Clive Matthews

Yes, this lead would work either way around. However, you don't need this expensive option unless you wish to use a Futaba set as a slave. You can achieve what you want with a simple 3.5mm stereo jack to jack lead, which are available almost anywhere;

It is very useful to use a radio which is compatible with any club you might join. Clubs can be extremely helpful in all aspects of flying model aeroplanes, that's why they're there. If you are absolutely certain that you will never join a club and you can do it all yourself, buy a Spektrum. Simply because there is so much more Spektrum compatible stuff out there.     @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

Watering Eyes! Fed up with difficult access to the Hexham Field due to Northumberland bearing the brunt of supplying the North East with water in 2009, Sadfly and Flygeek decided to try slope soaring. Now this decision is not taken lightly, slope soarers are a known wild race which doesn’t take to strangers easily! They are fiercely protective of the secrets of their dark art, but the intrepid duo managed to gleam that you require 2 things - a slope and an airframe. A kind farmer allowed them access to a slope overlooking Hadrians Wall. If nothing else, this was going to be an attractive walk. Sadfly already had an Easy Star in an attic ready for revival and keen to avoid any cost, this would do. On the basis that it would be easy to repair when inevitably broken, an Easy Glider was purchased by Flygeek. After much exhaustive research the intrepid duo learned that after reaching the top of the slope, the gliders, in our case the Easy Star (which was both) and the Easy Glider (which was neither), were to be thrown off. If the wind is in the right direction, the models fly upwards and backwards. Actually, the Easy Star penetrated the light Northumberland breeze (40 mph) and was happily flying in a most lively fashion along the slope. 40 minutes later when Flygeek had returned from retrieving the Easy Glider from the valley behind, it was doing some nicely controlled aerobatics. So, the pair learned that you actually need 3 things, ballast being the 3rd! The Easy Star with it's sub C cells was perfect, but the Easy Glider needed the insertion of a 6mm threaded rod into the wing spar. Now fully ballasted, the Easy Glider was able to stay in the lift along the slope but with it's tail twisting alarmingly in the 40 mph winds, control was occasional and hopeful rather than accurate. It was at this point they discovered the major problem that slope soarers don't tell you about! Watering Eyes! Was this from staring in manic concentration into a gale? No - it was from the manic laughter that slope soaring induces. Do try it. @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

FPV at Hexham Field New Naughty Boy, Mr J Dodger has perfected the art of FPV. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the dark art, it is the science of flying without looking. Whilst several members claim to have been doing this for years, none of them have managed to empty their wallets at the same time! As can be seen from the illustration, the art of FPV requires the pilot to wear a rather stylish set of goggles. This enables the wearer to view the site of any crashes first hand. They may also be observed running about the field doing an impression of a five year old imitating the dambuster raid! Do not be alarmed, this is normal behaviour for FPVers. Flygeek and Sadfly have had a go at this new exciting extension of our hobby and were impressed enough to research budget alternatives for themselves! @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

@import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css); Posted by Erfolg on 14/01/2012 14:25:30: I do despair when some see cars or personal transport as "the great enemy".     Don't think I said that! What I did say was that the car has resulted in some very unfortunate results for society. This was to try and balance some of the benefits which we perceive. The downside of cars is not always considered for some reason.   I also said that it was often cheaper to take the train if I was on my own. Clearly, a full car is cost effective. Most seem to be solo though! I'm also close to hitting 60, don't have a problem cycling! I accept that it's not for everyone, but it's the fastest growing mode of transport at the moment. Obviously, it's no good for getting my models up to the field, but for other journeys of up to say 3 miles, it can be the quickest and most convenient. @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);Edited By Clive Matthews on 14/01/2012 17:21:07

