Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator

Go on Percy! You know what they say - given enough power anything will fly! (But that one would be a challenge I'll conceed that! Smashing idea on the hatch - I can see everyone at the strip being dead jealous as you flick a tx switch and catch the flying hatch in the other hand - very slick! BEB

Posted by Don Fry on 06/10/2018 19:32:22: The Hobby king Tundra comes with a reversing Speed controller. Very amusing to watch the audience when you reverse it to the take off position. Try it in flight is interesting. A balance between crashing, and destroying the speed controller. I would take issue with BEB. A fast boat has a similar power to weight ratio as an aircraft, with the same power and battery needs. Yes there are fast boats - but only in the most extreme cases does their power to weight ratio approach that of even a sports aircraft. Yes there are planes that have ESC's that can go backward. I know of, Ohhh, let me see, is it 2 or is it 3? To quote my post Don I said "generally speaking we try to avoid reverse on aeroplanes" I think the facts bear that out fine - a few exceptions is one thing, the "norm" is exactly how I stated it. So unless Stan is a "hot rod" hydroplane racer, I think my comment that his marine gear is likely to be of limited use in aircraft is sound. BEB

Well as you probably know I'm a bit of a fan of the old WOTTY, I actually think that when Foss designed it it really was the last word in sports aeroplanes. Consider the fact that many of the most successful competitors are actually just WOT4 clones - the Riot being a case in point I believe. Anyway, which one to get? I would suggest the larger one - 53" span. I have had one of these for some time now and it is a "go-to" model for me. Whatever else I take to the strip I always take that and settle my hand in by flying it first. It has the weight and presence to cope with all but the very worst conditions. Its inertia also helps with its aerobatics - it as more "follow through" due to its momentum, so the tops of even very large loops become more easily round and with full control, rolls are more constant speed and can more easily be flown slower. In terms of performance: with the recommended set up - or equivalent - verticals are unlimited, every mainstream aerobatic manueouvre is possible - even on a large scale. Endurance is a little over 8 mins if you hammer it continuously, easy 10 mins for mixed aeros (B-test style). It cruises on under half throttle! Does it fit in the car? Well that depends how big your car is! I have a Mondeo estate (the ultimate aeromodeller's car!) and it will fit in that fully rigged. But even if you do have to break it down - it's only two aileron connections and two wing bolts, so hardly a major "set up". So,that's my tenpenneth worth - based on owning one of these for good few years in form or another! BEB

RE boat electrics - TBH its unlikely you could use much of it in planes. As you'll know boat ESC's do forward and reverse - generally speaking we try to avoid reverse on aeroplanes, it doesn't tend to go well! Also most boat stuff is based around brushed motors as far as I know - so brushed motor ESCs as well. Aeroplanes are pretty well 100% brushless kit now. BEB

Funny, cos it works fine for me and I can see our membership list etc. Just one problem - I'm one of those people with very mild OCD! At first glance it looks like you can have photos next to members entries - oh dear, I shall feel complied to go round the club photographing everyone! BEB

Posted by andyh on 06/10/2018 17:56:21: so long as trainees are given some assistance when making a step up to a larger/heavier model, I don't really see a problem. I think that if small foamies are getting people into the hobby who otherwise wouldn't, then the positives outweigh any negatives. I'd broadly agree, the down side is the look of dissapointment on their faces when you say "You can't take your A with that model I'm afraid, you need to go out and spend more money"! Often these models come with their own Tx, which we can't buddy with. When they do move up its not just a new model, its a model, new batteries and a new Tx. We have lost people at that point sadly, frustrated that they can't fly solo with their model, or simply unwilling/unable to spend the substantial extra cash. BEB

Thanks for the input chaps, very interesting. First, I totally agree some foamies are heavier (I have a foam Spit that weighs 7lb!), so foam itself is not the problem - it's the extreme light weight of these particular foam models that is the issue for us. Our landlord is the local authority! They did their homework and say "A-cert - nothing else will do"! Beside which we don't fancy having to effectively "police" folks with the BPC if we feel that the weight of their models is creeping up! At the moment we have a simple data base that says A-cert or no A-cert - so we can check very easily and its not a matter of what they are flying. We're also a fairly small club so basically all the instructors know who has an A-cert and who doesn't! BEB

