Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
More RC flying
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Gregory
Nov 19, 2011, 8:53:51 PM11/19/11
to
Not much going on this weekend except for processing images from last
Sunday, which was back to Rancho San Antonio and the RC field there.
One guy had a twin-tail pusher prop A/C that he built from plans
downloaded from the Internet using "home construction insulation" and
gorilla glue. It was simply RAW green foamboard.
Here he takes to the field. You can see L & R servo rods extending
back from the wing gloves. That's a 720p video camera attached to the
visor on his cap for recording and later analyzing flights.
http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1281.jpg
There are slits on each side of the nose in front of the cockpit to
allow battery cooling air flow. This guy was very scientific about it.
In the next pic, he's about to launch the plane by chucking it into
the air like a spear.
http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1284.jpg
This photo is of the landing.
http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1297.jpg
Might have to get me one of those radios and a couple models!!
Even use spreadsheets to tune it. :))
-G
Danny
Nov 19, 2011, 9:34:28 PM11/19/11
to
RC and spreadsheeting. Sounds like a fun afternoon for you G-man
"Gregory" wrote in message
news:bjmgc7h2as28vt0mh...@4ax.com...
"Gregory" wrote in message
news:bjmgc7h2as28vt0mh...@4ax.com...
Gregory
Nov 20, 2011, 12:13:47 AM11/20/11
to
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 21:34:28 -0500, "Danny" <drm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>RC and spreadsheeting. Sounds like a fun afternoon for you G-man
Let's get started by looking over and downloading some plans.
>RC and spreadsheeting. Sounds like a fun afternoon for you G-man
Google search: "RC airplane plans"
-G
-------
>"Gregory" wrote in message
>
>One guy had a twin-tail pusher prop A/C that he built from plans
>downloaded from the Internet using "home construction insulation" and
>gorilla glue. It was simply RAW green foamboard.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1281.jpg
>One guy had a twin-tail pusher prop A/C that he built from plans
>downloaded from the Internet using "home construction insulation" and
>gorilla glue. It was simply RAW green foamboard.
>
Gregory
Nov 20, 2011, 12:12:58 PM11/20/11
to
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:53:51 -0800, Gregory
<flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Not much going on this weekend except for processing images from last
>Sunday, which was back to Rancho San Antonio and the RC field there.
>One guy had a twin-tail pusher prop A/C that he built from plans
>downloaded from the Internet using "home construction insulation" and
>gorilla glue. It was simply RAW green foamboard.
>
>Here he takes to the field. You can see L & R servo rods extending
>back from the wing gloves. That's a 720p video camera attached to the
>visor on his cap for recording and later analyzing flights.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1281.jpg
Not too interesting huh? Well I found the plans for what is called a
<flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Not much going on this weekend except for processing images from last
>Sunday, which was back to Rancho San Antonio and the RC field there.
>One guy had a twin-tail pusher prop A/C that he built from plans
>downloaded from the Internet using "home construction insulation" and
>gorilla glue. It was simply RAW green foamboard.
>
>Here he takes to the field. You can see L & R servo rods extending
>back from the wing gloves. That's a 720p video camera attached to the
>visor on his cap for recording and later analyzing flights.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1281.jpg
"Harpy Cat" pusher jet. Some guys use a ducted fan motor.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=508902&pp=10
Think you could build a really good scale model out of foamboard?
Probably so. Isn't Don P. an airplane modeler?
Here's a really basic yet convincing F-15 (from a distance that is)..
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=401946
Looks like some kind of Autogen scenery in Flight Sim. Lol
-G
ManhattanMan
Nov 20, 2011, 1:04:57 PM11/20/11
to
On 11/19/2011 7:53 PM, Gregory wrote:
> Might have to get me one of those radios and a couple models!!
> Even use spreadsheets to tune it. :))
If you're serious about getting into RC, I'd hardily recommend a simple
> Might have to get me one of those radios and a couple models!!
> Even use spreadsheets to tune it. :))
RTF kit (ready to fly) that has everything you need to get started. A
nice foam (takes a lickin and keeps on tickin, plus easy to repair when
you do break it, and you will) electric is the ideal starter - something
like:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/minimag-rtf-MPU13209
Then find a local club, get a instructor, and have fun. It looks like a
cake walk from the sidelines, but is far trickier than most think. Some
adventurous types do it on their own, and in that case I'd advise you
get several models for backups. :)
Do NOT get a snazzy looking warbird to start, they're usually for the
advanced flyers. Avoid ducted fan, although they look and sound cool,
they're horribly inefficient....
We have one club member who has built a few "Home Depot" foamies from
scratch, but he's also been flying for decades and has at least a
thousand bucks worth of spare parts, electronics, etc., laying around
his shop.
--
MnM
ManhattanMan
Nov 20, 2011, 1:31:36 PM11/20/11
to
fare, although just rudder/elevator does fly ok, it lots nicer to have
better control with ailerons. So something a little bigger, better
equipped (even has 2.4 Ghz radio) would be:
http://www.hobby-lobby.com/apprentice_15e_rtf_with_dx5e_radio_1036634_prd1.htm
The bigger models are easier to fly, also! The smaller they are, the
twitchier they are.......
--
MnM
Gregory
Nov 20, 2011, 3:21:46 PM11/20/11
to
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:31:36 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
many of the RC flyers operate their models in idiotic ways that do not
resemble anything real. Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
Also the models are way to "quick" in the controls, darting left -
right, up - down and the rest. They certainly don't resemble anything
that has "scale mass", that being proportional weight. You can tune
the control surfaces by actuator rod design, and by programming the
controller very much like editing the AIR file in Flight Sim.
One guy says that if they loaded them up with payload, then there'd be
a BIG risk of stalls and crashes. He said you'd have to be very
experienced to operate a HEAVY model that's "to scale."
-G
wrote:
>
>> Do NOT get a snazzy looking warbird to start, they're usually for the
>> advanced flyers. Avoid ducted fan, although they look and sound cool,
>> they're horribly inefficient....
>>
>> We have one club member who has built a few "Home Depot" foamies from
>> scratch, but he's also been flying for decades and has at least a
>> thousand bucks worth of spare parts, electronics, etc., laying around
>> his shop.
>>
>
>Just noticed the model above doesn't come with ailerons as standard
>fare, although just rudder/elevator does fly ok, it lots nicer to have
>better control with ailerons. So something a little bigger, better
>equipped (even has 2.4 Ghz radio) would be:
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/apprentice_15e_rtf_with_dx5e_radio_1036634_prd1.htm
>
>The bigger models are easier to fly, also! The smaller they are, the
>twitchier they are.......
>
Yep.. 2.4 GHz radios are all over the field now. I find that a good
>> Do NOT get a snazzy looking warbird to start, they're usually for the
>> advanced flyers. Avoid ducted fan, although they look and sound cool,
>> they're horribly inefficient....
>>
>> We have one club member who has built a few "Home Depot" foamies from
>> scratch, but he's also been flying for decades and has at least a
>> thousand bucks worth of spare parts, electronics, etc., laying around
>> his shop.
>>
>
>Just noticed the model above doesn't come with ailerons as standard
>fare, although just rudder/elevator does fly ok, it lots nicer to have
>better control with ailerons. So something a little bigger, better
>equipped (even has 2.4 Ghz radio) would be:
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/apprentice_15e_rtf_with_dx5e_radio_1036634_prd1.htm
>
>The bigger models are easier to fly, also! The smaller they are, the
>twitchier they are.......
>
many of the RC flyers operate their models in idiotic ways that do not
resemble anything real. Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
Also the models are way to "quick" in the controls, darting left -
right, up - down and the rest. They certainly don't resemble anything
that has "scale mass", that being proportional weight. You can tune
the control surfaces by actuator rod design, and by programming the
controller very much like editing the AIR file in Flight Sim.
One guy says that if they loaded them up with payload, then there'd be
a BIG risk of stalls and crashes. He said you'd have to be very
experienced to operate a HEAVY model that's "to scale."
-G
ManhattanMan
Nov 20, 2011, 5:26:06 PM11/20/11
to
On 11/20/2011 2:21 PM, Gregory wrote:
>
> Yep.. 2.4 GHz radios are all over the field now. I find that a good
> many of the RC flyers operate their models in idiotic ways that do not
> resemble anything real. Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
>
2.4 GHz is the only way to go if you're starting from scratch, have lots
>
> Yep.. 2.4 GHz radios are all over the field now. I find that a good
> many of the RC flyers operate their models in idiotic ways that do not
> resemble anything real. Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
>
of cash to convert everything you have from 72 MHz, or are in a BIG
club. There's no channel assignments per se, and the
transmitter/receiver "bind" digitally, so you don't interfere with the
guy beside you, and vice versa...
Fake?? No, it's as real as you are standing there watching it! It's
not animation, it's real. The airplanes aren't fake, they're just
little airplanes. Now, if you could "scale" everything, including air
molecules, it might be more comparable to the big guys. They do have
some micro models that seem to defy physics in what they can do, and
some ultra light weight larger profile foamies can do silly things... :)
I've seen most of the idiotic maneuvers you mentioned at air shows, and
wondered - "Damn, how the f*** they do that!!!". I can't do it with an
RC model!!! Of course I'm just a clear weather, old fart, just havin
fun, RC'r..
> Also the models are way to "quick" in the controls, darting left -
> right, up - down and the rest. They certainly don't resemble anything
> that has "scale mass", that being proportional weight. You can tune
> the control surfaces by actuator rod design, and by programming the
> controller very much like editing the AIR file in Flight Sim.
transmitter settings, etc.., but some sport/airshow full size airplanes
are just as unbelievable.....
>
> One guy says that if they loaded them up with payload, then there'd be
> a BIG risk of stalls and crashes. He said you'd have to be very
> experienced to operate a HEAVY model that's "to scale."
See reply 1.
> One guy says that if they loaded them up with payload, then there'd be
> a BIG risk of stalls and crashes. He said you'd have to be very
> experienced to operate a HEAVY model that's "to scale."
>
>
> -G
>
>
--
MnM
Gregory
Nov 21, 2011, 12:36:27 AM11/21/11
to
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 16:26:06 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>Fake?? No, it's as real as you are standing there watching it! It's
>not animation, it's real. The airplanes aren't fake, they're just
>little airplanes. Now, if you could "scale" everything, including air
>molecules, it might be more comparable to the big guys.
