Gary Manuel

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsCVs003RZf8OY8VxcOfeE1dTkwlssb4Z Contact details (no website though) can be seen in the first of the videos in this playlist of a build of one of these.

Not true. The current drawn by the receiver is minimal and should NOT be relied upon to drop the battery voltage. Ah Pat beat me to it. Didn't spot it on next page.

It means the power supply is shared with the receiver (regardless of voltage used).

You need to make 2 adjustments to get the elevators set up correctly. 1. Slacken of the CENTRE screw on the servo arm and with the transmitter and model on and responding but stick centred, turn the arm a couple of splines anti-clockwise until the arm is at 90 degrees to the control rods. 2. Slacken off the grub screw on the end of the servo arm and adjust the two elevator halves so that they are level with the tail plane. The correct way for the control surfaces to move is: Position yourself BEHIND the model Ailerons - Push the stick to the RIGHT and the RIGHT hand aileron should move UP. Push the stick to the LEFT and the LEFT hand aileron should move UP. Elevator - Push the stick away from you (UP when looking at transmitter face on) and the elevator should move DOWN. Pull the stick towards you and the elevator should move UP. i.e. the opposite to what you would expect. This makes the model behave as a joystick in a full size aeroplane would. i.e move stick right to bank right. Pull stick towards you to pitch the nose up.

Much easier to see with new video 🎞️ As John Wagg says for adjusting the elevator. Ailerons ARE working the wrong way round as I thought. The aileron channel needs reversing on the Transmitter to fix this - transmitter manual should explain this. P.S. From past experience of using the forum, someone will be along pretty soon to advise you about not trying to fly it on your own. Don't take it the wrong way when they do. They are offering good advise based on their experience. New pilot have MUCH greater success rates if the get someone to teach them and set the model up. Ideally join a club. Good luck with setting up the model and eventually flying it.

I think your ailerons are inverted, but the reverse video is playing tricks with my mind. Can you post another video not inverted and clearly show which way you are moving the sticks and which way the controls move. It would also help if we could see the elevator servo arm movement too.

If I've got my head around the inverted video, you are setup for mode 2 (throttle on the left) and everything looks to be working the right way round. Ailerons look OK but the length of your elevator pushrods need mechanically adjusting so that the ailerons are level with the transmitter stick in the centre position. The servo arms should be 90 degrees to the pushrods when in this position.

Note that the video is INVERTED as can be seen from the reversed text.

Well he still spelt the fruit right but the colour wrong.

Bargain! Hopefully Agile Octopus will be back soon too - when energy prices start dropping.

That's true (and what a rip-off that is). I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that Tim's £12.76 was for the actual electricity, as the Octopus Go standing charge alone would actually be more than that (48.26p X 31 = £14.62). Anyway, I'm hoping to keep all of the Solar energy myself rather than selling it for the measly 4.1p per unit or whatever the going rate is. That's where the larger capacity battery comes in.

Hi Tim, I see that you are still paying for electricity (£12.76) even though you are exporting electricity (£10). Is this because your battery is full during the day, so the unused solar electricity has nowhere to go other than back to the grid? I'm hoping to use or store ALL of the solar energy I generate. I might try applying for Octopus GO in the hope that they won't ask for proof of EV ownership. If they do, I'll just stay on the capped tariff I'm on now.

Never say Never. I've just signed up for a 4000KWh/y Solar Panel / 9.5KWh Storage Battery installation. With the next rise in the energy cap prices, I have calculated my pay-back time as 7.5 years. With future addition of a second 9.5KWh battery assuming I can get onto Octupus GO tarif (7.5p per unit for 4 hours at night), the payback time reduces to 4.9 years. The question mark about Octopus GO is that it requires Electric Car ownership, which I'm not quite ready for.

Interesting stuff.

Thank you for listening to our concerns. May I provide a little feedback for your discussions? I do have Adblock installed, mainly for the unfavourable gaming / torrent sites I occasionally use, which pop up all sorts of images I would rather not view before breakfast. I normally have it disabled for modelflying.co.uk because I find the ads of potential interest. When I saw the mid-thread ads appearing though, I immediately right clicked on one of the ads and disabled them all across the entire site. It was as easy as that. Obviously not the effect you were looking for by adding the Ads. I have now restored the Ads across the site, but will disable them again if Ads start reappearing with the threads.

I have a Farmhand 90 and the wing easily fits into my A class Mercedes (that's the short stumpy one). It just rests on top of the front passenger and rear passenger seats and is really not a big deal. I don't think that a 2 piece wing would be feasible because of the dihedral and relatively thin wing profile - there would be nowhere for a wing tube to go inside the wing.

You missed option 4. 4. Let the site owners know that we don't like them within the actual threads as it interferes with the flow of the thread.

I haven't got two copper washers to rub together.

Adblock removes these annoying adverts 😉

Ah, That'll be the junction number reserved for the cancelled M1/A1 link road where Scratchwood Services are now which should have joined the A1 at Stirling Corner.

I agree with everything you have said. It's only a hypothesis and has a lot of questions to answer. The standard model doesn't even attempt to consider gravity because it doesn't fit the known data and also because it's negligible at sub atomic levels. It works but it's incomplete and in places confuses phylosophy with reality. We need to keep searching for a unified theory of everything. One thing is for certain - nature knows the answer. This is where we need to be looking.

It depends what you mean by unimportant. The "Shut up and calculate" approach is in daily use and has been very successful. It will continue to be successful in the future too as the maths is obviously sound. The problem is that it has been so successful at predicting results that it now tries to adjust our understanding of reality to fit some of the weirder results. What we should be doing is having a closer look at reality to see what's really happening. Once we understand that, the results will no longer be weird. A full understanding might just allow the 20 years plus Quantum Computer development programme to be completed (or cancelled). This is where a full understanding of what is happening in reality is important. I believe that the EWT project is looking in the right direction, certainly in terms of proposing a single fundamental particle and a periodic particle table. It is of interest that CERN has discovered several new pentaquarks and tetraquarks over the last few weeks - exactly as predicted by EWT. This is not the place to discuss quantum entanglement, the double slit experiment, wave-particle duality, "spooky action at a distance" etc, but these are the particular areas that I have an issue with. EWT offers reasonable explanations not offered elsewhere. Remember, it's only a hypothesis at the moment, but worth consideration.

This thread has nothing to do with model flying but I thought that someone out there might be interested. If not, scroll on. I’ve always had an interest in the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything. I am far from being an expert in quantum physics or cosmology, but the subjects have always interested (and confused) me. I have always had a problem with quantum physics. It’s just too complicated and contrived. It’s based on mathematics derived from experimental observations, which works very well, but has lost touch with reality. Surely nature can’t be that complicated or suddenly become so weird as things get smaller. I have always thought that one day, we will discover how the universe really works and we will be surprised by how simple it is. Well I’ve recently come across THIS website and I think it has a lot of potential. Not for the faint hearted but well worth a read if you are interested in such things.

Batteries could just be from different batches with slightly different chemical properties. Each particular battery looks to be using matched cells (from the same batch?). That is the explanation of what is happening. Whether or not this means that the 22.07v battery is inferior to the 22.94v or is duff is another matter. Maybe they will even out after a few cycles?