I am a bit skeptical that 3D printed pods would hold up much better.

My thinking now is to wait around a few more months and see if the Teksumo comes back into regular stock at Hobby King.  I still believe it's a popular plane that will stick around for five to 10 more years.

The fun next step for this plane wouldn't be a 3D printed pod,  but one made of foam. Perhaps a bit thicker foam than the wings, so  that that you could bury a battery.   It would be better able to take thick spars and place them where you like.   Just know that you'll be chewing into spars that are already in the wings. You need something that could take a beating  and still hold together.  I do have contacts in the foam industry.

Let's see what happens with Hobby King and the Teksumo.

Upgrade your motor (Mod Month)

The motor is the single most confusing part of the RC hobby.  It's easy to simply get this wrong and end up with a plane that doesn't fly well.   And yet, they are often so inexpensive that getting the right motor won't break the bank.   You may end up with a "motor box" full of motors that you've pulled off of planes and are holding for future projects.  Thus, if you've got a plane that you feel would benefit from a better motor,  let's do it!





Step 1 Find your All Up Weight (AUW).

Let's assume that you have a plane that is flying but you wonder if you can get a better motor? The first step is simple, set the plane up like you’re about to fly it. Add your battery and cameras and whatever other things you would add. Then, weigh it.  If you’re a fellow American be sure and convert that imperial weight to grams, it will make the rest of this much easier. This weight is your “All Up Weight.”  What you are looking for is the maximum weight the plane will carry.




Example: AR Wing

The AR Wing is a bit of an oddball.   It flies with so many different motors, and different people swear by their exact formula.  Since there are so many motors that could work with this plane I cannot cover them all.  Feel free to tell us what you're using in the comments below. We’re going to find a new motor for an AR wing that has an AUW between 600 to 700g.

Step 2.   Establish a flying goal.

Do you want 15 minutes of relaxed, slow-flying? Do you want the fastest 4 minutes of your day? Choose between speed or efficiency. Unfortunately, you can’t have both. When it comes to the AR Wing you can probably own two copies of this plane, one for speed and one for efficiency. Your flying goal will dictate the type of motor to select.



Step 3    Identify any physical limits upfront.

Sometimes motors have to fit inside of enclosures or have foam surrounding them. If the motor is too wide or too long it won’t work. If they are going to be used on the front of a traditional plane such as EFlite Radian where the mounting holes and shaft are on the same side, this drastically cuts down the number of motors that can work for your plane. And sometimes the shaft has to be of a certain length so that the shaft can pass through the cowl with enough shaft to attach the prop and prop adapter.

You will also need to measure the mounting thread spacing, often they are 16mmx19mm or 19mmx25mm. If the motor is going in a pre-established motor mount, the holes need to line up. In our AR Wing example, you simply attach the motor with a crossbar mount thus this isn’t usually an issue. Also, there are no motor width and length issues to worry about.

Phantom FX-61 Aluminum Motor mount by SmallPartsCNC.com

The last thing you will need to measure it the prop size and try and figure out if you can get by with an even larger prop. Most flying wings have limits on prop size you can use. If you go too large it will hit the elevons on the AR Wing.


If you have a special case where you need a specialized motor, it's time to do many Google searches and see what has worked before. A very good source for difficult to mount motors due to proprietary motor mounts or other mounting issues is SmallPartsCNC.com They have motor mounts that convert many proprietary mounts back to more commonly used motors.



Discovering motors

I am not going too deep into motors, but this should be enough information to get your beak wet. Trust me, there is a lot more information about motors on the web. I should be able to help you get started. A new motor can bring new life to a lackluster plane. This is an area that is a bit challenging, but once you get going you’ll be addicted. I discuss these topics in my order of importance, or at least, how important it is in my never-to-be humble opinion.

Weight

I put this as a top priority because if you get this wrong, it will lead to a lot of other problems.
If you go too heavy with a motor you run the risk of negatively affecting your plane. I know the feeling, you just so happen to have the perfect motor on hand, why not simply use it, even if it’s 20g heavier? Can’t you just put 20g on the other end of the plane to counterbalance? It doesn’t really work that way. The 20g on the motor could mean that as much as 80g on the other side would be needed to counterbalance a plane. When you start adding 100g to a small plane it can be devastating. You will need more speed to keep it flying and when making turns it will feel like it wants to fall out of the sky. Thus, the lesson is that you shouldn’t add motor weight unless you’re pretty sure that the plane can handle it.

Often we go the opposite route. We reduce motor weight to get better glide characteristics depending on the plane. On flying wing planes the results are often very good. Manufactures often spec out the correct motor to use for kits. Look up the weight of the suggested motors and look for motors around this weight range if not a bit lighter.

Thrust

We’re referring back to the “All Up Weight” that we established earlier. fIt’s the total weight of the plane when it’s ready to fly. In our example, we established 700g as the maximum AUW. I guess it’s pretty obvious we want a motor that can push out at least 700g of thrust? What happens if it pushes out 1400g thrust?   Or maybe we can change the topic a bit and ask, why does the motor of your car go faster than the speed limit if you're only legally allowed to drive the speed limit?  These two topics are related.

Once you get to a cruising altitude and slow your plane down you'll be using up to 80% less power than when you took off.   When you get your plane flying you'll be amazed about how fast your battery drains when you first take off, and how long you can make the remaining voltage last.  Thus, max thrust is often a short-term need.

Can you launch a plane with  a motor that has less thrust than the UAW?  For example, will a motor that only puts out 550g of thrust work with  our AR Wing?    Yes and no, it can work, sometimes. With a hard throw into the wind, it may take off.  But, you'll have a lot of failed launches.   After many failed launches the plane will start to collect some serious damage.  Thus, covering  AUW is a minimal requirement.