Of course they're real little airplanes, but they don't behave as
scaled down real airplanes. And I don't mean climbing 1000s of feet,
just that they dart around and respond TOO QUICK to inputs. I'd first
scale the real A/C in a spreadsheet and try to proportion everything
accordingly. No? what is the object of it?
-G
wrote:
>Fake?? No, it's as real as you are standing there watching it! It's
>not animation, it's real. The airplanes aren't fake, they're just
>little airplanes. Now, if you could "scale" everything, including air
>molecules, it might be more comparable to the big guys.
scaled down real airplanes. And I don't mean climbing 1000s of feet,
just that they dart around and respond TOO QUICK to inputs. I'd first
scale the real A/C in a spreadsheet and try to proportion everything
accordingly. No? what is the object of it?
-G
Gregory
Nov 21, 2011, 1:48:15 AM11/21/11
to
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:04:57 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>If you're serious about getting into RC, I'd hardily recommend a simple
>RTF kit (ready to fly) that has everything you need to get started. A
>nice foam (takes a lickin and keeps on tickin, plus easy to repair when
>you do break it, and you will) electric is the ideal starter
Only electric plane motors are allowed at Rancho San Antonio. Here's
an on-board camera video recorded at RSA, and many others like it.
You can see the I-280 expressway down below. Woo hoo.. lot's more
videos from there!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpXeumPeetI
Here are the coords of the field: 37.331651°, -122.084766° (repost)
If you zoom way in close, you'll see a RC plane on the ground behind a
car at the edge of the parking lot.
-G
wrote:
>If you're serious about getting into RC, I'd hardily recommend a simple
>RTF kit (ready to fly) that has everything you need to get started. A
>nice foam (takes a lickin and keeps on tickin, plus easy to repair when
>you do break it, and you will) electric is the ideal starter
an on-board camera video recorded at RSA, and many others like it.
You can see the I-280 expressway down below. Woo hoo.. lot's more
videos from there!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpXeumPeetI
Here are the coords of the field: 37.331651°, -122.084766° (repost)
If you zoom way in close, you'll see a RC plane on the ground behind a
car at the edge of the parking lot.
-G
ManhattanMan
Nov 21, 2011, 10:29:44 AM11/21/11
to
On 11/20/2011 11:36 PM, Gregory wrote:
No? what is the object of it?
>
To have fun, and not sweat the petty shit!!!
No? what is the object of it?
>
--
MnM
Dallas
Nov 21, 2011, 7:18:25 PM11/21/11
to
ManhattanMan wrote:
> To have fun, and not sweat the petty shit!!!
As opposed to petting the sweaty shit?
> To have fun, and not sweat the petty shit!!!
--
Dallas
ManhattanMan
Nov 21, 2011, 7:46:07 PM11/21/11
to
--
MnM
Gregory
Nov 21, 2011, 9:28:12 PM11/21/11
to
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:29:44 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 11/20/2011 11:36 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> No? what is the object of it?
>
>
>To have fun, and not sweat the petty shit!!!
Ok... 10-4 good buddy. :))
-G
wrote:
>On 11/20/2011 11:36 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> No? what is the object of it?
>
>
>To have fun, and not sweat the petty shit!!!
-G
Dallas
Nov 28, 2011, 10:56:16 AM11/28/11
to
Gregory wrote:
> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
Ya mean like this?
> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tzowQtqOM_I
--
Dallas
John Ward
Nov 28, 2011, 3:01:47 PM11/28/11
to
Hi Varmit,
STREWTH, mate!!
Some SERIOUS skill there, both in the flying AND the building - did you
notice the line up of aircraft in the background at the beginning of the
video......
Regards,
John Ward
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:ebCdnYLW67C9Mk7T...@earthlink.com...
STREWTH, mate!!
Some SERIOUS skill there, both in the flying AND the building - did you
notice the line up of aircraft in the background at the beginning of the
video......
Regards,
John Ward
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:ebCdnYLW67C9Mk7T...@earthlink.com...
Dallas
Nov 28, 2011, 4:10:26 PM11/28/11
to
John Ward wrote:
> Hi Varmit,
>
> STREWTH, mate!!
>
> Some SERIOUS skill there, both in the flying AND the building - did
> you notice the line up of aircraft in the background at the beginning
> of the video......
Quite amazing, especially considering he has to fly it while it's
> Hi Varmit,
>
> STREWTH, mate!!
>
> Some SERIOUS skill there, both in the flying AND the building - did
> you notice the line up of aircraft in the background at the beginning
> of the video......
coming at him, going away from him and climbing up, down and spinning
in all directions. His brain must be on a gimbal.
I also wondered how he could roll the aircraft with almost no forward
speed, then I got a close up shot... his ailerons span the whole wing
right to the root and the prop wash provides the airflow to spin him.
--
Dallas
Gregory
Nov 28, 2011, 9:44:55 PM11/28/11
to
-G
ManhattanMan
Nov 28, 2011, 10:30:02 PM11/28/11
to
On 11/28/2011 3:10 PM, Dallas wrote:
>
>
> Quite amazing, especially considering he has to fly it while it's
> coming at him, going away from him and climbing up, down and spinning
> in all directions. His brain must be on a gimbal.
Absolutely some of the best hand/eye co-ordination - unbelievable for us
>
>
> Quite amazing, especially considering he has to fly it while it's
> coming at him, going away from him and climbing up, down and spinning
> in all directions. His brain must be on a gimbal.
mortals, and the other 99.9999% of the RC community!! Only thing that
might keep the big guys from duplicating it, is an on board pilot would
probably pass out!! Not to mention the FAA... It also helps to have a
sponsor, like many of these high profile exhibitionists do (don't know
if this is one, but...) so when you do splatter a ~$1-2000 model, ya
just have your helper get another one out of the truck.
>
>
> I also wondered how he could roll the aircraft with almost no forward
> speed, then I got a close up shot... his ailerons span the whole wing
> right to the root and the prop wash provides the airflow to spin him.
>
Again, little guys duplicating what the big aerobatic guys have: hugely
>
> I also wondered how he could roll the aircraft with almost no forward
> speed, then I got a close up shot... his ailerons span the whole wing
> right to the root and the prop wash provides the airflow to spin him.
>
enlarged control surfaces, higher throw rates, 200% more horsepower than
needed for conventional flight, etc... Notice the size and throw of the
elevator in the last minute when he's taxiing up to the control area..
All this just IMHO, of course!!! :)
--
MnM
Copter_Six
Nov 29, 2011, 12:57:48 AM11/29/11
to
maneuvers. :{}
--
Copter Six
*Psychopath: A Journey Through the Madness*
=================================================
>Hopefully, you haven't ignited another flame war.
Que sera, sera...
Gregory
Nov 29, 2011, 8:40:32 AM11/29/11
to
The PA Addiction 3D. I didn't take it seriously enough to photograph.
http://www.precisionaerobatics.com/product_details.php?pid=53
Here's a review:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/article_display.cfm?article_id=980
It has surface areas and deflections that are so extreme, and a very
powerful engine.. more than enough for vertical climbs.
-G
Gregory
Nov 29, 2011, 9:22:45 AM11/29/11
to
>Just noticed the model above doesn't come with ailerons as standard
>fare, although just rudder/elevator does fly ok, it lots nicer to have
>better control with ailerons. So something a little bigger, better
>equipped (even has 2.4 Ghz radio) would be:
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/apprentice_15e_rtf_with_dx5e_radio_1036634_prd1.htm
>
>The bigger models are easier to fly, also! The smaller they are, the twitchier they are.
>
>MnM
>fare, although just rudder/elevator does fly ok, it lots nicer to have
>better control with ailerons. So something a little bigger, better
>equipped (even has 2.4 Ghz radio) would be:
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/apprentice_15e_rtf_with_dx5e_radio_1036634_prd1.htm
>
>The bigger models are easier to fly, also! The smaller they are, the twitchier they are.
>
Have seen a few of those (Apprentice) on the field and in the store.
You want REAL.. check out this model (a MUST SEE..)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBMv-UdHcN8
Here's the webpage:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/t-34-mentor-25-epts-rtf-EFL4800
Don't be fooled by the price. It comes with an EXCELLENT radio system.
I think electric motor is the way to go today, with the advanced
digital (programmable) radios, controls and no-hassle operation.
Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
-G
* a really "techie" beginner that is..
BillW50
Nov 29, 2011, 10:28:59 AM11/29/11
to
In news:h8q9d713aipcjr47k...@4ax.com,
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
side or the other on this issue. What is nice about gas is you can have
a huge amount of power in a tiny package. For example, most of my gas
engines have 1HP or more of power. So adding more weight like a heavier
design or a bigger fuel tank isn't a big deal.
Electrics has a bigger problem. Add a larger motor, now you need a
larger battery. And electric RC crafts have to be very light in design
for them to work well. And the majority of them just can't compete with
the power you get from a gas engine.
> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
Hahaha... that is loaded question. I don't know any RC pilot who can
claim they never had a crash. I have crashed my electric airplanes and
helicopters (both gas and electric helos). Although the worst I ever did
to my gas aircrafts is a busted prop.
You know what helps a lot Don? A RC simulator. As operating the craft
from outside the craft is the hardest to get used too. Flying away from
you in level flight is the same as sitting in the cockpit of course. But
flying towards you, left and right are backwards. And things gets harder
flying inverted, as elevation is now backwards too.
So practicing on a RC simulator is the best as it doesn't cost you
anything to make mistakes. And don't worry if all of the different
positions of the craft is confusing to operate. As it is always
confusing for everybody at first. But virtually everybody gets it and it
becomes totally automatic after awhile. Then it really becomes fun! ;-)
--
Bill
Alienware M9700 ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
AMD Turion 64 ML44 2.4GHz - 2GB - Two GeForce Go 7900GS 512MB SLI
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
> Have seen a few of those (Apprentice) on the field and in the store.
>
> You want REAL.. check out this model (a MUST SEE..)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBMv-UdHcN8
>
> Here's the webpage:
>
> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/t-34-mentor-25-epts-rtf-EFL4800
>
> Don't be fooled by the price. It comes with an EXCELLENT radio system.
>
> I think electric motor is the way to go today, with the advanced
> digital (programmable) radios, controls and no-hassle operation.
I fly both gas and electric. And it isn't hard to find RC pilots on one
>
> You want REAL.. check out this model (a MUST SEE..)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBMv-UdHcN8
>
> Here's the webpage:
>
> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/t-34-mentor-25-epts-rtf-EFL4800
>
> Don't be fooled by the price. It comes with an EXCELLENT radio system.
