scott cuppello

Almost as ridiculous as jumping to conclusions when somebody is trying to make a subtle point that generalisations are not helping and this thread is full of generalisations. Edited By scott cuppello on 22/09/2015 19:06:41

Assuming by "drone" the reference is camera platforms.......well if taking video's of the same field every time you fly is your bag, fair enough, it's a free country! Something tells me the majority wouldn't be so keen.....this highlights the problem of the common use of the word "drone" and the generalisations associated with it, the genre is more sophisticated than it's given credit for, to me a drone is something capable of autonomous flight, that could be fixed wing or Multi-rotor. When somebody uses the term "drone", what are they actually talking about? FPV platforms, FPV racers, video and photography platforms, acro & 3D Multi-Rotors?......all quite different, some really well suited to clubs....some really not. Edited By scott cuppello on 22/09/2015 18:22:46 Edited By scott cuppello on 22/09/2015 18:24:20 Edited By scott cuppello on 22/09/2015 18:27:34

Posted by Flyer on 22/09/2015 13:52:17: I think the problem is not so much as the term 'drone', but the lack of sensible use by the person operating. I would suggest that the majority of people purchasing the 'drones' do not realise that they need to confirm with the regulations put in place by the CAA. I think we are all worried that model flying may inadvertently fall under increased legislation (as per gun clubs etc) by the inconsiderate use by people who fly these things inappropriately. The end users need to be brought into clubs etc to ensure that they are aware of the operating regulations. There is a place for all model aircraft (including drones), as long as they are used responsibly. In that sense, there are many club flyers who need to revise the BMFA handbook !!! as even a small trainer could cause a lot of damage. If people are aware of their responsibilities, and they chose to ignore them, then by all means throw the book at them. Just my two pennarth. I think you will find it is the minority.....not the majority. As for traditional flying clubs, some are clearly hostile and the truth is, FPV racing aside, your average model aircraft club has nothing to offer the average "drone" flyer. Edited By scott cuppello on 22/09/2015 17:39:16

Posted by Bill_B on 21/09/2015 19:49:28: Scott, bird strikes are a daily occurance worldwide and are an act of nature, however, engine manufactures are still required to certify their engines to withstand a certain amount of damage as a result. Without going over old ground ad nauseum, drones are a different kettle of fish. Any sized drone in the vicinity of a live airfield is a risk which is unacceptable and IMHO, unnecessary. I have flown around airfields plenty of times (with permission) with a "drone".....but then I have flown lot's within active airfields with an RC model aircraft as well.....I am sure there are lot's of RC clubs who would take issue with the idea of them being classed as an "unacceptable risk".

A bird strike is far, far, far more likely and a lot of these alleged incidents have either proven to be false or have never been substantiated.

Ok, you guys win.....all "experts" clearly.

You are comparing Turnigy to companies with a reputation for quality and quality assurance........a reputation they deserve....Turnigy has the mediocre overall reputation it deserves. Turnigy is a brand.....it's not a product.....the products are re-branded OEM and as somebody who has actually been involved in this OEM process......let's just say it is not to the same standard as Honda, JR, Stihl or Sony and I rather think they would be horrified at the implication. Turnigy comes from more than one source, therefore it's theoretically possible that you would recieve 2 batteries manufactured in two different locations to two different standards......hardly Honda, Sony, etc is it? Unless a distributor set's a certain standard....and regularly checks that standard when they distribute batteries, then it's inevitable there will be shortfalls if those factories are left to their own devices....and take it from me, HK do not operate the same standards of QA as many European distributors.   Edited By scott cuppello on 30/06/2015 17:43:39

Posted by john stones 1 on 30/06/2015 15:06:43: You can only say as you see and know from personal use Scott, Turnigy lipos are by a long long way the most commonly used at our club and very few are dissatisfied ? John P.S maybe we should start doing a club lottery I think my experience is based a little more than personal use.

The ones I purchased last year are all in the bin suffering from high IR and are swollen. No doubt very soon people will start flocking to this thread with the usual "I have 30 orders and never had a problem" routine......well take it from somebody who knows for a fact and why....lack of QA and standardisation means that purchasing these things is a lottery.

Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 21/06/2015 20:09:25: Hopefully you have all read about the "flying for all" initiative in the Yorkshire Coast Model Flyers club profile in the last edition of BMFA News. an excellent initiative that has been very successful. Find out more at **LINK** Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 21/06/2015 20:25:32 That link has had 66 views!!!

Sorry for the nonsense....distracted!

My local club tried the ATC....unsurprisingly (for me) they were not interested......as I said, youngsters simply do not relate to aviation in the way we did. I worked for a decade with youngsters in Motor Sport and there is plenty of interest and plenty of good kids, same can be said right not for plenty of hobbies and sports (so no point blaming smart phones and computer games).......the point is that none of these have the image issues that aermodelling has.