Let's establish something right up front here - I've nothing against foam models - I own several of them and enjoy them. I think foam has been a real boon to our hobby. OK, so having got that off my chest what's my problem then? Well it all comes down to the fact that I'm seeing increasing numbers of beginners turn up for their first flight with a very light weight foamie. Often these models only weigh in at 0.5 to 0.8Kg or so. I know why its happening, its due to two causes: firstly they see them as a simple low cost entry to the hobby (and they are) and secondly the LMS is recommending them to anyone whose not in a club. Again makes sense - not likely to do so much damage etc. But once they have them - they then poll along to the club! Why am I concerned about this? Again there are a number of reasons: 1. We live by the coast in the North West - it's a windy place! These models are "grounded" too often and we all know that the key to learning is stick time. 2. Because they are so light I do not think they teach a beginner to handle the inertia and mass of a more conventional model. I've seen learners (quite accomplished on theirlight weight foamie) go on to a more conventional trainer only to struggle and find its "too fast" or "runs on" or "seems to need an over heavy hand"! 3. They can't do their A-cert with these models, they are too light - so at some point they need to change over and have both the difficulty of doing so and the additional, avoiidable, expense. We fly in a public area, it is a condition of our lease that any pilot flying solo must have an A-cert - so this is quite a problem for them and us. Is anyone else seeing this trend? I'd be interested to hear from other instructors in particular of their experiences, if any, with this. BEB

Yes, I'm in too now. Cuban if you are a club admin then go to the club profile bit on the right hand side - you'll find all your membership lists and renewals etc. there. Having a look around at the system it looks very good - a big improvement! Well done BMFA! And thanks to Andy for his help! BEB

I've sent the details Andy - I suspect it might be an email issue! Thanks for your help BEB

Me neither! I handle all of the memberships for my club - have done for several years - and I had a log in for the old portal that gave me access to club membership and renewals etc. But I've received no emails or information about the new system? BEB

It is amazing just how little power you can fly on isn't it! I've said it before I think these days we (all) have a tendancy to overpower - becuase we can! It's nice to see what is possible though on so little "umph"! Put a 2200 in it and you'll be up there all day! BEB

Yes - 60W/ib is plenty for a model like that I think. It is so easy to over power them and they don't fly right like that.. Lovely job by the way! BEB

Hi Chris, I'd second what Percy said about the cub - great plane but, for example, it has a very narrow U/C and is a bit of a pain on the ground! If you like building the DB range is good, Tinker as Percy says, also the Mascot. Straight forward to build and good flyers. Both can be converted to electric relatively easily. If you fancy something faster to get into the air so you can start flying ASAP, the Seagull range of ARTF trainers are good - maybe take a look at the E-Pioneer - specifically designed for electric power. Options options eh! BEB

This is becoming circular and incredibly tedious. You're getting no where, basically you have the same position but can't (or won't) see it Time to draw a line under this. BEB

Well, personally, I just listen to their viewof course (never too proud to listen to someone elses experience) but if I don't agree I just shrug my shoulders, walk away and do my own thing. No one can tell me what equipment to use in my model - as I say it's my responsibility not theirs. If they pressure me to adopt their way and it fails - are they are going to take the consequences? No, the buck stops with me, I'm the pilot in charge - so, if I have the buck I get to make the decison too! But you know looking at this from the outside of the debate I don't think any of you guys are doing that - I think you all basically agree but frankly are splitting hairs on exact definitions of technical terms compared to everyday colloquial usage. So it's a academic really. BEB