>
> I think electric motor is the way to go today, with the advanced
> digital (programmable) radios, controls and no-hassle operation.
side or the other on this issue. What is nice about gas is you can have
a huge amount of power in a tiny package. For example, most of my gas
engines have 1HP or more of power. So adding more weight like a heavier
design or a bigger fuel tank isn't a big deal.
Electrics has a bigger problem. Add a larger motor, now you need a
larger battery. And electric RC crafts have to be very light in design
for them to work well. And the majority of them just can't compete with
the power you get from a gas engine.
> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
claim they never had a crash. I have crashed my electric airplanes and
helicopters (both gas and electric helos). Although the worst I ever did
to my gas aircrafts is a busted prop.
You know what helps a lot Don? A RC simulator. As operating the craft
from outside the craft is the hardest to get used too. Flying away from
you in level flight is the same as sitting in the cockpit of course. But
flying towards you, left and right are backwards. And things gets harder
flying inverted, as elevation is now backwards too.
So practicing on a RC simulator is the best as it doesn't cost you
anything to make mistakes. And don't worry if all of the different
positions of the craft is confusing to operate. As it is always
confusing for everybody at first. But virtually everybody gets it and it
becomes totally automatic after awhile. Then it really becomes fun! ;-)
--
Bill
Alienware M9700 ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
AMD Turion 64 ML44 2.4GHz - 2GB - Two GeForce Go 7900GS 512MB SLI
ManhattanMan
Nov 29, 2011, 10:28:17 AM11/29/11
to
On 11/29/2011 8:22 AM, Gregory wrote:
> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
Shirley you jest? :)
> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
The Mentor is relatively big (5.2 lb 55 in wingspan) for an electric,
meaning shorter battery life and maybe transportation problems without
removing the wings every time (no idea what you're driving). The weight
is also a factor to consider for all those hard landings on the wire
landing gear the Mentor has, and they'll be a bunch. It's covered balsa
construction is a real PITA to repair, many times is unrepairable, and
you WILL crash it in the beginning (unless you're one of the 1%, plus
have an excellent instructor). It's also a relatively expensive model
to turn into match sticks. I've taken foam models home in four pieces,
and after mixing a batch of epoxy could have been flying again the same day!
Seriously, I'd start with a nice high wing foamy, some 15 minute epoxy
(depends on the type of foam, some of the new stuff only takes CA),
learn the basics, then upscale. The learning curve is hugely variable
among individuals - some take to it like a duck to water, some never get
the hang of it...
--
MnM
BillW50
Nov 29, 2011, 11:23:24 AM11/29/11
to
In news:jb1jjt$nkn$1...@dont-email.me,
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
Actually I don't consider it really all that hard. But I have been RC
flying for about 12 years now and it all comes second nature after
awhile. And RC aircraft like this fly so easy compared to most other
types of designs. As just a quarter throttle, all effects of gravity
just seems to disappear. ;-)
You can fly one on your computer for free to see for yourself.
http://www.realflight.com/free-g5-demo.html
Ignore the minimum requirements for the demo. You can fly it with far
less. At least with that photofield one as a landing strip. Of maybe G5
demo is missing a plane like that. Actually I think the G4 demo had one
of them. Yes that is the one you want.
http://forum.i3d.net/full-games-demos/78586-demo-realflight-g4.html
This page even shows you the craft that comes with G4 demo. There is a
G3 demo too. But I wouldn't suggest finding that one. As that one only
flies by keyboard only. While G4 and G5 demos can fly by joystick, RC
controller, mouse, or whatever too.
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
> On 11/28/2011 3:10 PM, Dallas wrote:
>
>> Quite amazing, especially considering he has to fly it while it's
>> coming at him, going away from him and climbing up, down and spinning
>> in all directions. His brain must be on a gimbal.
>
> Absolutely some of the best hand/eye co-ordination - unbelievable for
> us mortals, and the other 99.9999% of the RC community!!...
>
>> Quite amazing, especially considering he has to fly it while it's
>> coming at him, going away from him and climbing up, down and spinning
>> in all directions. His brain must be on a gimbal.
>
> Absolutely some of the best hand/eye co-ordination - unbelievable for
Actually I don't consider it really all that hard. But I have been RC
flying for about 12 years now and it all comes second nature after
awhile. And RC aircraft like this fly so easy compared to most other
types of designs. As just a quarter throttle, all effects of gravity
just seems to disappear. ;-)
You can fly one on your computer for free to see for yourself.
http://www.realflight.com/free-g5-demo.html
Ignore the minimum requirements for the demo. You can fly it with far
less. At least with that photofield one as a landing strip. Of maybe G5
demo is missing a plane like that. Actually I think the G4 demo had one
of them. Yes that is the one you want.
http://forum.i3d.net/full-games-demos/78586-demo-realflight-g4.html
This page even shows you the craft that comes with G4 demo. There is a
G3 demo too. But I wouldn't suggest finding that one. As that one only
flies by keyboard only. While G4 and G5 demos can fly by joystick, RC
controller, mouse, or whatever too.
ManhattanMan
Nov 29, 2011, 12:00:22 PM11/29/11
to
On 11/28/2011 11:57 PM, Copter_Six wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 9:56 AM, Dallas wrote:
>> Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
>>> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
>>
>> Ya mean like this?
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tzowQtqOM_I
>>
>
>
>
> You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the same
> maneuvers. :{}
>
>
LOL - reminds me of the old axiom: "With enough thrust you can fly a brick"
> On 11/28/2011 9:56 AM, Dallas wrote:
>> Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
>>> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really fake.
>>
>> Ya mean like this?
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tzowQtqOM_I
>>
>
>
>
> You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the same
> maneuvers. :{}
>
>
After watching that guy fly, it also reminds me of a few others
regarding RC: "Don't fall in love with your airplane!" and "If it ain't
been broke, it ain't been flown!"
--
MnM
BillW50
Nov 29, 2011, 12:58:50 PM11/29/11
to
In news:jb3339$ujv$1...@dont-email.me,
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
idea two seconds after a lit the rocket engine. As I attached a brick on
a roller skate and a rocket engine. I thought it was heavy enough to
just roll down the street for about 15 feet or so and that would be it.
But no, it picked up speed pretty fast and the front end lifted up and
it launched through the air. Luckily it didn't hit anything and no adult
was around to see it and to yell at us.
I did make a very heavy rocket once back then. That thing was the
coolest! As it had launched super slow just like a big space rocket. And
when it reached about 15 feet in the air, there was an explosion and it
came falling to the ground in flames. That one I did get into trouble
for. As a neighbor came running out with a garden hose and hosing down
my rocket. And they gave me an earful too at the same time. :-(
> After watching that guy fly, it also reminds me of a few others
> regarding RC: "Don't fall in love with your airplane!" and "If it
> ain't been broke, it ain't been flown!"
Yes I remember that one. I believe the rest of it was: "Don't fall in
love with your airplane! As it won't be around long." lol
Although after 12 or so years of RC flying. That isn't always true. As
experience and luck you can beat the odds. The luck part includes not
having a hardware failure. You know, servos locking up, radio battery
dying, linkage coming loose, etc. As I still have my first gas powered
RC aircraft and besides prop or two damage and landing on a gravel road
and a tire kicks up a stone and throws it right threw the skin of the
wing (lesson: don't land on gravel), it is still alive.
Although I haven't flown it for the last couple of years now since the
repeated stress on the structure has been weakened enough that it might
not be too fly worthy anymore. It is mostly the wing that seems to be
weaker than it used too. Probably still ok if you don't apply much G
forces on it. But that isn't much fun. ;-)
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
> On 11/28/2011 11:57 PM, Copter_Six wrote:
>> On 11/28/2011 9:56 AM, Dallas wrote:
>>> Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
>>>> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really
>>>> fake.
>>>
>>> Ya mean like this?
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tzowQtqOM_I
>>
>> You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the
>> same maneuvers. :{}
>
> LOL - reminds me of the old axiom: "With enough thrust you can fly a
> brick"
Actually I did that when I was just a kid. Which I realized was a stupid
>> On 11/28/2011 9:56 AM, Dallas wrote:
>>> Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> Flying upside down and slow, doing upside-down
>>>> loops, holding hammerheads and flying sideways, it's all really
>>>> fake.
>>>
>>> Ya mean like this?
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tzowQtqOM_I
>>
>> You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the
>> same maneuvers. :{}
>
> LOL - reminds me of the old axiom: "With enough thrust you can fly a
> brick"
idea two seconds after a lit the rocket engine. As I attached a brick on
a roller skate and a rocket engine. I thought it was heavy enough to
just roll down the street for about 15 feet or so and that would be it.
But no, it picked up speed pretty fast and the front end lifted up and
it launched through the air. Luckily it didn't hit anything and no adult
was around to see it and to yell at us.
I did make a very heavy rocket once back then. That thing was the
coolest! As it had launched super slow just like a big space rocket. And
when it reached about 15 feet in the air, there was an explosion and it
came falling to the ground in flames. That one I did get into trouble
for. As a neighbor came running out with a garden hose and hosing down
my rocket. And they gave me an earful too at the same time. :-(
> After watching that guy fly, it also reminds me of a few others
> regarding RC: "Don't fall in love with your airplane!" and "If it
> ain't been broke, it ain't been flown!"
love with your airplane! As it won't be around long." lol
Although after 12 or so years of RC flying. That isn't always true. As
experience and luck you can beat the odds. The luck part includes not
having a hardware failure. You know, servos locking up, radio battery
dying, linkage coming loose, etc. As I still have my first gas powered
RC aircraft and besides prop or two damage and landing on a gravel road
and a tire kicks up a stone and throws it right threw the skin of the
wing (lesson: don't land on gravel), it is still alive.
Although I haven't flown it for the last couple of years now since the
repeated stress on the structure has been weakened enough that it might
not be too fly worthy anymore. It is mostly the wing that seems to be
weaker than it used too. Probably still ok if you don't apply much G
forces on it. But that isn't much fun. ;-)
ManhattanMan
Nov 29, 2011, 1:10:18 PM11/29/11
to
On 11/29/2011 10:23 AM, BillW50 wrote:
>
> Actually I don't consider it really all that hard. But I have been RC
> flying for about 12 years now and it all comes second nature after
> awhile.
