Shaunie

Posted by WolstonFlyer on 16/09/2016 15:05:59: On the other side of the coin I was talking to a local estate agents yesterday who where thinking of getting a 'drone' to take commercial photographs of houses and land ect "because all of their competitors are doing it". He had no idea about any regulations / insurance / caa or anything. They were quite prepared to go online and buy a DJI Phantom 4 and fly it over peoples houses! And herein lies the crux of the problem. While we fight a rearguard action to preserve our credibility these idiots are still undermining us in complete ignorance of the law. They genuinely haven't even stopped to consider that there may be any relevant law because "Everone else is doing it". Shaunie.

Bit short of time but briefly, what if we classified not by aircraft type but by the purpose of the flight. 1. Where the purpose of the flight is primarily for the pleasure and skill of flying the craft itself. 2. Where the purpose of the flight is primarily to capture imagery i.e. placing the camera at a height above the ground. The Genie is out of the box as far as multirotors are concerned, it cannot be put back, ignored or thrown to the dragons. Unfortunately legislation like this is often created by someone who has little knowledge (apart from some brief research) about the practice they wish to regulate. They listen sagely to all the representations from the interested parties, say "thank you for that" and then go and do something completely inappropriate in an attempt to "improve" on what they have been told. Commercial aircraft operators are running scared and want to nip drone flying in the bud as hard as they can. They also have a lot of clout and can keep banging the safety drum with many people hearing it. The fact that in many cases so called drone events are being wildly overemphasized does not help. The legislation we have is already fit for purpose in my eyes, it just needs enforcing effectively, regardless of aircraft type, dangerous flying is dangerous flying. It's just that at the moment it's more likely to be a drone flown in an inappropriate place. Another problem is the massive infrastructure that is the lawmakers who need to justify their own existence, they are a law factory if you like. They would not be doing themselves any favours if they were to say "we have all the laws we need" would they? Shaunie. Edited By Shaunie on 13/09/2016 11:19:15

The energy conversion efficiency of Nimhs is much lower than Lithium chemistries. For instance a 2000 mAh Nimh charging cycle would be 200 mA for 14-16 hours which calculates out to 2800-3200 mAh. With Lithium chemistries you get back out almost all the energy you put in, not sure how much you lose, I've not done any tests but it would be fairly easy to set up. I suspect much of this is down to the internal resistance. Shaunie.

In my simple view of the world aren't almost all aircraft with anhedral high-wingers? Without anhedral then the centre of lift would tend to be much higher than the C of G in a vertical plane to my mind. As a result of this there would be a considerable amount of pendulum stability. Does this interact with the wing sweep to promote the Dutch roll BEB? Anhedral therefore brings the centre of lift lower down so not only is the roll stability reduced but the pendulum stability is reduced also. Or am I barking up the wrong tree? Shaunie

There are so many opinions about ammo boxes for this application it will make your head spin. When a Lipo goes up it liberates a vast amount of gas and without adequate ventilation I am sure there is a significant explosion risk. My box has a double skinned lid with a channel along the centre. I drilled a hole through the inner skin at one end and the outer skin at the other. The intention is to create a long thin flame trap, hopefully the gas can escape but not the flames. If it ever goes up I'll be sure to report back whether it works or not. I only drilled 5mm holes and my concern is whether they are big enough. Shaunie.

Hi Dave^2, Welcome to the forum and the words of wisdom so freely given here 😂. The sad thing is it's all absolutely true. I hope you do join a club and have a successful flying career. When you can fly you will realise the realities about park flying and what is safe and achievable. It's not the park flying with a small foamie, it's park flying with a small foamie by a person who cannot fly that is the problem. I learnt to fly out of a club environment and had no success until a friend who was a competent pilot taught me. In a club would have been easier even allowing for the fact that I had free access to suitable fields. I still fly from a private field at work but the banter at a club is almost as much fun as flying to me (I say almost!). Shaunie.