Efficiency

Efficiency= grams of thrust /watts- (I know I told you there would be no math, sorry)

This is a statistic that gets thrown around a lot when you’re looking at motor specs. A motor that has an efficiency of 2.5 means that for each watt the motor is consuming it is creating 2.5 grams of thrust. Obviously, the higher the number the better.  We’re going to look at a chart, but keep in mind, this chart is relevant for one motor and a set of props. But, from it, I will make some generalizations.






The chard shows 7 different propellers, all 5x4, with 2, 3 or 4 blades. The bottom is the amount of thrust in grams. The left is efficiency.

100g of thrust- All props are nearly identical in efficiency which is 2.5
200g of thrust- The props start differing, the spread is between 3.1g and 3. 5g of thrust.

300g of thrust- The spread tightens up to between 3.3g and 3.6g grams of thrust
400g of thrust- Maximum efficiency, the spread is between 3.4g and 3.7g of thrust
500g of thrust- All props show a decline in efficiency

In this particular example, at maximum thrust, there is a 20% spread from best to worst.

The takeaway

The story here isn’t the difference in props, but the graph.

1 There is  a rapid ramp-up in efficiency,
2.  a small plateau and then
3.  a distinct drop.

They will advertise this motor can do 1300g of thrust, but efficiency drops through the floor to hit that number. This means that after a certain point the motor is becoming less efficient and some of the additional energy consumed is turning into heat.

If you had a 1300 gram plane, with the right prop the plane will take off and climb. But that motor will get hot. If you’re doing a lot of climbing that moto will run your battery down quickly.

In our example, we have a 700g AUW AR Wing (900mm). If we put this Hyperlite motor on that plane 700g is just past peak efficiency, but it’s not to the point where efficiency is free falling. If you’re cruising (low throttle)  you can see that it’s probably close to maximum efficiency.

We’ll call this motor’s cruising efficiency 3.6, which means for each watt, the motor at cruising speed is putting out 3.6 grams of thrust. So, at 100 watts this motor is putting out 360g of thrust (which should be ample to cruise the AR Wing). (100w/11.1v)=9 amps on a 3S battery.

Thrust is concerned about getting your plane in the air, efficiency is about keeping it in the air as long as possible. You'll need to focus on your cruising throttle because this is where you can maximize your flight time. For our AR Wing example, this is the least efficient of the three motors we'll look at. If you happen to have this motor and want an AR Wing that can fly fast, this would be a good choice.

The reason why your car motor can go faster than you can drive is that it's trying to maximize fuel economy at speeds you'll drive.  Just like in the graph above, your often better off with more thrust than you need to hit maximum efficiency.

Motor KV and other numbers

The following are the specs for the second motor we'll look at, DYS D2826, well take it piece by piece


This diagram is showing you that the motor mount has hole patterns that are 19mm apart and 16mm apart. In our example of the AR Wing we don’t care because the motor will be mounted to a crossbar on the back of the plane. On certain planes, the manufacturer is very specific about what motors will work and your motor has to match up with the hole pattern. The 4-M3 means that it requires a quantity of 4 M3 screws. The motor comes with them and the crossbar.

The 37 means that it’s 37mm to the back of the motor to the end of the shaft. The 27.7  motor width can really be considered 28, thus the motor is 28mm wide. The length of the bell of the motor is 26mm. DYS (also Turnigy) uses the naming convention D2826 which is the width and length of the motor. The 3.175 is the width of the shaft which is important when you’re ordering prop adapters. 3.175 is a fairly common size. The shaft is 9.5mm in length.



Here’s some information to make decisions.

Model:: Four are listed, D2826- 6,10,13, or 15. The numbers refer to the number of turns in the windings of the motor. When we talk about motors we talk about KV instead of winding turns.

Motor size and shaft- We reviewed above

Weight: 50g- Your plane has to be able to handle 50g. The AR Wing does.

KV- This does not mean kilovolt! A kilovolt is 1000 volts.  (Thank you for clarifying this Stefan) I can assure you that we never talk about numbers this large when it comes to motors! This is a mathematical formula, and unfortunately, this chart is wrong It’s not RPM/ volts. K is a constant that is multiplied by volts.

K*V

Thus a 2200KV motor 2200 is the K. So, at 3S it would be 2200(11.1)=24,420 RPMs! If you were to do test this motor at full throttle it will spin fairly close to that number. But the catch is, it can only achieve this number without a propeller. Once you put the prop on, the RPM drops.

Max Power: The 2200KV motor puts out 342 watts, but with a max of 3s

342w/11.1v=30.9 amps, this means you can get by with a 35A speed controller

The 930kv motor is
130w/11.1v= 11.7 Amps, which means you can get by with a 15 amp speed controller, 40A is way overkill!

Battery- The motor only takes 2S or 3S

Propeller- I am going to save you time and money. Don’t put on props that are too large for your motor unless you’re sure you know what you’re doing. When you overload a motor sometimes the speed controller kicks in and shuts it down, sometimes the wires in the motor melt and sometimes speed controller catches on fire. Fortunately, I haven’t had a plane on fire, deadstick in the air, but that day is coming!

The larger propeller is for the 2S, the smaller is for 3S

Tangential velocity Formula- Interesting, not sure why it’s on this chart, and it certainly doesn’t cover thrust.


ESC: Already covered, but just wrong how it’s listed.

Further documentation:

Pull (AKA Thrust)- 960g/780g/660g/645g




Efficiency calculations

Motor                 KV      Thrust          Watts          Efficiency
    6                    2200     960g             342            2.81

  10                    1400     780g             205            3.80

  13                    1000      660g           150             4.4

  15                      930        645g         130                5






The last motor  (930kV) has an efficiency of 5, and you’re correct to assume that if you drop the throttle it will be even more efficient. So, why don’t we simply use that?  Two problems. The first is that its maximum thrust is less than the maximum AUW. The second and larger issue is that the suggested 10x7 propeller is far too large for the AR Wing. The propeller would hit the elevons.