After eight years, I guess I'm still in my first nature, and couldn't
>
> Actually I don't consider it really all that hard. But I have been RC
> flying for about 12 years now and it all comes second nature after
> awhile.
come remotely close to that performance! I might as well try to paint a
Rembrandt with left over house paint and a three inch brush! Frankly, I
couldn't afford the crashes involved just trying. Don't know anyone in
our club that could either, and some of them have been flying RC for
decades - but we're a small club.. :)
--
MnM
BillW50
Nov 29, 2011, 2:40:18 PM11/29/11
to
In news:jb376d$rjr$1...@dont-email.me,
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
Well I believe it just takes tons of practice. Those RC simulators are
great for this. As a simple mistake doesn't cost anything. And once you
have lots of practice under your belt, it becomes all second nature
after a while. You know like riding a bicycle, driving a car, typing on
a keyboard, etc. and it becomes automatic without thought involved.
Although I'm not perfect in one area. That is flying inverted. If I have
some space between the craft and the ground, a very small error is no
big deal. As you have lots of space to correct for the small mistake.
But low to the ground inverted and near stall speed, you can't afford
even a tiny mistake. And sometimes here I do.
Although doing this with an winged aircraft is one thing. What is much
harder is flying a helicopter inverted. This to me is the hardest to
master. Although flying a helicopter in general wasn't all that hard for
me. And once you get it moving in the forward direction, it flies a lot
like a winged craft with one exception. As nosing down gives you more
forward speed. In a winged craft, all that will do is to buy you a big
hole in the ground. Yes that was confusing me in practice at first. As I
would switch flying between the two all of the time. And especially
after flying a helicopter for awhile and switching to the winged craft,
I sometimes would forget and nose down instead of giving it more
throttle for more speed. Oops! I'm glad I don't make those mistakes
anymore. ;-)
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
great for this. As a simple mistake doesn't cost anything. And once you
have lots of practice under your belt, it becomes all second nature
after a while. You know like riding a bicycle, driving a car, typing on
a keyboard, etc. and it becomes automatic without thought involved.
Although I'm not perfect in one area. That is flying inverted. If I have
some space between the craft and the ground, a very small error is no
big deal. As you have lots of space to correct for the small mistake.
But low to the ground inverted and near stall speed, you can't afford
even a tiny mistake. And sometimes here I do.
Although doing this with an winged aircraft is one thing. What is much
harder is flying a helicopter inverted. This to me is the hardest to
master. Although flying a helicopter in general wasn't all that hard for
me. And once you get it moving in the forward direction, it flies a lot
like a winged craft with one exception. As nosing down gives you more
forward speed. In a winged craft, all that will do is to buy you a big
hole in the ground. Yes that was confusing me in practice at first. As I
would switch flying between the two all of the time. And especially
after flying a helicopter for awhile and switching to the winged craft,
I sometimes would forget and nose down instead of giving it more
throttle for more speed. Oops! I'm glad I don't make those mistakes
anymore. ;-)
ManhattanMan
Nov 29, 2011, 4:03:17 PM11/29/11
to
On 11/29/2011 1:40 PM, BillW50 wrote:
> Well I believe it just takes tons of practice. Those RC simulators are
> great for this.
They definitely are, no doubt about it! Most of our members have
> Well I believe it just takes tons of practice. Those RC simulators are
> great for this.
RealFlight (I did for the first year) and use it regularly, but even the
best couldn't hold a candle to the video.
But like I said, we're a small club, most retired, having fun,
camaraderie, and weather permitting, are out there three mornings every
week.
We've had lots of people that simply couldn't adjust to it, using hands
on instruction and/or the sim. And that's just for normal flight. Lots
of people looking for a nice casual hobby, and when it gets too
disconcerting/intimidating/perplexing, they move on. Also, I believe
it's a little like art or music, either you have it or you don't,
especially for the advanced stages. I've dabbled in both, and like RC,
reached the Peter Principle level than I'm comfortable with, without
becoming a fanatic over it.
Never wanted to be rich and/or famous, and so far my plans have worked
perfectly........... :)
--
MnM
BillW50
Nov 29, 2011, 6:32:59 PM11/29/11
to
In news:jb3han$1o7$1...@dont-email.me,
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
Yes I suppose you are right. As I had taken guitar lessons for two years
when I was in second grade. Progress was slow and after I quit the
lessons, I continued. But was I ever good enough for being in a real
successful band? I don't think so.
But after watching that video, I fired up RealFlight and grabbed the
Extra 300 (which has a lot of the same flight characteristics of that
plane). And I have no problem saying that he is better than I am. But I
can fly it pretty close. One thing I noticed is if I make a mistake from
what I had planned, nobody would have known. As the little mistakes can
easily be turned into another move that looks just as impressive. I
don't know if he was doing the very same or not?
In big RC competition, you have to disclose all of the moves you are
going to do beforehand. That is really tough. As you can't make a little
mistake and then pull something else out of the hat.
Speaking about flying clubs, I belonged to a few. One old guy flew a gas
helicopter and all he would do is just hover it. Hovering is usually
hard for a newbie, but it is one of the basic tasks you have to do
learning to fly a helicopter. Without doing it somewhat good, landing is
going to be very hard. He could do that well enough that I don't think
he would ever crash it. And that was good enough for him.
Then there was a younger group, who was really bold to try things I
would never do back then. As if the wind speeds got 10MPH or higher, I
wouldn't fly. Although they didn't care. Gusty winds, cross winds to the
runway, they still would fly. Although I was a bit new back then.
Nowadays I know they had overpowered gas engine 3D planes that makes it
so much easier.
> Never wanted to be rich and/or famous, and so far my plans have worked
> perfectly........... :)
Oh me either. Some people wanted to push me in that direction. I did a
little and I didn't like it. ;-)
ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov> typed:
when I was in second grade. Progress was slow and after I quit the
lessons, I continued. But was I ever good enough for being in a real
successful band? I don't think so.
But after watching that video, I fired up RealFlight and grabbed the
Extra 300 (which has a lot of the same flight characteristics of that
plane). And I have no problem saying that he is better than I am. But I
can fly it pretty close. One thing I noticed is if I make a mistake from
what I had planned, nobody would have known. As the little mistakes can
easily be turned into another move that looks just as impressive. I
don't know if he was doing the very same or not?
In big RC competition, you have to disclose all of the moves you are
going to do beforehand. That is really tough. As you can't make a little
mistake and then pull something else out of the hat.
Speaking about flying clubs, I belonged to a few. One old guy flew a gas
helicopter and all he would do is just hover it. Hovering is usually
hard for a newbie, but it is one of the basic tasks you have to do
learning to fly a helicopter. Without doing it somewhat good, landing is
going to be very hard. He could do that well enough that I don't think
he would ever crash it. And that was good enough for him.
Then there was a younger group, who was really bold to try things I
would never do back then. As if the wind speeds got 10MPH or higher, I
wouldn't fly. Although they didn't care. Gusty winds, cross winds to the
runway, they still would fly. Although I was a bit new back then.
Nowadays I know they had overpowered gas engine 3D planes that makes it
so much easier.
> Never wanted to be rich and/or famous, and so far my plans have worked
> perfectly........... :)
little and I didn't like it. ;-)
ManhattanMan
Nov 29, 2011, 7:04:11 PM11/29/11
to
On 11/29/2011 5:32 PM, BillW50 wrote:
> Yes I suppose you are right. As I had taken guitar lessons for two years
> when I was in second grade.
Hehehe - OMG, I just can't let this pass [blush]
> Yes I suppose you are right. As I had taken guitar lessons for two years
> when I was in second grade.
Ya know what the ten best years are in a rednecks life?
Grammar school!
OK - I go now... We're probably boring the general population to death,
Bill......
--
MnM
Gregory
Nov 29, 2011, 9:48:05 PM11/29/11
to
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 23:57:48 -0600, Copter_Six <c...@texas.com> wrote:
>
>You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the same maneuvers. :{}
Never heard of putting a chain saw engine on a basketball before. :))
>
>You could put one of those engines on a basketball and perform the same maneuvers. :{}
-G
Gregory
Nov 30, 2011, 12:09:25 AM11/30/11
to
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:28:17 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 11/29/2011 8:22 AM, Gregory wrote:
>> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
>
>Shirley you jest? :)
>
>The Mentor is relatively big (5.2 lb 55 in wingspan) for an electric,
>meaning shorter battery life and maybe transportation problems without
>removing the wings every time (no idea what you're driving). The weight
>is also a factor to consider for all those hard landings on the wire landing
>gear the Mentor has, and they'll be a bunch.
Here's a video "Inside the ePTS."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osC0QANi3lU
I've read all the reviews on that webpage and there were a couple
issues revealed, but mostly very positive comments. At 4:35 in the
video above the E-flite guy says to have a flight instructor. At 6:20
in the video he goes into "landing gear abuse" and does a rough
demonstration.
I think the plane flies and sounds like real, but would be afraid to
crash it early in the program. That would be very discouraging. :-[
Why not install two parallel batteries for longer flights? Making
on-board RC videos would be very kool. { thumbs }
What do you think now? assuming size isn't a factor? BTW a few
flyers of the T-34 are already upgrading to more powerful motors. I
think whatever is the scale power should be used.
-G
wrote:
>On 11/29/2011 8:22 AM, Gregory wrote:
>> Don.. can the Mentor be operated by a beginner* without crash damage?
>
>Shirley you jest? :)
>
>The Mentor is relatively big (5.2 lb 55 in wingspan) for an electric,
>meaning shorter battery life and maybe transportation problems without
>removing the wings every time (no idea what you're driving). The weight
>is also a factor to consider for all those hard landings on the wire landing
>gear the Mentor has, and they'll be a bunch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osC0QANi3lU
I've read all the reviews on that webpage and there were a couple
issues revealed, but mostly very positive comments. At 4:35 in the
video above the E-flite guy says to have a flight instructor. At 6:20
in the video he goes into "landing gear abuse" and does a rough
demonstration.
I think the plane flies and sounds like real, but would be afraid to
crash it early in the program. That would be very discouraging. :-[
Why not install two parallel batteries for longer flights? Making
on-board RC videos would be very kool. { thumbs }
What do you think now? assuming size isn't a factor? BTW a few
flyers of the T-34 are already upgrading to more powerful motors. I
think whatever is the scale power should be used.