After placing the order I received no dispatch information so after a few days I emailed them. They replied that the ESC I ordered is no longer in production and they would refund. No refund so far, so I emailed them last night to refund or I will raise a Paypal dispute. Shaunie.

Hmmm, I have two that are two or three years old and still performing ok. However I bought four last year, two for myself and two for a friend and we have one each that has gone high internal resistance. Might be a trend here. Shaunie.

Hi Daren, I've been meaning to build one of these for years! Unfortunately one of our club members is Gavin Barden of Evolution models. Once I've finished building his entire back catogue I promise I'll buy one of yours 😜. Shaunie.

So you bought it out of a catalogue, you say? Shaunie.

How about something like this:- http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Edge-Guard-Grommet-Strip-1-5-1-8mm-Square-Section-/322230826254?var=&hash=item4b0674350e:m:m94ub0PIvZgMOLFRynGCwAw Search for rubber grommet strip. Shaunie. Edit as link came unstuck! Edited By Shaunie on 18/08/2016 12:12:31

I ordered a 60Amp Hobbywing ESC last night, £17.90 including postage. I'll let you know how I get on! Shaunie.

Hi Scott and welcome to the forum. I think traditional building is having a bit of a comeback (certainly on here it is anyway). Don't be frightened to have more than one string to your bow, even if conventional airframes are what floats your boat a foamie lets you get easy stick time without risking your valuable hand-built airframe. Shaunie.

Posted by Nigel Day on 08/08/2016 17:36:09: How do you tell the difference between an English Police Officer, a Canadian Police Officer, an American Police Officer and a Scottish police officer? QUESTION: You're on duty by yourself (don't ask why, you just are, and your Sergeant hates you) walking on a deserted street late at night. Suddenly, an armed man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife and lunges at you. You are carrying your truncheon and are an expert in using it. However, you have only a split second to react before he reaches you. What do you do ? ANSWER: British Police Officer: Firstly, the Officer must consider the man's human rights. 1) Does the man look poor or oppressed ? 2) Is he newly arrived in this country and does not yet understand the law ? 3) Is this really a knife or a ceremonial dagger ? 4) Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack ? 5) Am I dressed provocatively ? 6) Could I run away ? 7) Could I possibly swing my truncheon and knock the knife out of his hand ? 8) Should I try and negotiate with him to discuss his wrong-doings ? 9) Why am I carrying a truncheon anyway and what kind of message does this send to society ? 10) Does he definitely want to kill me or would he be content just to wound me ? 11) If I were to grab his knees and hold on, would he still want to stab and kill me ? 12) If I raise my truncheon and he turns and runs away, do I get blamed if he falls over, knocks his head and kills himself ? 13) If I hurt him and lose the subsequent court case, does he have the opportunity to sue me, cost me my job, my credibility and the loss of my family home ? Canadian Police Officer: BANG ! American Police Officer: BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! 'Click'...Reload... BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! Glasgow Police Officer: "Haw, Jimmie.. Drop the knife, noo, unless you want it stuck up yer backside!" I just wish this forum had a "like" button! Shaunie.

For a classic style plane, how about a classic engine, I've got an OS 45FSR that needs a home. Would that be a reasonable match? It is the favourite engine of all that I've owned and deserves a new home. Shaun.

The last one I made ( many years ago) used 0.8mm stainless MIG. Welding wire and worked a treat. The biggest thing for me is keeping the wire taught as it goes baggy when heated up. I've been working toward making another (a divorce lost me the old one). I intend to put a bellcrank on one end and tension the wire with a spring so the tension remains reasonably constant. Otherwise you need to have the tension absurdly high when cold to keep a reasonable tension when hot. Temperature is colder than you think as the foam, being a good insulator, causes the wire to heat up when you enter the cut. The frame I have made is 20mm steel conduit, like a large hacksaw frame. Shaunie.