The 1400KV at 205 watts would mean that max power is about 19 amps. The 7x4 prop will fit on the AR Wing. It would cruise at less than 7 Amps. With a thrust of 780g it has enough thrust to get the plane in the air.  At 3.8 efficiency, it's worst efficiency is better than the Hyperlite's best efficiency.

Would I use the DYS D2826 1400KV motor on my AR Wing?   I have a used motor box that is full of motors that have come off of planes. If I found this motor and checked the specs I wouldn't think twice about bolting it onto the AR Wing. I would get the plane flying and for the most part, would be happy with this motor.  This is a motor that would need full throttle to launch the AR Wing and would probably sit at full throttle for around 10-15 seconds until I got to a comfortable altitude.    It's going to chew up the battery a bit, but it will work.    Would I go out of my way to buy this motor for the AR Wing?  No.






Another entry for our consideration for the AR Wing is a motor suggested by AR Wing expert and all-around good guy, Marc Hoffman. Getting suggestions is often a good way to widdle down the list of motors. There’s an old expression that goes like this “Trust, but verify.”

Sunnysky is a well regarded, well-trusted name in motors. It’s a premium motor that isn’t too outrageously priced. If we were to use the same naming convention as other motors this motor would be a D2834, and yet it’s known as X2212 1400KV . Here’s the link to the tech specs.

http://img.banggood.com/file/products/20181108032158X2212KV1400.pdfThis is a 1400KV motor that weighs 51g.

The good news is that Sunnysky has offered this chart, but you have to look for it. The information is nicely laid out and the work is done for us. At 700g of thrust, the motor has an efficiency of over 5g of thrust per watt, which is better than any motor we’ve seen thus far. And it only gets better as it cruises. Marc often talks about cruising on 2 amps which has an efficiency of over 7. This is a slow flyer prop which means that it’s best suited for cruising.



What I currently have on my AR Wings

First AR Wing

The first AR Wing had a 2204 motor on it at first. I added it as it was the kit version.  I couldn't get decent flight times with it.  To be fair, the plane was built WAY TOO HEAVY.  I switched to the $5 Racerstar BR2212 14000 KV.  It's hitting my thrust envelopes and giving me very decent flight times.   I have a Sunnysky motor just sitting on my desk for this plane, but I am waiting on the 8038 props to arrive.  Then this motor will get pulled for the blue Sunnysky X2212 1400KV

BR2212 1400KV

9x6E

The BR2212 1400 KV is currently flying without problem with my first AR Wing.  I am going to compare the motors to see how they compare.  On my AR I have the not suggested 9x6E.  Had I stuck with the suggested 9x5 I would get 910g thrust. I  suspect I can get a bit more thrust from this prop, at the expense of too much heat.  I have a 30A ESC on the plane.  Thus, the ESC probably won't cut out. What is more likely is long exposures to full throttle will melt the thin motor wires and the plane comes back down wherever it's at.    So far, I haven't noticed the motor getting too excessively warm.   Does the motor work for the AR?  Yes.   Can it be more efficient?   Sure.  On 3S and 19amps its consuming 210 watts.


Second AR Wing


BE2208 2600KV

I had this motor laying around. It's coming in at 8g lighter than the BR2212 1400KV.  The weight savings is nice, but not significant.   It only runs on 2S and 3S and is no longer sold.  It's obsolete technology.  Here's the limited information I found on it.

There is a guy on Youtube (RCPirate)  who makes thrust test videos. With the right prop  this motor was reaching over 1100g of thrust!    With the pedestrian knockoff APC  6X4R prop I have on it, the motor can deliver 950g of thrust on 35A  (410W) which means that this has an efficiency of 2.32 which is the worst yet, but not as bad as the 1.67 shown above.  In reality,  the efficiency in flight is on par with the BR2212 1400KV.  It just doesn't consume very much power when cruising.    You do have to watch it when taking off because it has enough thrust to go straight up.

This is a high torque motor with premium bearings and premium everything.  I suspect the premium build helps keep it running efficiently at the lower end.

The new kid in town:  Racerstar 2514 1498KV






This is a new Favorite of Marc Hoffman's.   I mean, I finished writing this document and Marc brings up that this is the direction he's going.  We are once again looking at a different prop, and 8045

At full power it's pushing out 1500g of thrust.   At 19A  we can estimate that it's somewhere around 950g of thrust, which is around the same ballpark as the Sunnysky.  With a tri-blade 5147 propeller, this motor will get up to 1958g  (4.5 pounds) of thrust.

Now, the bad news. . . .

This motor is 66g!


You know how I feel about weight, and thus this is a non-starter for me.  But, Marc is in the process of testing this motor with different props, trying to break 200k/hr with an AR Wing but perhaps hitting terminal velocity.

I also have to mention the T-Motor F80 Pro.   This is a darling of a motor.  If you're building race quads you probably have been drooling over them.   You'll be spending in excess of $100 for motors for your quad.   And you'll be spending even more money on a quality high C 6S battery for your quad if you want to get the most out of it.




On the 2200 motor you're getting more than 2000g of thrust with a 6040 propeller.  Before you get all giddy with excitement look at the temps.  101C means that is hotter than the temperature to make water boil (212 degrees F).   What did we learn before?  When a motor becomes less efficient it turns energy into heat.  These motors can maintain these higher temperatures longer than other motors.  Still, heat is wasted electricity.  And yet at half throttle, we have more than enough thrust to take off because it's over 700g of thrust. Looks good, right?

To get to 900g of thrust it's only somewhere around 14 amps instead of  19 amps. And people go nuts when they see this.  It's more efficient, right?    Going back to the lowly  BR2212 that does 900g on 19amps that was with 210 watts because that was a 3S battery at 11.1 volts.   This motor is using 14 amps at 19.89 volts on a 6s battery.    That is 278 watts.   . . .  Wait for it. . .