-G
ManhattanMan
Nov 30, 2011, 8:49:00 AM11/30/11
to
On 11/29/2011 11:09 PM, Gregory wrote:
> Why not install two parallel batteries for longer flights? Making
> on-board RC videos would be very kool. { thumbs }
>
> What do you think now? assuming size isn't a factor? BTW a few
> flyers of the T-34 are already upgrading to more powerful motors. I
> think whatever is the scale power should be used.
More battery = more weight = bad, especially in an already heavy
> Why not install two parallel batteries for longer flights? Making
> on-board RC videos would be very kool. { thumbs }
>
> What do you think now? assuming size isn't a factor? BTW a few
> flyers of the T-34 are already upgrading to more powerful motors. I
> think whatever is the scale power should be used.
electric that may have marginal performance with the 'stock' motor.
Forget adding more batteries, just get one with higher capacity,
providing there's room physically. Many of the larger LiPo's are build
with cells in parallel.
More motor = reserve power to get out of bad situations = good, not to
mention more fun - and also could compensate for the larger capacity
battery weight. I always go for more.
Having a "scale" motor power curve, could also lead to a "scale" crash.
Forget video, "scale" anything, how pretty the a/c looks - just learn to
fly first. KISS principle applies here.
--
MnM
Gregory
Dec 1, 2011, 10:47:30 PM12/1/11
to
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:49:00 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
For some reason I keep looking at Navy planes. Here's a couple more.
If one was to repeatedly crash the foam F4F it would probably survive:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/f4f-wildcat-bnf-PKZ1980
The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
good (is it?)
Here's another one.. the F6F Hellcat:
http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=HAN4075
It looks really sharp and has retracts.
Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors. There's been some
real advances in electric power and battery technology. See the
following:
http://www.hangar-9.com/Articles/Article.aspx?ArticleID=1563
http://www.hangar-9.com/Resources/Electric_Chart.aspx
I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
clean and efficient electric motors available.
-G
wrote:
If one was to repeatedly crash the foam F4F it would probably survive:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/f4f-wildcat-bnf-PKZ1980
The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
good (is it?)
Here's another one.. the F6F Hellcat:
http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=HAN4075
It looks really sharp and has retracts.
Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors. There's been some
real advances in electric power and battery technology. See the
following:
http://www.hangar-9.com/Articles/Article.aspx?ArticleID=1563
http://www.hangar-9.com/Resources/Electric_Chart.aspx
I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
clean and efficient electric motors available.
-G
Gregory
Dec 2, 2011, 1:14:20 AM12/2/11
to
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:04:57 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 11/19/2011 7:53 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> Might have to get me one of those radios and a couple models!!
>> Even use spreadsheets to tune it. :))
>
>
>If you're serious about getting into RC, I'd hardily recommend a simple
>RTF kit (ready to fly) that has everything you need to get started. A
>nice foam (takes a lickin and keeps on tickin, plus easy to repair when
>you do break it, and you will) electric is the ideal starter - something
>like:
>
>http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/minimag-rtf-MPU13209
All good advice, but the transmitter included with the model above is
a Hitec Zebra 4 Channel, which is a 35-40 MHz radio. Cannot even find
the specs for the transmit section on the web.. maybe it's here:
http://www.hitecrcd.com/files/ManualFocus4FM.pdf
I wouldn't go with anything less than a 2.4 GHz DX6i or DX5e, maybe
a quality DX4 (4 chan) unit but would soon upgrade.
After a failure analysis of that Harpy, it seems the rectangular foam
"slab" wings provide little if any lift (i.e. there's no air foil) and
you must rely on power to fly it. The Aft fuse plane of the Harpy
isn't designed properly either. It's a foam slab, and you can see
where the high stress areas are from the photo(s).
-G
>Then find a local club, get a instructor, and have fun. It looks like a
>cake walk from the sidelines, but is far trickier than most think. Some
>adventurous types do it on their own, and in that case I'd advise you
>get several models for backups. :)
>
>Do NOT get a snazzy looking warbird to start, they're usually for the
>advanced flyers. Avoid ducted fan, although they look and sound cool,
>they're horribly inefficient....
>
>We have one club member who has built a few "Home Depot" foamies from
>scratch, but he's also been flying for decades and has at least a
>thousand bucks worth of spare parts, electronics, etc., laying around
>his shop.
wrote:
>On 11/19/2011 7:53 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> Might have to get me one of those radios and a couple models!!
>> Even use spreadsheets to tune it. :))
>
>
>If you're serious about getting into RC, I'd hardily recommend a simple
>RTF kit (ready to fly) that has everything you need to get started. A
>nice foam (takes a lickin and keeps on tickin, plus easy to repair when
>you do break it, and you will) electric is the ideal starter - something
>like:
>
>http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/minimag-rtf-MPU13209
All good advice, but the transmitter included with the model above is
a Hitec Zebra 4 Channel, which is a 35-40 MHz radio. Cannot even find
the specs for the transmit section on the web.. maybe it's here:
http://www.hitecrcd.com/files/ManualFocus4FM.pdf
I wouldn't go with anything less than a 2.4 GHz DX6i or DX5e, maybe
a quality DX4 (4 chan) unit but would soon upgrade.
After a failure analysis of that Harpy, it seems the rectangular foam
"slab" wings provide little if any lift (i.e. there's no air foil) and
you must rely on power to fly it. The Aft fuse plane of the Harpy
isn't designed properly either. It's a foam slab, and you can see
where the high stress areas are from the photo(s).
-G
>Then find a local club, get a instructor, and have fun. It looks like a
>cake walk from the sidelines, but is far trickier than most think. Some
>adventurous types do it on their own, and in that case I'd advise you
>get several models for backups. :)
>
>Do NOT get a snazzy looking warbird to start, they're usually for the
>advanced flyers. Avoid ducted fan, although they look and sound cool,
>they're horribly inefficient....
>
>We have one club member who has built a few "Home Depot" foamies from
>scratch, but he's also been flying for decades and has at least a
>thousand bucks worth of spare parts, electronics, etc., laying around
>his shop.
ManhattanMan
Dec 2, 2011, 11:31:12 AM12/2/11
to
On 12/1/2011 9:47 PM, Gregory wrote:
> Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors.
You haven't been listening, have you................
> Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors.
--
MnM
BillW50
Dec 2, 2011, 12:10:09 PM12/2/11
to
In news:jshgd7p4ipam63trb...@4ax.com,
throttle, the prop may always stop horizontally. If it doesn't, I don't
think it would be that big of a deal. As I have some like that and as
long as you don't have any throttle, the prop easily swings one way or
the other sliding on the ground.
> I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
> clean and efficient electric motors available.
But you'll miss out smelling like fuel at the end of the day and
cleaning all of that oily exhaust off of your planes. ;-)
--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
Gregory wrote:
> The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
> land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
> good (is it?)
I looked at the video and I can't really tell. But when you kill the
> The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
> land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
> good (is it?)
throttle, the prop may always stop horizontally. If it doesn't, I don't
think it would be that big of a deal. As I have some like that and as
long as you don't have any throttle, the prop easily swings one way or
the other sliding on the ground.
> I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
> clean and efficient electric motors available.
cleaning all of that oily exhaust off of your planes. ;-)
--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3
Gregory
Dec 2, 2011, 11:25:56 PM12/2/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:10:09 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>In news:jshgd7p4ipam63trb...@4ax.com,
>Gregory wrote:
>> The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
>> land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
>> good (is it?)
>
>I looked at the video and I can't really tell. But when you kill the
>throttle, the prop may always stop horizontally. If it doesn't, I don't
>think it would be that big of a deal. As I have some like that and as
>long as you don't have any throttle, the prop easily swings one way or
>the other sliding on the ground.
>
>> I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
>> clean and efficient electric motors available.
>
>But you'll miss out smelling like fuel at the end of the day and
>cleaning all of that oily exhaust off of your planes. ;-)
Oh that's good to hear. Let's look at the Toledo from Hanger-9:
>In news:jshgd7p4ipam63trb...@4ax.com,
>Gregory wrote:
>> The question I have about the F4F Wildcat is.. what happens when you
>> land on the belly skid? Doesn't the prop hit the ground? That's no
>> good (is it?)
>
>I looked at the video and I can't really tell. But when you kill the
>throttle, the prop may always stop horizontally. If it doesn't, I don't
>think it would be that big of a deal. As I have some like that and as
>long as you don't have any throttle, the prop easily swings one way or
>the other sliding on the ground.
>
>> I'd not want to bother with fuel cans and all that stuff when there's
>> clean and efficient electric motors available.
>
>But you'll miss out smelling like fuel at the end of the day and
>cleaning all of that oily exhaust off of your planes. ;-)
http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=HAN4860
A video preview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH6YZanE0uQ
It can be outfitted with 4-cycle, 2-cycle and Electric Power 46.
See here for electric conversion:
http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/RelatedParts.aspx?ProdID=HAN4860&Category=Completion%20Guides&
SubCategory=Power 46 (E-flite)
I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
-G
Gregory
Dec 2, 2011, 11:41:38 PM12/2/11
to
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:31:12 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 12/1/2011 9:47 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors.
>
>
>You haven't been listening, have you................
Au contraire mon frere. I've read all of your replies and re-read
some of them. You said to start with a foamy and that I'd break
models by crashing them. And gas engines are more powerful
and run longer. { not direct quotes }
Gas engines are verboten around here, but there are parks for
gas models.. just a longer drive. I've seen plenty of electric planes
and many of them sound and look great. OTOH there are a lot of
guys that set timers for 5 mins of flying on "battery".. but those
configs aren't designed too well IMHO. Many of the flyers run full
throttle. Lots of flyers are charging there airplane batteries by
connecting [charger] to their car battery.
How long do you usually fly on a gas engine?
-G
wrote:
>On 12/1/2011 9:47 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> Not sure why you have it in for Electric motors.
>
>
>You haven't been listening, have you................
some of them. You said to start with a foamy and that I'd break
models by crashing them. And gas engines are more powerful
and run longer. { not direct quotes }
Gas engines are verboten around here, but there are parks for
gas models.. just a longer drive. I've seen plenty of electric planes
and many of them sound and look great. OTOH there are a lot of
guys that set timers for 5 mins of flying on "battery".. but those
configs aren't designed too well IMHO. Many of the flyers run full
throttle. Lots of flyers are charging there airplane batteries by
connecting [charger] to their car battery.
How long do you usually fly on a gas engine?