@import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css); Posted by Martin Harris on 13/01/2012 14:56:47: Perhaps I've missed it but there doesn't seem to have been a great deal of opportunity for the public to voice their opinion or consider informed facts before this monumental amount of OUR money has been committed to the project.     There is and was opportunity, but maybe this forum isn't the ideal place to get opinion on this subject heard.   My point of view is that car use has brought some unfortunate results for our society (such as http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/data/files/publications/fairness_car_dependant.pdf) and that any progress towards providing an attractive alternative is welcome. I understand reluctance to accept that there might be an alternative to the car for some journeys. I'm not saying that rail is superior for all journeys, but on the many occasions when I have used it, it has proved to be largely reliable and comfortable. Erflog, you will be aware that your criticism of the Eurostar fiasco has been answered with the completion of the cross London HS rail link and new Eurostar terminal at St Pancras.   Steve W-O, the car cheaper to run than the cost of train fares argument is a myth. Between 1997 and 2009, the cost of running a car rose by 120%. Over the same period, rail fares rose by 109%. In practice, I find it can often be cheaper to take the train if I'm on my own. More importantly to me, the experience is less tiring! I match car door to door times by cycling to and from the stations. This adds pleasure and exercise to the experience.   At the end of the day, if you choose to drive and rail reduces the volume of road traffic, you also win! Edited By Clive Matthews on 14/01/2012 13:19:05

Sorry for expressing a counter experience Steve W-O.   I can't answer for Funny Flyer, but I am also amazed, at the vitriolic attitude towards someone who disagrees with 'mass' opinion.   Perhaps some people should get out more? @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

Just for balance, I spend my working life travelling on planes, trains and auto mobiles. The transport system with the least delays is by far the rail system!   I agree it's not perfect, but delays are quite rare, especially when compared to road and air.   In terms of cost, it can be competitive if tickets are bought at least the day before. My least favourite online sources are trainline and red spotted (price choice and credit card charges) . My favourite source is East Coast (price,seat choice, reward scheme and informative website).   No connection (sic) with any company listed other than as a customer. @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

The three original kites plus a fourth took part in the annual bonfire display for the third year running. This year I would estimate the crowd to be in excess of 18000. Our display was very well received with loud cheering with every loop and roll and huge applause at the end, quite a buzz. We are beginning to become an essential feature!   The point of my post is to address the issue of cost. All the original kites are still flying. There have been 'incidents' but the strength of design, repairability and availability of spares has helped this longevity. The real reason though is because they fly so well.   I have tried making my own and building an IFO from a kit. Neither flew in a manner which was particularly inspiring.   So yes, they were expensive, but in the long term seem excellent value. @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

The only reason for shoving the engine forward was to make it fit. There isn't quite enough clearance for the carb on a Saito.   Maybe you used rather a lot of epoxy on the firewall @import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css);

@import url(http://www.modelflying.co.uk/CuteEditor_Files/Style/SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/CuteEditor_Files/public_forums.css); Hi Nigel, inverted does it, just like the real thing!

Hexham Model Flying Club are hosting a Training Day at Albemarle Barracks a large tarmac airfield near Newcastle Upon Tyne on Sunday June 27th. There will be examiners available for fixed wing and helicopter, a perfect opportunity to gain further achievement ratings. 10am start, £3.00 on the gate. Click here for directions. Further information, contact Clive Matthews [email protected]  07850174466  

Another good one;   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vksT0oUguQw   I believe that the pilot took the producers direction very literally!    WARNING THERE IS (VERY JUSTIFIABLE) BAD LANGUAGE AT THE END OF CLIP 

  Fly past at our club strip by 1947 Aeronica Champ 

I recall doing a project on steam injection at college several decades ago. The conclusion was that it works very well. To prevent corrosion of the engine it had to be turned off for a period prior to stopping the engine.    The effect was to increase the speed of ignition by breaking up the fuel droplets. Not sure that it would work on diesels though.   There doesn't appear to be enough detail in the article above to conclude that this is a different application. 

