spincycl
Veteran
Location: Marietta, GA
| I have to agree with Mal., Chris, and Larry on this as well. COMPOSITES are great stuff, and the G-10 fiberglass is still a good one.
1. It will flex, but not break. Although Heli frames should not flex, they do (especially in a crash), so it's nice that you can use the G-10 frames several times over while a CF frame would possibly break after just one mishap.
2. Although I have never had it, I have heard of the RF problems generated by all CF frames, and I hear its a real bear to get rid of.
3. The cost of a CF frame would be a LOT more.... a LOT more!
I had a discussion with a engineer friend of mine who has worked at McDonnel-Douglas air for a long while in the advanced composites lab. Basically, fabricating CF in large sheets is 2-4 X more expensive than G-10, and depending on the lay-up it could be much more expensive than that. So, what does that mean? Well, the bergen frames have large pieces, and that means you have to cut them from large sheet$. It would be better if they could cut two frames from a single CF sheet, but it's unlikely.
So, on this note, I went on a pilgrimage to Minuature Aircraft in Florida. I talked to one of their engineers and talked about this very subject. So, why does the older X-cell CF frames cost about $125 total, and the new fury CF frames cost about DOUBLE that... The reason is that with the CF sheet sizes they can get, they could get a complete older style xcell frame out, but with the Fury, they get HALF of a frame per sheet. All of the CF material in the center is WASTED. So, THATS why most of the Fury's have G-10 frames as well. They are just as good IMHO.
4. I have 2 Bergen Industrial Twins, and they are 100% G-10, and they are STRONG. They pull 15-20 lbs of weigh no problem. That's good enough for me. |