The 79% is easily explained. If converting a plane which had a Spektrum receiver, you would set the servo travel to 79% as Spektrum gear does not have the same range of servo travel as the Taranis. Max extended limits on the Spektrum is equivalent to the Taranis 100% (which is why it is better never to use extended limits on the Taranis). PPM centres differ between makes also, though the Taranis and Spektrum are the same here. It sounds like your friend has done a little reading/ video watching/advice taking, but has not read enough to understand what is going on. At this point I've probably put quite a few off moving over to Taranis! I've been considering Taranis, no you haven't put me off but the servo travel part concerns me. In my naïveté I believed that most systems had servo centres at 1500uS (I know some are 1350uS) with +/-500uS as 100% travel. So what yo are saying is Spektrum says that's 125% and Taranis says that's 100%. The wonderful thing about standards is there are so many to choose from! Shaunie

For what it's worth I have a 68" Edge 540 with a four cell sub-C 3200 Rx pack in it. I've always been concerned about the main point of failure, the on-off switch. I was intending to go to two five cell packs with dual switches and Schottky diodes. I am not worried about diode reliability as I have a considerable stock of 40amp devices ( from when I used to work for International Rectifier). I'm sure a complete short circuit won't hurt those puppies! Shaunie.

Of course with a SLEC tank you can block one of the top pipes and drill out the blanked fitting at the bottom that is intended for a level pipe and use that for a fill/drain. Shaunie.

Aaah, but I've never got enough clunks for the tanks I have, let alone two for each. I have one plane with this problem, I put a fuel dot in. Some people have had problems with air leaks but mine has been fine. I put a remote glow on the same plate, works really well. shaunie.

There's always a Clever Dick in any forum . Seriously though, not always practical with something large. Shaunie.

Hi Liam, Aliphatic is considered better than PVA as it sands more easily. It sets a little harder where PVA is a bit "rubbery", the worst is a bobble of PVA coming off under the sanding block and leaving a tramline in your almost finished handiwork. Moral, always wipe your joints. Many use Grateshapes sanding tools but they are a bit expensive for my wallet at the moment. Having just finished the leading edge on an Evolution Fusion, I tried gluing some emery cloth into a piece of sink waste pipe cut lengthwise into a gutter shape. It worked reasonably well but the risk is digging the edge of it into the wing skin. Ultimately I planed it as far as I could and then sanded it with a block by eye, just using my shaped block to even it up a bit. Minimum for a straight fuselage. Building board with a straight line drawn down it. Make sure both Fus sides are identical and of the same grade of wood. build the wing seat area absolutely square and let it set. Pull the sides together onto the centre line and it should be straight. Collect up anything that is a known square. I use some engineers Vee blocks and parallels, overkill but it's what I have. They are nice and heavy and hold stuff in place. And some strong magnets hold formers up against them a treat. Others have used Lego blocks successfully. I also use 7Ah 12V batteries as holding weights but be careful, they are not square! I try not to pin too much now and prefer to hold things in place using weights. You are talking "immediate nosedive", I take it you don't fly already. Try to get some experienced help with that it will make a big difference to your wallet in the long run, not to mention improve the learning process greatly. Shaunie.

Only a problem if they are incendiary toffees (AP, HE). As long as they are biodegradable, wrapped in a 2" 50mm layer of recycled foam with a clearly affixed allergy label, no problem. Shaunie.

The way I read your post Tony is that there is nothing wrong with your feed pipe/clunk, just that it's difficult to access. I see no problem with what you propose, providing that there is a third pipe for exhaust pressure (or venting). If you were to invert the pipe and extend it with some tube to the bottom of the tank it will do what you want. Yes it could siphon if the bung comes out, but how often has that ever happened to you? you'd be in trouble with a lean running engine anyway, regardless of fuel loss. Don't think you need to bother with a clunk though, the plane is always upright on the ground when you de-fuel it, just cut the pipe accurately so it lays on the bottom of the tank at the lowest point. Shaunie. Edited By Shaunie on 01/08/2016 16:18:53