The T-Motor F80 Pro is 33% less efficient at 900g of thrust than the lowly BR2212 1400KV motor!

If you want a motor that can launch your AR Wing to the moon, this is the motor. Run it with 6S.  If you're into slow cruising relaxed FPV this isn't the best choice.


This is why when the people online steer you toward this motor for your AR Wing, you need to run some numbers and ask yourself if it's the best choice for your needs.  The F80 Pro is legendary good if you're building a fast plane.  For its size, weight, and thrust, it's in a league of its own.


I bring this up because the F80 Pro does have its fanboys.  They feel it's the right motor for everybody building an AR Wing.   I won't knock the F80.  It's a great motor and proves we've come a long way in motor development over the past few years.    It's just that people have biases towards things they like. If you're all about the rock n' roll when flying, this is the motor for you.  If your flying style is more like 'slow jams', look elsewhere.

Summing up the motors thus far



There are a few takeaways from this chart.  First, Hyperlite doesn't offer the 2206 anymore.  It's now the 2207 and it's light on details.    The DYS and Racerstar BR2212 1400KV use roughly the same wattage, but the Racerstar offers 130g more thrust.  And the DYS costs more.

The two Racerstar motors have remarkably similar thrust characteristics at 900g of thrust.   But the BR2212 tops out there.  The 2514 can handle twice as much wattage.  For 100% more wattage you get 65% more thrust.  Why isn't it also 100% more thrust?  What happens to the extra wattage?  By now you know. It turns into heat.


Other motors

When I asked about what people were running on their AR wing in the group there was someone running a Sunnysky X2216 1250KV.   That's an 80g motor, he had it balanced with heavy batteries.   It's amazing that the AR Wing will take a setup this large.   One thing I didn't mention is that certain planes really can't handle the extra weight.  Oh sure, they fly around level without a problem, but if you do a loop and try to pull out of it you may not be able to.  I don't know if this is the case of the AR Wing.   I've had this happen to a Parkzone Radian.  Not fun.
Some people are flying with very light 2205s.  This will give you speed and agility.


Making it all simple

A light and agile AR Wing

The obvious winner is a  smaller motor like a 2205-2207.      The specs call for this motor, and a good one, and I do mean a good one should do wonders for this plane.  You may want to look at a T Motor or a very current EMAX motor. There are a lot of 5S and 6S motors out now that you'll have a lot of fun getting this setup.  Here's Chad Bidwell's EMax 2205 which he flies on 5S



Though it may have less overall thrust than other motors it's lightweight makes this a delightful, lean mean flying machine!

Relaxed FPV

Sunnysky makes a few different motors in the 2212 series that works.  The A2212 1400KV has slightly better specs than the newer X2212.  Either one with the 8038 propeller should make this plane a real cruiser.


Economy build

If you are short of funds and want something better than the stock motor that the PNP came with, the BR2212 1400KV with a 9" prop should work fine.


Just send it

As Jessie Dixon always says, "just send it."   When you've built plenty of planes you get a sense for what will work and what you'll ultimately like.  But, the proof is in the sky.  You simply need to take your plane out for a flight and see how you like it with new motor.

I don't really think there is an ultimate motor.  I was quite surprised to see that at 900g of thrust many of the motors were in the same ballpark when it came to amp draw. 

What will make the difference?

Two things will make a difference, the first is building plenty of planes and testing out different motors and finding what you like. The second is attention to detail.  Keep the wings free of things that block airflow, make efficient builds where you keep the weight down, watch your CG .  A clean build just flies better!

Multiplex Easy Star

Multiplex Easy Star 1

The Bixler line, the Sky Surfer, Volantex Ranger line, and Finwing Penguin and Sabre all have something in common. They are mid-fuselage pusher planes.  But, who started this branch of excellence in RC flying?  The Germans. The Multiplex Easy Star to be exact.  It's just a bit smaller than the Bixler 1/1.1/1.1 v2

A different concept

Efkute Radian is a similar concept, the prop is upfront

The Easy Star is a foam trainer with extra rigid wings. The wings feel a bit more like EPP than EPO foam.   Thus it's durable.  It was designed for new pilots, a type of trainer where the prop is not at the front or back of the plane and thus less likely to get damaged.    And, it's only 3 channel.   It has elevators but no ailerons.  It steers by the rudder.  The dihedrals in the wings help keep it stabilized.   It's the basic concept of the Horizon Hobby Radian.  The Radian is two meters and has a prop upfront, but other than that, they are similar.

The joy of floating

I can't explain floating to people.  You either enjoy watching a plane fly Line of Sight (LOS) and floating on the air currents, or you don't.   I find that it's like Indian food, you either simply love it, or you avoid it.   If you love it you seek out planes that can float well,  this is one of them.

Rebuilt with left-overs

I used the Racerstar  BR2212 2200KV motor

I found this plane for sale used.  Someone had pulled out the stock brushed motor that came with the plane back in the era where brushed motors were a thing.  He was going to put a brushless motor in it but didn't get around to it.  I just finished the plan.  The plane was rebuilt with stuff I literally had laying around.


Motor:  Racerstar BR2212 2200 -  I believe this is similar to the DYS D2826/6 2200KV motor.   I think the original motor may be around 30g heavier.  With a 6" prop it's plenty powerful.  The motor is only 2S and 3S. Honestly, the plane flies great on 2S

ESC:  Skywalker 20A-  The motor tops out at 21 amps.   So, technically, the speed controller should be around 25A.   If I were going to weigh down the nose and fly this plane at full throttle all the time on 3S then yes, it would get the proper speed controller.  But, that's not what I am doing.

I found a motor mount from the Bixler 2 that I wasn't using, That seemed to be a bit too large, but I made it work.  It wasn't pretty but I sent her anyway.