-G
ManhattanMan
Dec 3, 2011, 10:01:56 AM12/3/11
to
On 12/2/2011 10:41 PM, Gregory wrote:
> And gas engines are more powerful
> and run longer.
Better re-re-read. I never said that...
> And gas engines are more powerful
> and run longer.
Never have owned a r/c gas engine....
--
MnM
ManhattanMan
Dec 3, 2011, 10:11:19 AM12/3/11
to
On 12/2/2011 10:25 PM, Gregory wrote:
> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
Couple of hard landings and the retracts are fixed gear. They're prone
> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
to prangs and add weight. First things first. First learn to fly, then
go for the bells & whistles.
Outa here............
--
MnM
Gregory
Dec 3, 2011, 11:40:17 AM12/3/11
to
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:01:56 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
Ok.. well how about the Habu? (see embedded video)
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
-G
wrote:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
-G
Gregory
Dec 3, 2011, 12:03:14 PM12/3/11
to
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:58:50 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> After watching that guy fly, it also reminds me of a few others
>> regarding RC: "Don't fall in love with your airplane!" and "If it
>> ain't been broke, it ain't been flown!"
>
>Yes I remember that one. I believe the rest of it was: "Don't fall in
>love with your airplane! As it won't be around long." lol
>
>Although after 12 or so years of RC flying. That isn't always true. As
>experience and luck you can beat the odds. The luck part includes not
>having a hardware failure. You know, servos locking up, radio battery
>dying, linkage coming loose, etc. As I still have my first gas powered
>RC aircraft and besides prop or two damage and landing on a gravel road
>and a tire kicks up a stone and throws it right threw the skin of the
>wing (lesson: don't land on gravel), it is still alive.
Will have to head over to AeroMicro sometime this weekend and look
>
>> After watching that guy fly, it also reminds me of a few others
>> regarding RC: "Don't fall in love with your airplane!" and "If it
>> ain't been broke, it ain't been flown!"
>
>Yes I remember that one. I believe the rest of it was: "Don't fall in
>love with your airplane! As it won't be around long." lol
>
>Although after 12 or so years of RC flying. That isn't always true. As
>experience and luck you can beat the odds. The luck part includes not
>having a hardware failure. You know, servos locking up, radio battery
>dying, linkage coming loose, etc. As I still have my first gas powered
>RC aircraft and besides prop or two damage and landing on a gravel road
>and a tire kicks up a stone and throws it right threw the skin of the
>wing (lesson: don't land on gravel), it is still alive.
around for the familiar models. Wow.. going to that place is like a
kid going into a giant candy store. Actually it's a high tech toy
store for a 50 y/o kid!! Lol
See if the link below works. Use the overlayed white arrows to walk
around inside the store. The simulator is near the entrance and the
across from the counter. Be sure and go full screen!!
http://www.google.com/maps?layer=c&z=17&sll=37.380509,-121.961401&cid=15523944850130301205&panoid=6_qq6Vn1ys6p0FBkAGW_1w&cbp=13,180.76010369364428,,0,0&ei=rlTaTrnUPMmWiQKPz6XLCQ&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=interior-innerspace-image-link&cd=1&resnum=8&ved=0CAgQ2hQoADAH
-G
BillW50
Dec 3, 2011, 1:06:19 PM12/3/11
to
In news:o0lkd7hrr29jj6a84...@4ax.com,
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
Yes works fine. Although you can move around using the arrow keys too.
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
BillW50
Dec 3, 2011, 1:13:28 PM12/3/11
to
In news:d1kkd7h58bj3h5rif...@4ax.com,
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
How much RC experience do you have again? A craft like that for a
newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight of it
in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again. Or they
will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it disappears) and
nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces. :-(
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight of it
in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again. Or they
will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it disappears) and
nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces. :-(
Gregory
Dec 3, 2011, 9:41:10 PM12/3/11
to
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:13:28 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
>> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:01:56 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/2/2011 10:41 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>>> And gas engines are more powerful
>>>> and run longer.
>>>
>>> Better re-re-read. I never said that...
>>>
>>> Never have owned a r/c gas engine....
>>
>> Ok.. well how about the Habu? (see embedded video)
>>
>> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
>>
>> There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
>> I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
>
>How much RC experience do you have again? A craft like that for a
>newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight of it
>in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again. Or they
>will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it disappears) and
>nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces. :-(
What's an "RC experience" ? :))
>
>Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
>> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:01:56 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/2/2011 10:41 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>>> And gas engines are more powerful
>>>> and run longer.
>>>
>>> Better re-re-read. I never said that...
>>>
>>> Never have owned a r/c gas engine....
>>
>> Ok.. well how about the Habu? (see embedded video)
>>
>> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
>>
>> There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
>> I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
>
>How much RC experience do you have again? A craft like that for a
>newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight of it
>in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again. Or they
>will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it disappears) and
>nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces. :-(
I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo. q:-}
Smashing up a new model is the worst fear. Yep, went over to Aeromicro
this afternoon and got more time on the simulator. I'm able to keep
from crashing and have a much better handle on opposite sense (toward
the controller) flying.
Here's a model in the store that astounded me!!
http://www.empirerc.com/images/P51-BoxLabel-MissAmer-08.jpg
It has a wing span of about 4 ft, a balsa frame and is beautifully
finished... plus retracts. It's a fantastic airplane model even if
it wasn't flyable!!!
-G
BillW50
Dec 3, 2011, 11:37:02 PM12/3/11
to
In news:s5mld71u7cruj11nd...@4ax.com,
But one wrong move and you have like a tenth of second to do something
really fast or it is history at those speeds.
> Smashing up a new model is the worst fear.
Well it can happen in mere seconds (or earlier). I was lucky in the
sense my dad flown RC in the 50's and 60's and I watched him. Then I had
flew Cessnas in the 70's. Then my dad flown RC again the late 90's and
00's (RIP) and so did I (about 5 years later than he restarted). So I
have lots of experience beforehand.
And it is almost virtually if you get into RC, you will crash! And odds
are it will be your first craft. I know I speaking of having lots of
experience beforehand, but RC flight simulators can save you a bundle.
That is what I would do first. And practice and practice.
> Yep, went over to Aeromicro this afternoon and got more time on the
> simulator. I'm able to keep from crashing and have a much better
> handle on opposite sense (toward the controller) flying.
>
> Here's a model in the store that astounded me!!
>
> http://www.empirerc.com/images/P51-BoxLabel-MissAmer-08.jpg
>
> It has a wing span of about 4 ft, a balsa frame and is beautifully
> finished... plus retracts. It's a fantastic airplane model even if
> it wasn't flyable!!!
Retracts? That is expensive! It is almost positive that the first craft
you buy being a newbie is going to bite the dust. So if that is okay,
well ok. Hopefully there is enough pieces that you can reuse them for
your next craft.
Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:13:28 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>>
>> Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
>>> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:01:56 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/2/2011 10:41 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>>>> And gas engines are more powerful
>>>>> and run longer.
>>>>
>>>> Better re-re-read. I never said that...
>>>>
>>>> Never have owned a r/c gas engine....
>>>
>>> Ok.. well how about the Habu? (see embedded video)
>>>
>>> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
>>>
>>> There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
>>> I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
>>
>> How much RC experience do you have again? A craft like that for a
>> newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight
>> of it in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again.
>> Or they will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it
>> disappears) and nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces.
>> :-(
>
> What's an "RC experience" ? :))
>
> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo. q:-}
Oh okay. As I have 12 years of RC experience and I know I can fly it.
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:13:28 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>>
>> Gregory <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> typed:
>>> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:01:56 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/2/2011 10:41 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>>>> And gas engines are more powerful
>>>>> and run longer.
>>>>
>>>> Better re-re-read. I never said that...
>>>>
>>>> Never have owned a r/c gas engine....
>>>
>>> Ok.. well how about the Habu? (see embedded video)
>>>
>>> http://www.horizonhobby.com/products/habu-edf-bnf-PKZ7080
>>>
>>> There are youtube videos where if flies by at 110-116 MPH.
>>> I'd still like a Navy trainer, with flaps!
>>
>> How much RC experience do you have again? A craft like that for a
>> newbie, two things will likely happen. Either they will lose sight
>> of it in about 2 seconds at 100+MPH and you'll never see it again.
>> Or they will try to bring it back within 2 seconds (before it
>> disappears) and nose dive it right into the ground into many pieces.
>> :-(
>
> What's an "RC experience" ? :))
>
> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo. q:-}
But one wrong move and you have like a tenth of second to do something
really fast or it is history at those speeds.
> Smashing up a new model is the worst fear.
sense my dad flown RC in the 50's and 60's and I watched him. Then I had
flew Cessnas in the 70's. Then my dad flown RC again the late 90's and
00's (RIP) and so did I (about 5 years later than he restarted). So I
have lots of experience beforehand.
And it is almost virtually if you get into RC, you will crash! And odds
are it will be your first craft. I know I speaking of having lots of
experience beforehand, but RC flight simulators can save you a bundle.
That is what I would do first. And practice and practice.
> Yep, went over to Aeromicro this afternoon and got more time on the
> simulator. I'm able to keep from crashing and have a much better
> handle on opposite sense (toward the controller) flying.
>
> Here's a model in the store that astounded me!!
>
> http://www.empirerc.com/images/P51-BoxLabel-MissAmer-08.jpg
>
> It has a wing span of about 4 ft, a balsa frame and is beautifully
> finished... plus retracts. It's a fantastic airplane model even if
> it wasn't flyable!!!
you buy being a newbie is going to bite the dust. So if that is okay,
well ok. Hopefully there is enough pieces that you can reuse them for
your next craft.
ManhattanMan
Dec 4, 2011, 12:10:30 PM12/4/11
to
On 12/3/2011 10:37 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
Donna need no stiinnkin demo. Been there, done that.
>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
http://www.hobby-lobby.com/f86.htm?pSearchQueryId=2386095
As I mentioned back 11/20, avoid ducted fan. You don't count weight in
oz, you count in drams - they are horribly inefficient for the power it
takes to fly them!
A few oz of epoxy to fix something like a severed wing, and they're
barely able to stay airborne....... Don't ask.........
--
MnM
Gregory
Dec 4, 2011, 12:48:28 PM12/4/11
to
On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:10:30 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 12/3/2011 10:37 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
>
>Donna need no stiinnkin demo. Been there, done that.
