Jump to content
Please be aware of scammers when using the Sale/Wanted forum areas

IanN

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,784

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Everything posted by IanN

  1. IanN
    Well, that didn't take long, seems it's happening already.... An email from Airtek received today says "It can hardly have escaped anybody's attention that since the Brexit vote the value of the Pound against the Dollar has plunged which has, unfortunately, had an immediate effect on the products we sell. As we buy most of our stock with Dollars these have become much more expensive and sadly over the coming weeks we have no option but to increase some of our prices." And the Taranis X9D Tx that I bought immediately after the EU exit vote in anticipation of this now costs a full £10 more today than I paid last month. The receivers haven't gone up yet, but seemingly only because they haven't needed to be restocked yet - that can only be a matter of (not much) time
  2. IanN
    Posted by John F on 18/07/2016 16:52:43: No other retailer offers any discount or warranty repair out of the guaranteed period on anything, never mind radio gear. Spektrum are the only ones who will repair a Tx, that I am aware of, that is outside the guarantee timeframe. John, not so. For anything bought on or before 30 Sept 2015 the Sale of Goods Act still applies. That holds a retailer liable for up to six years after purchase if goods don't conform to "reasonable standards". There are massive grey areas within that, in that durability and reasonable expectations play a part. A £6.99 budget kettle might reasonably only be expected to have a lifespan of a couple of years whereas it would be perfectly reasonable to expect a £2k oven to give far longer service. Also, from six months after purchase the burden of proof falls on customer. A retailer can insist on an independent report (at the customer's expense) to "prove" that an item was faulty, and not for example subjected to excessive use. If the retailer then agrees there is a fault but can prove it's unfeasible or uneconomical to repair they can then pay compensation. Basically, that's the purchase price minus a sum that reflects how much use you have had from the item to date - most retailers use a sliding scale of "% of purchase price per year" So, I'm not saying it's easy - especally when applied to r/c gear (how on earth would you go about proving that an item had not been subject to "excessive use" - i.e. crashed a few times!), but it is not the case that "No other retailer offers any discount or warranty repair out of the guaranteed period on anything". For goods bought pre Oct 15 the law clearly says otherwise
  3. IanN
    It was said at this year's show that it was believed to be secure for 2017
  4. IanN
    Posted by Nigel Dell on 21/07/2016 15:04:08: Posted by Daithi O Buitigh on 21/07/2016 14:37:08: Nothing to fly it with? What about Hellcats, Wildcats, Corsairs - and don't forget that they used P39s to take out Admiral Yamamoto. There's a severe lack of Japanese twins (or even Italian multis if the Betty is too problematic) I suspect the issue will not be what to fly with it, but if there will be enough interest in it, i.e. orders to put the time and money into developing it, nice though it is. Exactly As already been gone over a no of times in this thread, there are commercial realities involved here. There is little point suggesting the more esoteric or "special interest" subjects - no matter how nice they may be
  5. IanN
    All part and parcel of the joys of building
  6. IanN
    Going back a bit but I too was unimpressed They had an enviable reputation back in the day, mainly it seemed due to a proactive policy of replacing faulty - or perceived faulty - Spektrum gear swiftly and without quibble My experience was different. I bought a Parkzone Super Decathalon and it had a no of issues, which I emailed along with supporting pics. That obviously got sent on to someone in their tech dept, as all I got back was a forwarded copy of an internal reply - no covering note or anything else - that said "yes it's wrong, tell him he'll have to take it back to the shop"
  7. IanN
    Posted by Bob Cotsford on 18/07/2016 09:36:26: I think that is related to the mods Percy mentioned earlier, the fix was to move the tailplane up or down (I can't remember which) on the fuselage. These were Percy's words - useful stuff - from a different thread, which coincidentally I searched out on here last week in anticipation of a forthcoming Acrowot build "bit of a can of worms, this one. Over the past 30 years or so, many Acrowots have been built and successfully flown without any form of modification. However, there are now quite a number of "unofficial" mods, some of which have found their way onto the larger Extrawot and the newer artf version of the Acrowot. The mods I know of are: 1. Reduction in wing dihedral. Various amounts have been mentioned, but 50% seems the most popular mod. 2. Lowering the tailplane. Anything from 1/2 an inch to 3/4 of an inch. Sometimes I've seen an increase in tailplane span mentioned too, although I'm not sure what it's effect will be. Be aware though that these tailplane mods may make it more vulnerable to damage in rougher landings. 3. Increased rudder area, both in chord and particularly below the fuselage. An additional underfin at the rear of the fuselage will complete this mod. Interestingly, this is the mod which has found it's way onto the ExtraWot. 4. Undercarriage plate reinforcement. Although I guess this one depends both on the quality of your landings and your flying site. However, you'll also find many modellers who've built an AW and will advise no changes at all, so I guess you pays your money and you make your choice!
  8. IanN
    I've got the Sense Innovations Ess-Air unit - as yet unused - and that weighs slightly north of 5.5 oz, so c160g. A little heavier than this HK item I would imagine that at this budget end of the market there is a physical size (and weight) of the amp and/or speaker below which the sound produced would be inadequate in a flying model? Edited By IanN on 17/07/2016 11:21:33
  9. IanN
    Posted by Rich2 on 14/07/2016 08:03:56: Edited By IanN on 13/07/2016 23:58:54 I agree, I am getting tired of it. If people don't like the topics don't read or get involved with the threads. It is very sad that we cannot have these discussions. Where is it in the rules that we cannot discuss politics? There is nothing in the forum rules (that I can find) and yet, it specifically mentions posts with bad language, which as Ian mentioned are being ignored. And please do not give me "this is a model aeroplane forum", as plenty of other topics are discussed. perhaps we should close the chit chat forum altogether? Edited By Rich2 on 14/07/2016 08:05:13 That wasn't quite my angle. I was coming more from the point of view that the Chat thread could possibly be renamed or redefined to make things clearer and so avoid these misunderstandings or whatever you want to call them, rather than saying that political etc discussion should be allowed - which tbh I'm completely not bothered about