The maiden

The first flight was with 2S.  Not only that, but it was at 1/3rd power the majority of the flight. Needless to say that it doesn't take much to make this plane fly.   It floated like crazy. It's simple yet stunning to fly.  It just floats about the air currents which is both simple and relaxing.

Old School still works

Something off-topic but does drive the point home is 'In & Out Burger.'   For those who don't know, In & Out Burger is a Southern California institution.  It offers a couple different burgers, shakes, fries and a few drinks. That's it.    The most famous burger, the 'Double Double' is essentially two beef patties.  There really isn't much to the burger, it's nothing you wouldn't find elsewhere. Meat, cheese, onions, buns, etc.  Though there are variations of the burger that can be ordered (such as Animal Style) there are no "Southwestern Double Double" nor "Chipolte Double Double"  nor "Monterey Double Double." 

Don't try and fix perfection!

As an experiment, we took these delicious burgers home and added avocado and bacon to it.  So, what was learned with our experiment? It's simply the economic term "The Law of diminishing returns" in action. The avocado was nice, but not needed, and for whatever reason, I couldn't really taste the bacon.   You see this same thing happen when beautiful gals go a bit too far with playing with their hairstyles. Sometimes it's counter-productive. 

The Easy Star is the same thing, it just works, and it's beautiful as it is. There is no need to fix perfection.

The Easy Star, the plane that started the sensation

I can easily hack the wings and drop in ailerons and flaps if needed.   I can put a flight controller in it, as well as a camera, VTX and GPS.  I can make this a full INAV plane.   And yet, I won't.   Why? I mean, this is what I do.  I look for odd planes to put INAV into, and this would be a perfect fit.   The reason why this plane works is because it's light and simple. Once I start weighing it down with gear, it's a small Bixler, and perhaps not as good as a Bixler.   For around $45 US you can buy the SkySurfer any day of the week from Banggood. It's an EPO Chinese knock off of the Easy Star,II and a much better plane to hack and improve upon.   The Skysurfer has ailerons.  The Easy Star did capture lightning in a bottle with the original concept. The only issue was that it came out at a time before brushless motors were popular.   The brushless motor upgrade makes it fly even longer.

Multiplex blinks

The Easy Star II has five channels with the addition of ailerons.   So, I will say this as a guy who owns a Bixler 1.1, 2, and Sky Surfer.  The original Easy Star is perfect.  Like the Radian, the rudder is all you really need to turn the plane.  Sometimes, less is more. Unless an Easy Star II falls into my lap I wouldn't spend the extra money on it when I could have a Bixler 2.  If you would like to add things to the Easy Star such as more servos and FPV, it's far, far better to buy a Bixler 2 or Bixler 3 and start from there.  Why?  Both planes are larger than the Easy Star and can take the weight a lot easier.




This plane has been for sale for the last year.   It's the Easy Star II with FPV already added to it. The ad claims it has a flight controller.  It has a long-range VTX in it. So, why is it for sale?   Without flying it, I would guess that the plane is heavy and it doesn't take long before the battery voltage is depleted.   Had this gear gone into a Bixler 2 or 3 it would float better, and take larger batteries.


Update:  Motor mount and new motor.  I wrote to Terry at SmallPartsCNC.com and asked him to find me a mount for the Easy Star 1.  Keep in mind this plane hasn't been made in a very long time and thus the demand for the mounts are gone.  But, he found one. This allowed me to put on a one inch larger propeller.   So, this is what I did.


I put on the Racerstar 2208 1400KV motor.  It's around 13g lighter.  Then I put on a Master Airscrew 7x3 prop.   I sent the plane out for a flight at 6 AM.  The old 2200 motor  was loud and I wouldn't ever think of sending it that early when people are sleeping.  But, this plane was so quiet that it didn't matter. 

This flight was with a 3S 1500mAh battery and lasted 40 minutes.  It floated effortlessly in the sky.   And yes, I probably could have put in a 3S 2200mAh  battery ahd let it float around in the sky for an hour. 

Did we leave something behind?

There is a simplicity and honesty to the Easy Star that got lost in translation when these planes went from Germany to China.   Yes, you can still buy the Easy Star 2, but it's not the same thing. Perhaps it's like talking about LP vinyl albums.  There was a time that you would put on the Beatles Abby Road album on your record player and listen to it. Then you would have to get up and go flip the album over and listen to the other side.  You would often listen to the entire album and see how it was structured.  Now you'll hear "Something" from that album mixed in with other songs from other artists as they are streamed. It's not the same.

 For around $45 you can get the Sky Surfer from Banggood and leave off the servos on the ailerons and perhaps get a plane that's 95%  as good.   Therefore, I am not saying that you should search high and low for this plane.  But, just the same, it's about as enjoyable as listening to the Beatles Abby Road album.

5 things I've learned about the Bixler 2

As the administrator for the INAV Fixed Wing Group (Facebook) we get people of all skill levels coming to the group. Often we get guys who come to us from quads who want more range and longer flight times. It’s not surprising that people’s next quad is often their first plane. The topic comes up of what would be a good INAV plane. Planes such as the Reptile S800 and Sonicmodell AR Wing (900) often come up first because of their ease of use. I like flying wings because they are easy to repair after a good crash or two, or 10. But, many suggest that a good 5 channel plane is what’s best. The name “Bixler” comes up, again and again. This is surprising because the plane is has been out for at least the past seven years. It’s still beloved and still a favorite of many. These are the top five things I’ve learned about the plane.

1) Glider with trainer capabilities- The word “trainer” more or less means “useless” once you learn how to fly. Trainers often go in the corner of the garage, rarely if ever used again. The Bixler 2 is easy to fly and would be a good plane for a first plane. The good news is that you won’t grow tired of it and want to retire it. With glide characteristics like the Horizon Hobby Radian, the Bixler 2 is a plane you’ll enjoy for a long time.