I've just used HH service for the first time and am gobsmacked as to how good it is. I don't wish to take anything away from other distributors but these guys go the extra mile and then some!   I'd lost complete control of one of my slopies and it impaled itself in the ground. It's fortunately repairable (thank you Czech glassfibre) but the internal damage was immense. The receiver had become a ballast/battery sandwich and was well battered. The investigation took a week to find an intermittent break in the battery lead.   In the meantime, I sent the receiver with a brief note to HH asking if it was possible to check the RX. By return post I received a brand new one 'for my peace of mind'.  As you can imagine, I am delighted to receive service like this.

That's brilliant news Tony. I'm sorry that my faith in Schulze was misplaced but delighted that something has worked. Flying glitch free removes all of the major hurdles (am I still at Cheltenham). I imagine that your project will move on with more pace now. Lets hope the wind drops.

On a good day they are

The 2.4Ghz video downlink equipment on the market is cheap and plentiful. It is also efficient and well designed. The problem is in the application. Awareness of this issue and it's implications will result in problem free operation.   'Broadcast quality' (whatever that is these days!!)  video, requires a great deal of bandwidth (analogue) or smart encoding (digital) to transmit. To maintain this quality, professional systems employ a directional antenna system to ensure that the signal is received at maximum gain and minimum interference from outside sources. To give another analogy, a light shower spread over a square mile will have less impact on a person than if all that water was channelled down a pipe onto his head.   Most of the systems I have seen on the market have antennae designed to spread rather than focus. Many users then modify the antenna to achieve focus.  The problem then is ensuring that the antennae are pointing at each other at all times. For the 'lower quality' video required there may be no need to do this but it does improve the stream quality.   Interference both to and from is a problem for all these systems, regardless of cost and design. If you think to the last time you watched a motor race, the on car camera is rarely 'solid' all the way round the track. In order for these to co-exist with oncar telemetry and radio systems requires a great deal of careful positioning and shielding. The cheaper consumer units tend to be made of plastic and are not well shielded and will cause interference as well as being susceptible.    Erflogs question hints at a hope for systems operating on other frequencies. They are available but at a cost (either money, licence or law). They wouldn't guarantee trouble free operation either.  5.8Ghz equipment is readily available, but not legal in this application. I've no doubt that it is used and there will be information on the net concerning it's useability.

Brian, your math is good. I was confusing EU and UK output regs. I meant directivity, although I suspect some of these cheap 2.4Ghz links splatter a bit as well.   With highly directional antennae, the system would of course be more efficient but would then require an extra hand to point!   My enthusiasm for 'enthusiast' equipment of this type is somewhat tempered by the amount of effort involved in a successful link being maintained from a moving object. I guess that it all depends on expectation and I sometimes wonder what people expect in terms of quality and reliability. 

Just to clarify a point here.   In my (very extensive professional) experience of video microwave downlinks, it is almost always the video downlink which is interfered with from external signals. This is in part due to the intensity of the data stream and encoding issues. The antennae used in such systems should have a narrow focus to be effective.   Timbos' experience  is probably rare and would suggest to me that the antenna focusing might have been poor, in any case it was a TX very close to a RX. This may have 'swamped' the RX.   I hesitate to say it won't, but in my opinion, it is extremely unlikely that a video link with correctly focused antennae would effect a model flying any distance away.    Brian, did you leave a 0 out somewhere? 

No probs, I can either drop it through your letterbox, meet you at Cheltenham, or you can pop into the Broom Hall Inn. I've PM'd my mobile number.   I never bet. I'll be there working on the TV coverage. Show you round a TV OB setup if you're interested. 

You need this!

Well, amazingly enough, I'm on my way to Broom tomorrow for a week at the Broom Hall Inn  (Gold Cup week ). I will drop it in with a pair of crystals tomorrow. Found suitable blonde but decided not to share! Edited By Clive Matthews on 14/03/2010 15:54:36

Tony, offer still stands of the loan of a Schulze RX to try. It was the only thing which solved these problems for me! They are specifically designed to cope with a 'dense' RF enviroment, with a circuit which rejects signals which are 'too loud'.