  10. IanN
    Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 09/07/2016 15:48:28: The political debate stops now guys, or we close this. As we have pointed out many times now this is a model aircraft forum. If you wish to discuss politics please go elsewhere to do so. BEB The regularity with which this is needing to be pointed out is becoming tiresome if I might suggest, hopefully non controversially and purely in the spirit of trying to help, why do we still have a heading titled Chit-chat Anything off-topic including the famous Cafe - shoot the breeze! when that clearly isn't the case. Just redefine the "rules of engagement" by changing the title and hopefully that may reduce the incidences of warnings needing to be issued and threads being locked? And whilst on the subject of moderation etc, what's the current state of play re "Please note our enforced langauge guidelines ............ using *** to hide language will result in your posts being deleted"? The forum thankfully doesn't get too much of that, but I do see more examples of the asterisk being used to "mask" language than I do political threads, and those don't seem to be being deleted. Ironically, the recently closed Brexit thread contains a "cr*p" that was neither commented on nor deleted NOT criticising or having a go - I wouldn't want to do the Mods' jobs for all the tea in Europe - just suggestions, that peeps are free to either take on board or ignore       Edited By IanN on 13/07/2016 23:58:54
  11. IanN
    Posted by Tim Mackey on 12/07/2016 08:27:13: Ive just received one of those sound modules, and fancy putting it in a Vampire, foamy jet ( glider ) - anyone know if there are jet "sounds" available, or if you can add your own sound files somehow ? Sounds downloadable from the supplier - although the downloads page is not particularly easy or intuitive to get to, in the first instance They do an ME 262 **LINK**
  12. IanN
    Posted by Barrie Warehand 2 on 10/07/2016 08:14:21: . So I'm about to hit the green fields of Hertforshire with my new Diamond 1100pro powered Glider Hopefully not literally, Barrie Welcome, and let us know how it goes
  13. IanN
    Posted by RICHARD WILLS on 09/07/2016 10:20:01: Canopies ,cowlings , spinners and nacelle moulds are all the sticking points . I was guessing that and funnily enough was going to p.m. you along the same lines. The dilemma is obviously that to tool up to a kit you need the commitment of sufficient (was it c25?) builders, but If we can't get that no, how will we ever get to a viable proof of concept? I'd be perfectly ok with "We do have a lot of moulds in our store so some of the above items can be approximated". if that drops the initial outlay and gets to a flying prototype. "approximated" is fine by me if it gets us off the ground. I'd also have absolutely no problem at all with building my own nacelles and cowlings, nor with having a go at moulding my own canopy. Well up for that So, if it were in the first instance a case of producing, say, a set of Whirlwind foam wings and fus deck mouldings - nothing else - for those of us who fancy the Whirlwind, how would that stack up? I was going to also say the only other thing we'd need would be the plan, but I'm guessing that if you do a plan it's then only a very short step from there to also getting the main components (formers e.g.) cnc cut aswell - but you'll know that far better than me Don't know - what do you, and other potential builders think - might that be a viable way forwards? Edited By IanN on 09/07/2016 12:17:58
  14. IanN
    Posted by Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 08/07/2016 19:00:38: ''The Ju88 has produced a great deal of wow factor from all who have seen it the air and on the ground. The simplicity of build and great flight characteristics had a good few say they would like to have one '' There could be a great many people who have never even considered a twin as they are a rarity in kit or ARTF form, the are perceived to be expensive, complex and almost guaranteed to bite the dust if an engine fails. With modern engines or an electric setup cost and reliability are not the issues they once were and even if one engine/motor does go most pilots should be able to handle it if the follow the right procedure and guidance on this could even be included in the kit instructions. Single engine handling would also be helped by the model (like the Ju88) being lightly loaded and not a flying brick like twins of old. Its almost like we have to put the cart before the horse and produce a product first and then convince the punters its viable and show off its strengths. I personally don't think this would be a hard sell especially once the ball is rolling a bit.   The JU88 is already out there. Get the a few each of the Whirlwind plus another prototype, and plan for a couple of the shows - or Greenacres or similar - next year to test the water? Edited By IanN on 08/07/2016 21:22:43
  15. IanN
    Excellent. I'll have my (admittedly probably not as scale as yours) version up and flying ground attack missions over Buckinghamshire whilst you're still working out your flap arrangement
  16. IanN
    Put me down for "team Whirlwind" then, if anything comes of that idea. I propose Jon as team leader
  17. IanN
    Posted by RICHARD WILLS on 07/07/2016 18:25:20: The Ju88 sales will influence the likelyhood of any future twins. As we said before I dont need big numbers but there is a limit ! I am excited about the twins because I feel the time is right for them . R That's what worries me slightly: this seems dependant on the JU88 which I don't think is an "obvious" winner - really do hope I'm completely wrong I too think the time is right for the twins concept though - there could be huge potential for a genre that has been largely overlooked by manufacturers until now
  18. IanN
    Posted by Michael Ramsay-Fraser on 07/07/2016 15:31:38: I'd still prefer to see the Whirlwind as the twin offering and, yes, I'd probably buy one even if it did come with veneered parts. I just love the design. I know what you mean. The thought of one of these beating up the patch certainly gets the blood flowing. Just needs to be commercially viable though
  19. IanN