2) Highly stable, but not a speed demon. One of the reasons why it’s so loved is because it can fly smooth and stable even in less than ideal conditions. Some people like stable fliers and others can’t stand them. The Bixler 2 will help you discover the airspace, and drift on wind currents and help you find thermals. The swept up wings make it less than ideal for being a fast flier. The STRIX Stratosurfer is similar to the Bixler 2 with flat wings so that you can get the speed you desire. It also has an injection molded plastic fuselage so it’s very durable,


3) Version 2 has flaps



This is the original Bixler 2.






I didn’t care for the graphics of the original Bixler 2. The newer graphics are a lot more appealing The real change is that the Bixler 2 now has flaps. I have this plane as a LOS flyer for my first plane, and I didn’t use the flaps. I can say that I’ve never wished for flaps when landing. However, I could really use them for taking off.


Flaps can also help for slowing the plane down for catching thermals. At 1500mm the Bixler 2 is a great size for riding thermals. I once got the plane stuck in a thermal and I was barely able to get it down before it floated up to the stratosphere. My thinking now is that catching thermals is fun, but I would like to do this FPV in case this ever happens again. Flaps can also slow the Bixler 2 down for a landing. The 2 is more prone to take its sweet time landing and I can see how having flaps can get it back down safely when it needs to come down quickly.

The flaps are on hinges whereas the ailerons aren’t. Strange, right?


4. Launching is an art.



Mid-fuselage pusher planes like the Bixler and the Volantex Ranger are notorious for dipping under heavy throttle. This means as the Bixler takes off the plane will want to push itself into the ground. The , unfortunately, the result is a lot of failed launches when you're not launching into a mild breeze. For this reason alone I find the Bixler is less than ideal as a trainer. It's a great plane if someone who is experienced can launch it for a new pilot. I find the solution for a good takeoff is a short run with a level launch at around half throttle. This works well 95% of the time. I usually have my hand on the nose so the plane is less likely to pitch when I let go of it.









5 ) Buy the kit- If you're not one to spend your weekends with a bottle of glue and a set of build instructions then the PNP is for you. If you're not afraid to get your hands dirty, by all means, buy the kit. Throw in actual metal gear servos and spend time thinking about which motor to purchase. If this is a plane you’ll hopefully be flying around for at least the next few years then you’ll want to outfit it with good stuff. In my book, motors are a subjective thing. You can run with a strong Sunnysky X2216 motor if you like, or you can get by with one for half the price. I figure if you don’t dig your motor you can always upgrade it when you’re itching for a change. The plane does a lot of floating so you don’t really need an outrageous motor unless you’re loading it up with excessive gear and weight. If you’re coming back from flights and your motor is always hot a change may be needed sooner than later. Though you may not go top shelf first, make certain that the motor offers enough thrust to fly the plane without struggling.


Servos are the main thing that would draw me toward a kit instead of the PNP. My rule of thumb for the plastic servos that come with most PNP planes is to just leave them, and you’ll change then out, eventually. Hopefully, you’ll catch them starting to fail and replace them before the situation turns critical. I’ve gone years flying with plastic servos in certain planes and they haven’t been an issue.

When you build a kit, you’re signing up for customization. The metal gear servos are just a start. There is a lot we can do with this plane to improve the way it flies, how long it flies as well as make it better suited for certain tasks.






Is the Bixler 2 An ideal INAV FPV platform?

We have a number of members of our INAV Fixed Wing Group on Facebook who start out with an AR (900mm) Wing and love it. The only wall they hit is that the flight is over 8-12 minutes later. The Bixler 2 makes a lot of sense because 20 minute flight on a 3S 2200mAh battery are common. Depending on the weather it can be even longer. The Bixler 2 can take larger batteries such as a 3S 3000mAh battery and a bit larger. This can help you hit the half-hour flight windows. But you do have to be careful with the amount of weight you’re putting in the nose. The plane really isn’t designed to hold an extraordinary amount of weight in the nose and doing so increases the likelihood of damage. It also changes the flight characteristics, namely how it glides. The Bixler does like a bit more weight on windy days to help it penetrate but I would be careful with not overloading it. The other issue is that the elevator may have a problem with the extra nose-weight and may force the plane down if you rely too heavily on it doing things like stunts.

Of course with longer flight times you can go out even further, which is a mixed blessing. The risk of you never seeing your plane again goes up the further away the plane gets. Extending your flight range is something you want to ease into, perhaps going out 100 meters further with each circuit you make. When you start taking on mid-range flights you’ll need to consider the range of your transmitter and video transmitter. You may need to start playing with new video antennas to extend the range further. If your dream is long-range FPV the Bixler 2 may be a very good way to work your way up to it. The FrSky L9R maybe a perfect compliment to this plane, allowing you the distance up 6KM if not longer.




If you’re looking into mid-range flights another worthwhile addition is the SmallpartsCNC.com Bixler 2 Motor Mount adapter. With this you can put on larger props and turn the Bixler 2 into a cruiser. What you’re giving up for speed and agility you make up for in extended flight times. This is an all aluminum CNC machine motor mount and well worth the money.



Overall

I did a little research into what the original version of this plane was.  It was the Multiplex Easy Star. That plane is a 3 channel plane, elevator, rudder, and throttle.   It's less than 1400mm which means it's smaller than the Bixler 1.1.    The Easy Star is a well-designed plane but is a trainer.    The Bixler line added ailerons to the design.  The Bixler 2 now adds flaps.

If anything, you can argue that the Bixler 2 is over-engineered.    I say, cost per feature it's perhaps the best value RC plane on the market.    Now with FPV this is a plane that can chase thermals and stay afloat for long periods of time.  I find the Bixler 2 to be like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.  It may not be exciting all the time, but it's good and it will make you happy.

There will be more to say about this plane when I get it flying in INAV FPV.