Guys can we cool down a little bit here please? It seems to me (as a spectator to this debate and someone who uses FrSky and their Rx are a good price so I can afford brand name!) that you are getting yourselves very hot under the collar over what often seems to be (on both sides) generalisations and misunderstandings. I think we can all agree two things: The law is primary and the law requires that you have a "reason to believe the flight can be completed safety". And that holds whatever the make or cost of the Rx - it's as true for a £10 clone as it is for a multi-hundred pount set up with £100 Rx's and loads of redundancy built in. If your experience is that the £10 Rx is fully reliable in your application then you are justified in your actions to fly the model. If you have doubt, you should not fly it, no matter how expensive and sophisticated it is. But this is matter of personal judgement - which we have to remember that under some circumstances we may be called on to explain and defend. But that's easy with any receiver, whatever the cost, if you have had 200 sucessful flights with it and no recorded issues. But,...we also need to remember that simply spending more money is not an automatic indicator that you can have greater confidence - and I believe it could be dangerous to take such a view. Each Rx should be assessed in the context of its application and its passed performance - those are the only justifiable rational criteria. Note, when I say "context" I am not refering to how expensive the model is - instead I am referring to issues such as; is there any carbon fibre about that might impeded reception, how far away are you planning to fly this model, is there sufficient room for a high quality, robust, installation etc. The second thing I believe we could agree on is that no system, no matter how sophisticated and expensive (or low cost and simple) is 100% "safe". We use the word "safe" in everyday language as a sort of shorthand I believe. When we aeromodellers say "this is safe" what we really mean is something like "I have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure this system is as safe as I can reasonably make it. I have selected suitable components, I have installed them carefully, tested them and my data on previous use tells me they are reliable". But that's a bit of a gob full isn't it! So we just say "its safe" for short - but we know all that other qualifying stuff too and respect it. Or at least we should do! So, let's chill on this. The fact is different folks have slightly different views, experiences and contexts. All you can say really is "This is what I do and I'm happy with it" - the problems come when we change that slightly to "This is what I do and if you don't do the same you're wrong"! Because responsibility is an invidual thing - its not up to any of us to dictate the other guy's position - as long as he is happy he can defend it that should be enough for us! Let's all be friends then, and respect each others position. Here endeth the sermon! BEB Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 05/10/2018 10:18:41

Yes, this might be the almost unique case that a NiMh pack may be best. Before you rush into getting someone to make a pack up for you, take a look around the model boat websites - it really is a charming trip down Memory Lane! Most of these guys are still in the sixties - well the start of the sixties anyway! But they very often still use NiMh packs and they have ready made packs in various capacities and voltgaes, brushed motors, ESC's the size of a bungalow! And if you think aeromodellers can be a bit "careful" with their money these chaps are in different league believe me! So prices tend to be good - electric motor for £4 for example! So, a look around places like Howes, Hobbies and Cornwall Boats etc might yield dividends! If you are unsure give them a ring - nice blokes. BEB PS No insult intended to out boat sailing colleagues - they are lovely chaps, just a bit "traditional" that's all!

Hiya Stan, and a warm welcome back mate! Once its in your blood there is no escape! BEB

Hi Antony, something for you to think about. When you were involved previously it was probably the case that Futaba were the dominant force - and to some extent you're probably "picking up where you left off" But the stark reality is things have changed! Futaba are no longer the market leader they were, at present three companies lead the pack: Spektrum, Futaba and FrSky.They are all good reliable makes with excellent facilities. So before you simply jump in a buy Futaba a bit on "auto-pilot"(!) you may just want to look at what these other companies have to offer. You might be surprised both in terms of capability and price. BEB

Just follow the very good instructions. I found that the recommended throws and CoG were all fine - unusually! BEB

Are you sure the ESC is initialising? Does it actually fire up the motor when you open the throttle? Because, as I'm sure you know, no cell count bleeps usually means a non-initialised ESC? BEB

Something wrong there Devcon! I've have loads of X8R's - they are my "go to" FrSky Rx. I've never had any problem whatsoever - in three years - with either my X9D or X10S. So if this one is behaving badly it sounds like a fault - I agree antirely with Bob - back it goes! BEB

Ah, spoken like a true Yorkshireman! BEB

Hi Bob: yes I was somewhat surprised at how big the weight gain was too! The Dynamic and the Zippy are both 30C, the Turnigy is marked 30-40C, which might explain why it is the heaviest of all? OK, ground power test finally done, and the result is,..... 1492W on full throttle. A very satisfying result indeed. That works out at 155W/lb - excellent, loads of power! Big verticals and loops here I come! The current for that power was 73A, it's an 80A ESC so not a lot of headroom there, but as I'm not likely to be holding those power levels for extended periods I'm not too bothered. One interesting point did emerge. On any model half throttle always delivers less than half power, the system isn't linear. But I find you can usually cruise OK on half throttle and help the endurance along. But on this set up half throttle was less than 400W! Now that is very low. It will be interesting to see what she flys like under those conditions - I am always surprised just how little power you need to just fly around once you are already "up there", but that does seem marginal. I may have to consider programming in a throttle curve - we'll see. Just waiting for a reasonable day now to re-maiden her - hey-ho! BEB