>
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/f86.htm?pSearchQueryId=2386095
>
>As I mentioned back 11/20, avoid ducted fan. You don't count weight in
>oz, you count in drams - they are horribly inefficient for the power it
>takes to fly them!
Do you mean gram or drachm?
I'm not too interested in jet RC'ing anyway. A putt-putt would be fine
to start. All of the starter foamie hi-wing trike gear are too basic.
They either have rubber bands holding the wings on or really lousy
radios. I'm not going out to the field with a model that's for kids.
Here's a plan that assumes a high probability (or certainty) that the
first A/C will be damaged or destroyed. Buy three of the same model..
a Prototype, Qual model and a Flight model. The proto is the newbie
break-in bird that will get whacked a few times and maybe ruined. The
second and third A/C (PNP) will be NRTF. The third plane will have
the fancy retracts and flaps.
Same with the Harpy.. start by building THREE. A proto (for cutting,
gluing and assy techniques), a Qual model and a Flight model. You
would cut enough foam for three birds at once and have them at various
stages of fir and finish. The first model would be the "banger" and
the Flight model would be the cream puff. Think of it as your own
little fleet.
-G
wrote:
>On 12/3/2011 10:37 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
>
>Donna need no stiinnkin demo. Been there, done that.
>
>http://www.hobby-lobby.com/f86.htm?pSearchQueryId=2386095
>
>As I mentioned back 11/20, avoid ducted fan. You don't count weight in
>oz, you count in drams - they are horribly inefficient for the power it
>takes to fly them!
I'm not too interested in jet RC'ing anyway. A putt-putt would be fine
to start. All of the starter foamie hi-wing trike gear are too basic.
They either have rubber bands holding the wings on or really lousy
radios. I'm not going out to the field with a model that's for kids.
Here's a plan that assumes a high probability (or certainty) that the
first A/C will be damaged or destroyed. Buy three of the same model..
a Prototype, Qual model and a Flight model. The proto is the newbie
break-in bird that will get whacked a few times and maybe ruined. The
second and third A/C (PNP) will be NRTF. The third plane will have
the fancy retracts and flaps.
Same with the Harpy.. start by building THREE. A proto (for cutting,
gluing and assy techniques), a Qual model and a Flight model. You
would cut enough foam for three birds at once and have them at various
stages of fir and finish. The first model would be the "banger" and
the Flight model would be the cream puff. Think of it as your own
little fleet.
-G
Gregory
Dec 4, 2011, 1:10:16 PM12/4/11
to
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 22:37:02 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> Smashing up a new model is the worst fear.
>
>Well it can happen in mere seconds (or earlier). I was lucky in the
>sense my dad flown RC in the 50's and 60's and I watched him. Then I had
>flew Cessnas in the 70's. Then my dad flown RC again the late 90's and
>00's (RIP) and so did I (about 5 years later than he restarted). So I
>have lots of experience beforehand.
>
>And it is almost virtually if you get into RC, you will crash! And odds
>are it will be your first craft. I know I speaking of having lots of
>experience beforehand, but RC flight simulators can save you a bundle.
>That is what I would do first. And practice and practice.
>
>
>> Smashing up a new model is the worst fear.
>
>Well it can happen in mere seconds (or earlier). I was lucky in the
>sense my dad flown RC in the 50's and 60's and I watched him. Then I had
>flew Cessnas in the 70's. Then my dad flown RC again the late 90's and
>00's (RIP) and so did I (about 5 years later than he restarted). So I
>have lots of experience beforehand.
>
>And it is almost virtually if you get into RC, you will crash! And odds
>are it will be your first craft. I know I speaking of having lots of
>experience beforehand, but RC flight simulators can save you a bundle.
>That is what I would do first. And practice and practice.
>
>Retracts? That is expensive! It is almost positive that the first craft
>you buy being a newbie is going to bite the dust. So if that is okay,
>well ok. Hopefully there is enough pieces that you can reuse them for
>your next craft.
After looking around for a week or two, I see the Parkzone P-47
>you buy being a newbie is going to bite the dust. So if that is okay,
>well ok. Hopefully there is enough pieces that you can reuse them for
>your next craft.
Thunderbolt (not referring to Don) fits the bill. It's a foam A/C and
can be outfitted with Flaps and Retracts. Here are some how-to's:
Install Flaps - Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0_jXyI9u_Y
Install Flaps - Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJOIzeSotPs
Install Retracts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9-L1bOJifo
How about if I order two P-47s? One ARF to bang up (I'll buy a good
microwave radio separate) and the other PNP to experiment / add
accessories? Bird #1 will probably get smashed two or three times.
If bird #2 gets damaged, then it's time to move on to another type.
What about telemetry? That will be for the wood frame A/C. :))
-G
ManhattanMan
Dec 4, 2011, 1:44:03 PM12/4/11
to
On 12/4/2011 11:48 AM, Gregory wrote:
>
> Do you mean gram or drachm?
>
dram1
>
> Do you mean gram or drachm?
>
dram [dram]
n
1. measurements unit of weight: a unit of mass in the avoirdupois
system equal to 1/16 of an ounce (or approximately 1.77 grams)
2. measurements U.S. unit of weight: a unit of apothecaries’ weight
equal to 3.89 grams/1/8 of an ounce or 60 grains.
Also called drachm
Also called drachma
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
> I'm not too interested in jet RC'ing anyway. A putt-putt would be fine
> to start. All of the starter foamie hi-wing trike gear are too basic.
> They either have rubber bands holding the wings on or really lousy
> radios. I'm not going out to the field with a model that's for kids.
>
fuel models.... When it's flying, who knows, and more important, who
cares - it works great and is very convenient!! When you're learning
the basics, a basic model is exactly what you want. If you want a
better radio, buy the model and radio separate - most of the quality
transmitters have capabilities that will amaze you, including set
memories for maybe a dozen different models that set servo speed,
direction, control surface trim, etc., for each model...
But, to get started, a plain vanilla transmitter works fine, and makes a
nice backup if you decide to upgrade. The snazzy ones can cost more
than the model, and damn near take a factory intro course to figure out
how to program it....
Quit trying to reinvent the wheel, and just learn to fly! Crawl >>> walk
>>> run >>> jump >>> crash >>> do not pass go..... :)
--
MnM
John Ward
Dec 4, 2011, 2:38:23 PM12/4/11
to
Hi Gregory,
Not all that cheap, mate, if this is the one you have in mind:
http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly.html?dir=asc&order=price
Regards,
John Ward
"Gregory" <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1ocnd7ljg2ofgkciv...@4ax.com...
Not all that cheap, mate, if this is the one you have in mind:
http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly.html?dir=asc&order=price
Regards,
John Ward
"Gregory" <flights...@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1ocnd7ljg2ofgkciv...@4ax.com...
Copter_Six
Dec 4, 2011, 6:33:59 PM12/4/11
to
On 12/4/2011 11:48 AM, Gregory wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:10:30 -0600, ManhattanMan<fly...@usa.gov>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2011 10:37 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
>>
>> Donna need no stiinnkin demo. Been there, done that.
>>
>>
It just reminded me of an incident in Korea. I was stationed close to
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2011 10:37 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>>> I posted it mainly for Don as a ducted fan demo.
>>
>> Donna need no stiinnkin demo. Been there, done that.
>>
>>
the DMZ where anytime I flew above 200' AGL I'd get a Missile Warning
Light and strobe pointing north. I pilot there, Rich Guy (real name)
was flying his p-51 RC and decided to see if he could fly it through the
hanger. (Both end doors were open) It went in one side S&L but when it
exited the other door he wasn't in a position to see it immediately and
it went off on his own toward the village. He and a couple of other
pilots walked into the village and heard people yelling and carrying on.
His plane had hit a chicken and killed it. No one spoke Korean (It's
soooo hard) but he convinced the people there that the North Koreans had
attacked them and he took the plane for "evidence".
--
Copter Six
*Psychopath: A Journey Through the Madness*
=================================================
>Hopefully, you haven't ignited another flame war.
Que sera, sera...
ManhattanMan
Dec 4, 2011, 7:03:57 PM12/4/11
to
On 12/4/2011 5:33 PM, Copter_Six wrote:
>
> It just reminded me of an incident in Korea.
ha - bet it was the Korean era paint job on the Sabre that jogged your
>
> It just reminded me of an incident in Korea.
memory. That story is great!!
The Sabre flew like a scalded cat when new, but all it took was a few oz
of extra weight, and performance went to zip.........
--
MnM
Gregory
Dec 4, 2011, 10:34:45 PM12/4/11
to
On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 17:33:59 -0600, Copter_Six <c...@texas.com> wrote:
>
>It just reminded me of an incident in Korea. I was stationed close to
>the DMZ where anytime I flew above 200' AGL I'd get a Missile Warning
>Light and strobe pointing north. a pilot there, Rich Guy (real name)
>
>It just reminded me of an incident in Korea. I was stationed close to
>the DMZ where anytime I flew above 200' AGL I'd get a Missile Warning
>was flying his p-51 RC and decided to see if he could fly it through the
>hanger. (Both end doors were open) It went in one side S&L but when
>it exited the other door he wasn't in a position to see it immediately and
>it went off on his own toward the village. He and a couple of other
>pilots walked into the village and heard people yelling and carrying on.
>His plane had hit a chicken and killed it. No one spoke Korean (It's
>soooo hard) but he convinced the people there that the North Koreans
>had attacked them and he took the plane for "evidence".
Now let's get this straight. On of your compadres flew a RC fighter
>hanger. (Both end doors were open) It went in one side S&L but when
>it exited the other door he wasn't in a position to see it immediately and
>it went off on his own toward the village. He and a couple of other
>pilots walked into the village and heard people yelling and carrying on.
>His plane had hit a chicken and killed it. No one spoke Korean (It's
>soooo hard) but he convinced the people there that the North Koreans
>had attacked them and he took the plane for "evidence".
through a hanger, it went out of sight or radio range, and clocked a
SK chicken? And this Rich fella' told the villagers it came from
north of the DMZ?
-G
Gregory
Dec 4, 2011, 11:53:13 PM12/4/11
to
On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 05:38:23 +1000, "John Ward" <jrm...@tpg.com.au>
wrote:
>Hi Gregory,
>
> Not all that cheap, mate, if this is the one you have in mind:
>
> http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly.html?dir=asc&order=price
Yep.. this one:
http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly/parkzone-p-47-thunderbolt-pnp.html
You'll need a transmitter and all the electrical components inside.