Hands on review- Matek F411-WSE

By:  Steve Schlesinger
Build by : David Story
Dinner by: Pizza Hut




FC Specifications

MCU: 100MHz STM32F411CEU6

IMU: MPU6000 (SPI)

Baro: BMP280 (I2C)

OSD: AT7456E (SPI)

Blackbox: No

2x Uarts

2x Softserial-Tx

2x Motors, 4x Servos outputs

1x I2C

4x ADC (VBAT, Current, RSSI, AirSpeed)

3x LEDs for FC STATUS (Blue, Red) and 3.3V indicator(Red)

Switchable Dual Camera Inputs

TR/SA VTX control: Yes

WS2812 Led control : Yes

Beeper output: Yes

RSSI: Yes

Voltage divider for Analog Airspeed sensor: Yes

FC Firmware

INAV Target: MATEKF411SE

PDB

Input voltage range: 6~30V (2~6S LiPo)

2x ESC power pads

Battery Voltage Sensor: 1:10 (Scale 1100)

Current Sensor: 78A,  3.3V ADC,  Scale 423

Where does this fit?

The main selling point of this board in my mind is that it’s a mini board but you don’t need to be at the top of your soldering game to build this board. You don’t have to solder wires to pads like on the FCHUB PDB A5 for the F405 Mini. Thus, this board opens up the mini flight controller to those of us who are still working on our soldering skills.

This is a flight controller that is designed for a plane because it only has two motors it can support from the PDB. It’s small, it’s very light (8.5g) and fairly straight-forward to get working. I hesitate a bit on this board because it is small and probably not your best choice as a first board because some of the pads are smaller than normal. If you have a few flight controllers under your belt, by all means, you’ll love it!



The WSE covers a lot of ground. This is an attractively priced bundle ($38 US) that comes complete with the flight controller and PDB in the same package.. When you really start to figure out how much the mini flight controllers sell for, they are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination. If you’re making a simple build, such as a little 600mm plane that you’ll fly occasionally do you really want to be spending $50(US) for a flight controller setup? Are you going to be putting Smart Audio on, and a fair number of telemetry devices? What if you just want to build a simple plane with a flight controller, VTX, RX, GPS, and camera or two? As compared to the F405 Mini the WSE only has two UARTS and a slower clock speed. It shouldn’t make a difference for fixed wing on INAV. If you’re a UART junkie you’ll need to spend a few more dollars and spend more time building the F405-Mini.




A first look

A few small issues that had me thrown off a bit. The first is that I never got a chance to really study the board before I opened the package. If I did I would have noticed it was a simple pin layout style board. I also wanted to up my game at building flight controllers and get feedback on this board from someone who has built a lot of F405-Minis. I asked my friend David Story for help with this build. David has been a member of the Facebook INAV Fixed Wing Group since day one. When you go to his house you just learn a lot. Besides, he has a very nice wife and family.

David just more or less took over the build. David also spends a lot of time worrying about how things look. So, I learned a lot about wire wrapping.

What plane did we select?

For the plane I wanted to use it had to be something that could take advantage of the capabilities of this flight controller and be a logical choice. It also had to be something unbuilt, sitting on my shelf. Thankfully I had the ZOHD Nano Talon  ready to go. David has built one before and felt that people overload ed them a bit too much. When they go into a nose dive there is no pulling out of it. Having seen this exact thing with on of my Radians I know exactly what he was saying. Thus, with this build, I decided to keep the weight down. The WSE is a perfect choice. It has four control surfaces and just 3 servos. I wanted a light, and simple build. And to be a bit insane I added a T-Motor F60 to the build. It will run on 6S at 40A. And yes, there is a 32bit 42a ESC in the build. Thought this plane is a cruiser more than built for speed.


The issues we faced with this build had very little to do with the flight controller. The ZOD Nano Talon is a bit more of a handful than we expected. There was a lot of time spent trying to figure out where to put various components and drawing out very long motor wires. So, at the time of writing this, it’s still being built. I am waiting on a stubby VTX antenna. I use RP-SMA and David had to remind me a few times why he doesn’t like RP-SMA.



The Layout


Two boards, the flight controller on top, and PDB on the bottom. Instead of an FCHUB ribbon cable there are gold pins that go between boards -AMAZING. This is SOOO MUCH BETTER. I mean, I freaking love this!!!!!

Flight controller, it has an AirS pin, this is for an analoge airspeed indicator that can be displayed in your OSD.  INAV will not make any calculations on these measurements, for now.   Buzzer, and LED which are now standards. Support for two FPV cameras which is great. This is similar to that found on the F722-Wing. We’re actually putting using two cameras on the build. And, VTX output with filtered VBAT power. This is not dropped down to 10v or 9V however, and that’s a bit of a disappointment. If you’re running 6S you’ll be running 24v into your VTX. The filtered power is nice. The rest is the normal things you’d find for GPS and RX. There is inverted SBUS and two Softserial options.

On the PDB there was a new term that had us confused. “Vx.” What this means is that default is 5V. But, there is a solder pad close to the top of the board that you can short and the output turns to 6V. S1 and S2 are close to the ESC pads. There are pads for four servos. You don’t have to find 5V somewhere and do funky wiring. You just drop the pins onto the board There is a cutout for putting your servo leads in which makes it easy for your final setup.



The F411 WSE sitting inside the Nano Talon. Check out David Story’s handiwork!



Ideas for planes to put the WSE into

So, let’s talk about what this would be ideal for. I’ll list a few planes where this would be a natural choice.

Wing-Wing Z84- There is a renewed interest in this plane. It doesn’t have a lot of space inside and a board of this size would be perfect. But, let’s be honest, the flight controller will cost more than the plane. This would be an ideal plane to do mission flying with. That being said I’ve build this plane heavy and it’s not as great as when it’s light. With the right choice of motor this is a plane that can easily stay up in the air for over 20 minutes.

