Martin Harris - Moderator

If it drank any of the methanol, a new home will be the last of its worries... P.S. Don't forget that the use of wildcard characters to disguise bad language (removed) is contravening the forum rules! 👮‍♂️

I'm always conscious of the vulnerable end of the model that I'm maneuvering - unfortunately, the other end often seems to manage to find the nearest solid object!

Thread title changed to correct name for clarity.

I made several attempts at finding useable substitutes with no joy. They appear to be square section rings of an unusual size. I think it very unlikely that you’ll find any in a “selection box”.

Yet another modeller who doesn’t understand how servo grommets should be assembled! @8:15

What do you regard as excessive? A quick glance at eBay indicates plenty of Futaba transmitters at buy it now prices under £50 and many low starting price auctions. If you want some buyer’s protection, how about this from Midland Helicopters?

Two tier system? Mysterious marginal compliance sounds like you’ve been given the benefit of the doubt/best case scenarios by sympathetic testers.

I have wondered about IPA (not the beer variety!) as I believe that mixes well with water - I’ve used it in my “patent” window washing solution on many occasions.

Good to hear positive news. At least a stiff wind will be good for you! I’ve never tried RC sailing but I certainly enjoyed my occasional encounter with dinghys so I’m sure you’ll find enough challenge to make it worthwhile.

I’ve thinned them with ordinary water but while I haven’t used it but I’ve seen windscreen washer fluid recommended. It seems odd to me as I’d assume there’s a detergent content but others may know more?

Easier way to prove it would have been to invert the model. That's where a cradle helps but with help, it's pretty easy to have it held upside down...and saves a lot of work if it proves not to be flooding!

Our field adjoins a wood and open land which are used for an expensive pheasant shoot and associated breeding ground. We often get a cheery (yes, really) wave from the gamekeeper as he passes. It may help that we own our land but while not officially endorsed, we are tolerated when retrieving errant models as long as we’re sensible. We have a very healthy population of Red Kites and Buzzards nesting in the wood, who seem to take a friendly interest in our models - seeming to take most interest in new ones - and aren’t intimidated by our activities. We have kestrels regularly patrolling our boundaries and numerous other flying visitors. The only (non-human) undesirable visitors are the rabbits, who delight in digging holes in our runways and deer who prefer to go through our safety fences rather than round them.

Just a reminder to keep this discussion relating to the effects of import tariffs and to avoid straying into the politics of the situation...

It’s always struck me as slightly odd that we go to the trouble of setting a tank height - and then add an unknown amount of pressure to the air above the fuel! If using pressure, the main benefit in setting tank height “correctly” would seem to be in avoiding flooding while starting as once in flight - particularly with an aerobatic model - the relationship between tank height, gravity and fuel draw is varying constantly. I wonder if anyone has a figure for the typical exhaust pressure applied to a tank? I assume it’s significant as when there’s a failure in the pressure plumbing, engine tune is badly affected. Of course, when not using exhaust pressure, it seems logical that tank height will be more critical as with only atmospheric pressure (and maybe a little effect from a forward facing tank vent) there is a greater effect (in upright flight) as the fuel head changes. These are more thinking out loud thoughts than any sort of arguments for or against any recommendations but another anomaly that comes to mind is the effect of a well located non-pressurised tank when the model is in sustained inverted or negative g flight…

Yes, very quickly. Perhaps I was just lucky?