What the "baby boomer" generation have in common with their now middle-aged offspring is growing up in a post war/cold war 20th century when aviation was the fastest developing technology, we were brought up on a national pride of the achievements of our aero industry & our airforce and a staple of war movies on Sunday afternoons.....but that is mere nostalgia......fast forward to the 21st century. What would I expect a youngster to identify with, my 1/4 scale Tiger Moth or my 250 FPV Racers?....not a difficult one to answer really. Given some of the hostility I have recieved (and that is a middle aged bloke talking) for the latter from the some of the older modellers.....I'm getting down with the kids.....because it's a hobby and I just want to have fun......if that fun is held at an indoor meet or in local woodland......so be it. Some traditional clubs won't benefit from the fast growing new scenes (although some of the more progressive clubs are in on the act......good for them) and therefore the new blood that goes with it, not without a big shift in attitude.

The smaller set's for the Cougar, etc, are good for the price, some people have complained of them stopping working without realising that you frequently need to adust servo end-points on the retract channel with e-retracts in order for them to operate reliably, other than that and keeping them clean and moisture free, nothing to worry about.

80w/lb on such a draggy airframe potentially offers little to no reserve in certain circumstances, personally I would be upping that figure, 100w/lb would offer peace of mind and using 8s should be achievable for around 62A for 1800w.......I always aim for around 60A or as close to 10c as possible with such conversions to achieve reasonable AUW, good flight times and decent battery life (based on the more common size of packs you would use for a model this size).

UHU Por and other foam glues (medium to thick) are brilliant for attaching plastic to wood.

Told you he was one of the good guys!

Word of warning, last week it seems German/Euro customs officers inspected ALL HK parcels with SCS and shipping invoices were check against actual web prices.....something I have never heard of before, lot's of people were pretty miffed due to the length of time this investigation took (parcels were held for around 8 days).

Philip at PW is one of the good guys for sure.

Pearl Harbor.......Tora, Tora, Tora did it properly 30 years earlier without CGI, the insulting re-writing of history and worst of all, a pointless love story......must be the worst aerial warfare movie ever made.

But Paul, we already do? This is the point, show pilots have flying and build standards set by the LMA, UAV pilots (Commercial) have a standard set by the CAA, we have the BMFA pilot certificates (which now includes multi-rotor) and the excellent safety record in the UK is a testament to the resulting standards.......this was my whole point, the US is way behind in many area's relating to keeping up with RC and aeromodeling advances......and as I keep pointing out to my American friends, unless the hobbyists (not the Commercial guys, they have lettle choice) get a grip, drop all this "land of the free" nonsense and start to have constructive dialogue with the FAA, then they will at minimum, have the same reg's as us thrust upon them. Edited By scott cuppello on 16/07/2014 09:41:37 Edited By scott cuppello on 16/07/2014 09:43:02

The FAA is probably in an un-enviable situation of trying to react to and regulate what it see's as very real and increasing issue's from certain sections of the RC Community.......horse and bolted springs to mind. FPV is being hit because of all those video's of long range FPV flights.....and what did they expect? The have no collision avoidance, they seem to have no clue what airspace they are flying in, airmanship is basically largely non-existant.....these flights very much take the hobby RC pilot into the realm of full size aviation. Mult-Rotor craze......and it is a craze, right now there are hundreds of muppets with an excess of cash who are willing to destroy a £350 DJI Phantom in the pursuit of stupidity.......regulation was inevitable. "Pro-Pilots".......very much an American thing......why should full time, paid display pilots not be regulated? Who says they are up to it? Airmanship is more than waggling sticks...... Finally UAV/RPAS.....I suspect the Americans are simply going to have to operate to almost certainly the same reg's that we, Europe, Australia, etc have to, 400ft AGL, VLOS......and frankly, if you can't operate a small UAV in that space, you shouldn't be doing it.....and if you are flying for cash then of course you should be licenced. I have to say, our American cousins are coming over as rather petulant right now, things move on and the changes resulting from technology in the last few years brings with it the need for changing regulation. I have spoken to many US FPV/UAV pilot's and it is suprisingly hard to get over to them that they need to take the bull by the horns and co-operate with the FAA. Edited By scott cuppello on 16/07/2014 09:04:41 Edited By scott cuppello on 16/07/2014 09:05:30

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 12/07/2014 18:49:47: As for HobbyKing putting their name to a whitewash of a serious accident - well, it beggars belief!   For most I am sure and rightly so........some of us however are not shocked at such poor judgement. So it seems that as well as poor airmanship, we can add suspect building (no throttle redundancy on a 100lb multi?......and using common servo extension leads.....EH?) and poor maintenance to the list of failures.......perhaps somebody should hand the guy a large shovel so he can dig himself a deeper hole.....oh HK already did. What I find disturbing is the blind partisan attitude of many RC flyers in the USA.....unbelievable. Edited By scott cuppello on 12/07/2014 23:37:57 Edited By scott cuppello on 12/07/2014 23:38:43

You are missing the point......good airmanship means that flight should NEVER have been attempted, that was 100% pilot error.....the crash itself is an entirely different discussion. Let's look at the crash though if you wish, what additional detail do you need? It's there for everybody to see, he made a mess of it, that's it, there is no mechanical fault to blame, just poor judgement.......and it was luck, not judgement that put that model where it landed, he was not flying that thing from the second it stalled.........sorry, but the people that have condemned the pilot and organisers are very right to do so.

I can tell you that certain brands from Hong Kong are sourced from more than one factory, I think that is not at all likely with UK brands.