-G
wrote:
>Hi Gregory,
>
> Not all that cheap, mate, if this is the one you have in mind:
>
> http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly.html?dir=asc&order=price
http://www.rcworld.com.au/airplanes-1/rtf-ready-to-fly/parkzone-p-47-thunderbolt-pnp.html
You'll need a transmitter and all the electrical components inside.
-G
Gregory
Dec 4, 2011, 11:56:17 PM12/4/11
to
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:11:19 -0600, ManhattanMan <fly...@usa.gov>
wrote:
>On 12/2/2011 10:25 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
>
>Couple of hard landings and the retracts are fixed gear. They're prone
>to prangs and add weight. First things first. First learn to fly, then
>go for the bells & whistles.
How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
payload! :))
-G
wrote:
>On 12/2/2011 10:25 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
>
>Couple of hard landings and the retracts are fixed gear. They're prone
>to prangs and add weight. First things first. First learn to fly, then
>go for the bells & whistles.
payload! :))
-G
ManhattanMan
Dec 5, 2011, 12:37:24 AM12/5/11
to
On 12/4/2011 10:56 PM, Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:11:19 -0600, ManhattanMan<fly...@usa.gov>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/2011 10:25 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
>>
>> Couple of hard landings and the retracts are fixed gear. They're prone
>> to prangs and add weight. First things first. First learn to fly, then
>> go for the bells& whistles.
> On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:11:19 -0600, ManhattanMan<fly...@usa.gov>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/2011 10:25 PM, Gregory wrote:
>>> I still like the T-34 Mentor a lot, but really want some retracts.
>>
>> Couple of hard landings and the retracts are fixed gear. They're prone
>> to prangs and add weight. First things first. First learn to fly, then
>
>
> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
> payload! :))
>
>
> -G
>
>
Let us know when you solo, and land successfully............ :)
>
> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
> payload! :))
>
>
> -G
>
>
--
MnM
donbutts
Dec 5, 2011, 4:09:54 AM12/5/11
to
"Dallas" wrote in message
news:69GdndhSAJ9fZU7T...@earthlink.com...
John Ward wrote:
> Hi Varmit,
>
> STREWTH, mate!!
>
> Some SERIOUS skill there, both in the flying AND the building - did
> you notice the line up of aircraft in the background at the beginning
> of the video......
yep that was absolutely incredible if I may say so .. late as I may be
Butts
NZ
MikeW
Dec 5, 2011, 7:18:58 AM12/5/11
to
ManhattanMan wrote:
>> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
>> payload! :))
>>
>>
>> -G
>
>
> Let us know when you solo, and land successfully............ :)
ROTFLMAO :-)
>> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
>> payload! :))
>>
>>
>> -G
>
>
> Let us know when you solo, and land successfully............ :)
--
MikeW
Shrewsbury, UK
Remember, you're always a student in an airplane.
Gregory
Dec 5, 2011, 9:01:07 AM12/5/11
to
On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 12:18:58 -0000, "MikeW" <Mi...@spammenot.con>
wrote:
>ManhattanMan wrote:
>
>>> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
>>> payload! :))
>>>
>>>
>>> -G
>
>>
>> Let us know when you solo, and land successfully............ :)
>
>ROTFLMAO :-)
LMAO? time for calculations..
http://flbeagle.rchomepage.com/software/webocalc_1.5.2/html/webocalc_imperial.html
http://adamone.rchomepage.com/design.htm
http://adamone.rchomepage.com/calc_motor.htm
How about some spreadsheets!!
-G
wrote:
>ManhattanMan wrote:
>
>>> How come you're so concerned with weight? I was thinking of adding
>>> payload! :))
>>>
>>>
>>> -G
>
>>
>> Let us know when you solo, and land successfully............ :)
>
>ROTFLMAO :-)
http://flbeagle.rchomepage.com/software/webocalc_1.5.2/html/webocalc_imperial.html
http://adamone.rchomepage.com/design.htm
http://adamone.rchomepage.com/calc_motor.htm
How about some spreadsheets!!
-G
Copter_Six
Dec 6, 2011, 2:12:01 AM12/6/11
to
Gregory
Dec 6, 2011, 7:52:07 AM12/6/11
to
On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 01:12:01 -0600, Copter_Six <c...@texas.com> wrote:
>On 12/4/2011 9:34 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 17:33:59 -0600, Copter_Six<c...@texas.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It just reminded me of an incident in Korea. I was stationed close to
>>> the DMZ where anytime I flew above 200' AGL I'd get a Missile Warning
>>> Light and strobe pointing north. a pilot there, Rich Guy (real name)
>>> was flying his p-51 RC and decided to see if he could fly it through the
>>> hanger. (Both end doors were open) It went in one side S&L but when
>>> it exited the other door he wasn't in a position to see it immediately and
>>> it went off on his own toward the village. He and a couple of other
>>> pilots walked into the village and heard people yelling and carrying on.
>>> His plane had hit a chicken and killed it. No one spoke Korean (It's
>>> soooo hard) but he convinced the people there that the North Koreans
>>> had attacked them and he took the plane for "evidence".
>>
>>
>> Now let's get this straight. On of your compadres flew a RC fighter
>> through a hanger, it went out of sight or radio range, and clocked a
>> SK chicken? And this Rich fella' told the villagers it came from
>> north of the DMZ?
>>
>>
>> -G
>
>
>That sums it up.... :{}
Well then.. we need to white wash the story. New version:
>On 12/4/2011 9:34 PM, Gregory wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 17:33:59 -0600, Copter_Six<c...@texas.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It just reminded me of an incident in Korea. I was stationed close to
>>> the DMZ where anytime I flew above 200' AGL I'd get a Missile Warning
>>> Light and strobe pointing north. a pilot there, Rich Guy (real name)
>>> was flying his p-51 RC and decided to see if he could fly it through the
>>> hanger. (Both end doors were open) It went in one side S&L but when
>>> it exited the other door he wasn't in a position to see it immediately and
>>> it went off on his own toward the village. He and a couple of other
>>> pilots walked into the village and heard people yelling and carrying on.
>>> His plane had hit a chicken and killed it. No one spoke Korean (It's
>>> soooo hard) but he convinced the people there that the North Koreans
>>> had attacked them and he took the plane for "evidence".
>>
>>
>> Now let's get this straight. On of your compadres flew a RC fighter
>> through a hanger, it went out of sight or radio range, and clocked a
>> SK chicken? And this Rich fella' told the villagers it came from
>> north of the DMZ?
>>
>>
>> -G
>
>
>That sums it up.... :{}
Now let's get this straight. An RC fighter flew through a hanger,
went out of visual range and clocked a chicken, sources say. It
reportedly came from north of the DMZ according to those familiar
with the incident.
-G
Gregory
Dec 6, 2011, 8:34:10 AM12/6/11
to
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:06:19 -0600, "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote:
>> Will have to head over to AeroMicro sometime this weekend and look
>> around for the familiar models. Wow.. going to that place is like a
>> kid going into a giant candy store. Actually it's a high tech toy
>> store for a 50 y/o kid!! Lol
>>
>> See if the link below works. Use the overlayed white arrows to walk
>> around inside the store. The simulator is near the entrance and the
>> across from the counter. Be sure and go full screen!!
>>
>>
>> http://www.google.com/maps?layer=c&z=17&sll=37.380509,-121.961401&cid=15523944850130301205&panoid=6_qq6Vn1ys6p0FBkAGW_1w&cbp=13,180.76010369364428,,0,0&ei=rlTaTrnUPMmWiQKPz6XLCQ&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=interior-innerspace-image-link&cd=1&resnum=8&ved=0CAgQ2hQoADAH
>
>Yes works fine. Although you can move around using the arrow keys too.
Good observation. I went to AeroMicro on Saturday afternoon and got
>> Will have to head over to AeroMicro sometime this weekend and look
>> around for the familiar models. Wow.. going to that place is like a
>> kid going into a giant candy store. Actually it's a high tech toy
>> store for a 50 y/o kid!! Lol
>>
>> See if the link below works. Use the overlayed white arrows to walk
>> around inside the store. The simulator is near the entrance and the
>> across from the counter. Be sure and go full screen!!
>>
>>
>> http://www.google.com/maps?layer=c&z=17&sll=37.380509,-121.961401&cid=15523944850130301205&panoid=6_qq6Vn1ys6p0FBkAGW_1w&cbp=13,180.76010369364428,,0,0&ei=rlTaTrnUPMmWiQKPz6XLCQ&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=interior-innerspace-image-link&cd=1&resnum=8&ved=0CAgQ2hQoADAH
>
>Yes works fine. Although you can move around using the arrow keys too.
more time on the simulator (photo below.) The store proprietor wasn't
aware that 3D walk-around viewing was available on Google, but did
acknowledge that Google came in and "took some pictures." dooh
http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/AeroMicro_simulator_530x.jpg
Come to realize now that RSA (Rancho) has lots of small stones on
the field and tail-dragger A/C wheels are catching these stones and
causing them to flip on their nose or back. One guy has a Cub with
tundra tires that handled the surface stones ok.. or better that is.
Here's a T-28 foamie taxiing out for takeoff.
http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/IMG_1644_3.jpg
It's an extreme telephoto shot from across the field. You can see LOTS
of stones out there. I'd say it's not a good place to fly RC and have
seen many tail draggers flip on their props, and recorded two P-47
nose strike videos on Dec 4th.
-G
Copter_Six
Dec 6, 2011, 7:49:58 PM12/6/11
to
On 12/6/2011 6:52 AM, Gregory wrote:
>
> Well then.. we need to white wash the story. New version:
>
>
> Now let's get this straight. An RC fighter flew through a hanger,
> went out of visual range and clocked a chicken, sources say. It
> reportedly came from north of the DMZ according to those familiar
> with the incident.
>
>
> -G
>
>
Why would it need to be whitewashed??????
>
> Well then.. we need to white wash the story. New version:
>
>
> Now let's get this straight. An RC fighter flew through a hanger,
> went out of visual range and clocked a chicken, sources say. It
> reportedly came from north of the DMZ according to those familiar
> with the incident.
>
>
> -G
>
>
Gregory
Dec 7, 2011, 8:57:42 AM12/7/11
to
On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:49:58 -0600, Copter_Six <c...@texas.com> wrote:
>
>Why would it need to be whitewashed??????
>
Because the readback was too blunt ?
>
>Why would it need to be whitewashed??????
>
-G
0 new messages