    IanN posted a gallery image in Member Albums

  20. IanN
    Posted by RICHARD WILLS on 07/07/2016 14:24:54: Lorenz , Ian . I asked for your opinion and I value you it . You both want different things and I like both ideas . The problem we have is numbers. How many Whirlwinds or Hornets will I sell in one year , Please give it your best educated guess. We can go from there. Richard Richard, totally understood. However, you did say earlier that the Whirlwind "Comes up in conversation a fair bit over the years so it may well have legs if it ever got to production. But then again, if you're relying solely on sales based on contributors to this post then I suppose realistically you'd be doing well to shift half a dozen. The Mossie hasn't attracted any significantly higher level of interest on here, but is obviously a little more "mainstream" - although does that necessarily translate into £ sales? (Especially based on your P51 numbers, which had me absolutely gobsmacked) So, I guess the Whirlie is a gamble - the wild card. A lot of folks may look at it and think "wow, that's really cool, it stands out, it's practical, unusual, and not available anywhere else, I want one" Or, does the Whirlwind maybe become the "next kit" if the Mossie is successful? You know the market better than us and if a Mossie were to become the twin equivalent of your Spitfire, sales wise, and that leads to further kits then it's win/win I don't envy you the decision. I obviously have my preference but I'll support (i.e. buy) either. One thought I did have is is this whole thing dependant on shifting some JU88s first?
  21. IanN
    Not familiar with that particular item but as I understand it the pump will send the smoke oil via a tube to connect to the muffler / cannister at that pressure nipple that you mention. That introduces the oil to the muffler, and the heat from the exhaust then vapourises (or whatever the correct technical term is) the oil to produce the smoke I think the T piece reference is for if your engine happens to be a twin - two mufflers
  22. IanN
    And, it was said earlier "Anything with compound curves is going to slow you down , ie He111 , Mossie , C47 " Go on - Whirlwind - you know you want to"
  23. IanN
    Working ok here this morning - desktop pc, Windows 7, Chrome
  24. IanN
    Posted by The Wright Stuff on 06/07/2016 15:32:30: Posted by IanN on 06/07/2016 15:08:10: Yep, just because a prop is small, or isn't attached to a noisy i.c. engine, doesn't mean it's not every bit as dangerous Agree with the sentiment, but I don't agree literally. A smaller prop is (a) likely to be attached to a lower power source of energy than a big prop, (b) it weighs less and so has less angular momentum, and (c) for any given RPM, the tips will be travelling more slowly. So still dangerous, but not every bit as dangerous! I have a gut instinct that props intended for electric use are thinner than ones intended for IC use, and therefore possibly sharper. In the interests of good practise, and preserving my digits intact, I'll stick with treating them as "every bit as dangerous"
  25. IanN
    Yep, just because a prop is small, or isn't attached to a noisy i.c. engine, doesn't mean it's not every bit as dangerous
×
×
  • Create New...