AR Min/ RMRC Mini Recruiti- This is a beloved plane. If you buy one the BEC has 5V coming off of it. Be sure to cut the red wire before hooking it up to the WSE or you’ll pay nearly $40 to see the magic smoke show.

BlackWing- This was a little Eachine plane that came out and excited a lot of people and then everybody dropped it as quick as possible. I ordered one and then accidentally ordered a second one. I threw an Omnibus in it, and I do have to say having flown it both as a LOS plane and a INAV plane it does fly well on INAV. There is a rat’s nest of wires in the plane instead of fixing them I think the plane would be better off with a micro-board.

Bonsai? - If you have an old HK Bonsai that you both love and rarely fly this may be a good challenge project for you. It’s time to bring it to the world of FPV. The newer Bonsai’s have issues with the servo placement and have not been well thought of. Thus, don’t waste your time with the newer Bonsai.



The WSE is so good I am ordering more!

I will order another one for the Black Wing. I am very impressed with this board. I am looking forward to flying this with the nano Talon. A video will follow within a couple of weeks.

As for David Story, he liked many things about the board but he’s a fan of the F405-Mini and since he’s a UART junkie, that’s he’ll stay with.







Specs:
http://www.mateksys.com/?portfolio=f411-wse#tab-id-4

Steve's Radian build cheat sheet

Radian Custom Build




The Horizon Hobby Radian is an epic plane, beloved by experienced pilots and newbies.  In the summer months, what better plane to build?   Should you buy the Night Radian?  If you find yourself replacing the EC3 battery connector, and the Spektrum receiver why not just build it from the ground up?   And don't even get me started on the stock motor or the propellers built onto the spinner.  So, here's my source list of "Dream parts" for the plane  From start to finish this is what it will cost.

The Foam & Canopy  `$78

(All Pirces in US Dollars)

The foam comes in three pieces that are sold the price doesn't include the decal set.   This is for the non-Night Radian  If you feel like painting it and laminating it or putting on Plastidip or something else be sure to use Krylon Foam Primer.   Inventory fluctuates, but parts can often be found at hobby stores if you haappen to have one close by.




Main wings w/ spar- $35https://www.horizonhobby.com/main-wing-with-spar%3A-radian-pkz4720



Radian Fuselage-  $28
https://www.horizonhobby.com/bare-fuselage%3A-radian-pkz4767


Radian Horizontal Stabilizer  $10 
https://www.horizonhobby.com/horizontal-tail%3A-radian-pro-pkz4725

Canopy $4
https://www.horizonhobby.com/canopy%3A-radian-pro-pkz4713



All the other parts



Servos  - $18 for two

JX PDI-1171MG 17g Metal Gear Core Motor Micro Digital Servo

 If you happen to have some 15-17g servos laying around you can use them.  Or you can use the  Hitec HS-81.   Staying clear of the plastic servos for this build I am suggesting this one, a metal gear servo.   You will need two.   Be sure to cut the servo arms down so that the arms don't make contact with each other in the fuselage.



https://www.banggood.com/JX-PDI-1171MG-17g-Metal-Gear-Core-Motor-Micro-Digital-Servo-for-RC-Models-p-1075298.html?rmmds=search&cur_warehouse=USA


Speed controller-$15
Though you could get away with a 30A ESC for this build, we'll plat it safe.  For this price it comes with either an XT60 connector or a Deans connector.



https://www.banggood.com/FMS-Predator-40A-Brushless-ESC-With-3A-Switch-BEC-T-XT60-Plug-for-RC-Models-p-1105060.html?rmmds=search&ID=512584&cur_warehouse=CN


Spinner-$13
If you are following along with the suggested build parts




Option C for the 4mm shaft for the suggested motor. Leapord motor or

Option D for the suggested Emax motor.

Otherwise, select the option that works with your shaft.  The size of the spinner for hte Radian is 50mm

https://www.banggood.com/Gemfan-Aluminium-CNC-Spinner-3mm-Pitch-50mm-Diameter-For-Folding-Propeller-1Pcs-p-1156633.html?rmmds=search&ID=510594&cur_warehouse=CN

Propellers  $4
The 11 inch propeller is slightly oversized for the motor.   It's an 11x8 when it calls for an 11x7.   This is for a 3S battery.  Be certain to pick up a few sets of props.

https://www.banggood.com/Gemfan-Electric-Nylon-Folding-Propeller-7060-7540-8050-9050-1060-1180-1280-1380-1-Pair-p-983784.html?rmmds=search&ID=517471&cur_warehouse=CN


Radian Motor Mount  $16

In order to fit an aftermarket Radian motor onto your plane you'll need a Radian motor mount sold by Small Parts CNC.     You will not need this option if you select the Emax motor, it will bolt onto the Radian without the need of an adapter.

http://smallpartscnc.com/index.php?route=product/product&filter_name=Radian&product_id=97

If he's out of stock, write to Terry @  Info@smallpartscnc.com  He'll get right back to you.



Motor

Leapord LC3536 960KV-Best motor!!!!  $30

This is a premium motor, and it's worth every penny!  It's well made  It's a 2-4S motor.  It will provide around 1800g (63oz) `4lbs  of thrust.  The flying weight of a Night Radian (a heavier build) is half this weight.  Thus, you'll have enough thrust to keep you out of trouble, and yes it will fly nice on 2S.




https://www.altitudehobbies.com/products/leopard-3536-8t-960kv-brushless-airplane-motor

Also good

Emax $25

This is the Emax version, it can take up to 3S.  The motor mount will work but the shaft size of this is 5mm as oppoosed to the 4mm for the Leapord motor.





Adding it up

The cost of the foam  $78

Everything else

Emax Version  $75
Leapord Version $95



Overall $150-$180

You will still need a receiever.  But, this is a complete build.   Other than the decal set which you can decidet buy or not, there are no missing parts.