Richard Clark 2

Posted by GONZO on 14/06/2020 13:43:26: Richard Clark 2, agree with you. Our current situation with the 'toy plane' rules is just symptomatic of our current society. Anyone taking a wider view of society will see 'we' are all being slowly, incrementally hedged in by rules/laws and nudged this way and that by staged events to an eventual destination that would not have been acceptable if imposed in one go. In the absence of any organised 'refusal to pay' I have personally not paid the 'toy tax', nor will I. If I can't fly my planes so be it., the end of 60+ years. People have given up more for less. People have given their lives for the right to say what they think. Gonzo, You don't have to give up toy planes if you have not paid the toy tax. I asked my wife. 1) The police can always ask you your name but you are only obliged to answer if they say you are suspected of a driving or terrorist offence. 2) The police at the 'Gatwick event' said they did NOT think the arrested couple were in any way connected with terrorism. This will establish a precedent for 99% of 'unregistered drone flyers'. 3) Even in the rare occasions it doesn't establish such a precedent because the police do think you are a terrorist all they can do is arrest you even though they don't know your name. 4) A driving offence. If you refuse to give your name the police have no way of connecting a car parked nearby to you. 5) So either way, suspected terrorist or suspected bad driver, they put you in a cell at the local nick., still without knowing you name. 6)Then they have to persuade the Public Prosecutor that it'a worth taking you to court. At court is the FIRST time you are compelled to give your name. 7) In arresting you and taking you to the police station the arresting officer(s) will expose their actions to the senior officer at the police station and to go any further also expose their actions to the Public Prosecutor. That's all fact. My wife's professional legal opinion "After the recent decision on the Gatwick compensation no sane police force is going to do all this just for flying a toy plane in a farmers field, recreation ground, beauty spot, or whatever". So keep on flying

Posted by Geoff S on 14/06/2020 22:47:05: Posted by Gary Manuel on 14/06/2020 21:25:43: Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete Sounds about right. Lawyers get three times as much as the people who deserve it. As Dickens wrote in Bleak House. It was ever thus Geoff I see you've read Bleak House too

Posted by Dickw on 14/06/2020 23:51:32: Posted by Martin Harris on 14/06/2020 18:19:27: Whatever you decide, check the switch for damage regularly. It will be many years before the memory of a clubmate's shaking hands after landing subsides into the haze of old age...his 7kW F5b glider left his hand and a small piece of metal hit the ground half a second later. Yes, that piece of metal was the throttle switch lever. It was previously speculated that the phenomenally over rated drive train wouldn't last much longer than the less than 2 second burst which normally took it to a couple of hundred feet and well over 100 mph vertically but it held together for the 45 seconds or so until the energy limiter used for competition cut in. I can assure you that nobody at the field took their eyes of the model for a fraction of a second during the entire flight - the ballistic missile-like projectile describing gigantic loops in order for the pilot to keep the 2m model in visual range. Can your transmitter have a non latching switch within reach? Could you consider using that? I learned a few lessons that day One was not to use a "long lever" switch where I was going to pul back hard as I launched with the other hand - I now use a short lever spring loaded switch for motor and no more problems in then following 6 years! The second thing was that once the plane had accelerated beyond its normal top speed to something around 200mph the power level had dropped right off to about 2.5 kW (still about twice the motor rating, but survivable). The third thing I learned was that my 'clubmates' are never going to let me forget it Dick I use a 'safety switch'. In addition to the usual 'throttle cut' and the throttle itself (be it on a switch or a stick) I set up an additional switched mixer which also cuts the throttle. Originally I set up TWO such switched mixers for a smallish DH88 Comet racer twin as I knew it would be tricky and even more so if a motor failed, so I set up one for each motor. This allowed me to cut and restart either motor without affecting the other one so I could practice single engined flight. Now I do the same on all electric planes. And it would fix Martin's clubmates problem (as his transmitter presumably didn't have a 'regular' throttle cut.)

Posted by Michael Adams 4 on 14/06/2020 20:12:35: Well said Baaaaa. Falsely arrested couple £55,000, lawyers £145,000, taxpayers minus £200,000 If my wife ever accused me of 'domestic abuse' she would be happy to defend me against the charge she herself laid if the taxpayers paid her well enough

Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete My wife's a lawyer. She's as rich as Croesus. They all are

Posted by Steve J on 14/06/2020 16:59:56: Posted by Andy Stephenson on 14/06/2020 13:46:20: From the Daily Mail this morning... Couple who were wrongly arrested over Gatwick drone that sparked three day of Christmas flight chaos in 2018 receive £200,000 in compensation Good although I am surprised that it has taken Sussex plod so long to settle. PS The Sussex police website, says that they only paid £55k. Edited By Steve J on 14/06/2020 17:10:44 I never noticed the £200,000 report was the Daily Mail. So obviously I'll believe your version

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 14/06/2020 17:26:35: Basically no, I have an Seagull Maxi-lift, Astro Hog, Bucker Jungmeister, and Sopwith Camel with outboard ailerons and none of them are over sensitive. Personally, for 'safety' I do the maiden and a couple of other flights with 'high' dual rates set to 100% and 'low' dual rates set to 60%. When happy with the overall 'travels' I set the low dual rates to 100% also. That way it doesn't matter how the rate switches are set as from then on they do nothing.

Posted by Steve Colman on 14/06/2020 15:56:42: After many years of flying motor gliders today I maidened a full house motor glider for the first time with flaps on the left stick and the motor on a switch. Also 3 flight modes on another stick. It was somewhat of a challenge to prevent confusion! Once up to height with the motor off the model flew well for a maiden flight. To keep things simple I flew in cruise mode throughout the flight. Although some trim changes will need to be made to fine tune everything I was reasonably pleased with how the model performed. There were however, a few times of "mild" panic as I searched for the correct swith to activate the motor for another climb and then to switch it off again. When I finally managed to execute a safe landing, still in cruise mode and no flaps, without damaging the model I felt somewhat relieved. I'd completed my first flight on what felt a very strange way (to me) to control a model. I'm surmising that many have gone through similar experiences and it's just a matter of getting used to the new set up? I do want to persevere as I know it's the right way to go. Would welcome hearing from anyone who has been through this "Transition" themselves and any hints / tips that you might have. Thanks, Steve. Edited By Steve Colman on 14/06/2020 15:57:51 Personally I fly all models, 'regular' power models, glider powered and unpowered, and helis all set up in the same manner, which in my case happens to be mode 1 (though mode 2 would be fine if you prefer it). All 'extras' go on the same switches or sliders regardless of the model but on some models some or all of these are not configured so do nothing. That way I do not have to 'get used to' anything. That said it took me a short while to learn than 'up elevator' on a heli does not mean 'up' but 'go backwards'

Posted by Andy Stephenson on 14/06/2020 13:46:20: From the Daily Mail this morning... Couple who were wrongly arrested over Gatwick drone that sparked three day of Christmas flight chaos in 2018 receive £200,000 in compensation Rush to judgement much? A. Edited By Andy Stephenson on 14/06/2020 13:47:14 Being compensated AFTERWARDS is no use whatsoever. They should never have been arrested in the first place. Least of of all merely because a couple of neighbours said he flies toy planes, which is not 'evidence' at all. (and which is probably why the compensation is high).

Posted by ken anderson. on 14/06/2020 09:31:47: fat better that the BMFA,LMA and all were at least consulted and involved..and their views sort?....fact of life that all our daily lives are governed by rules and regs...and like it or not when some waster decides to fly a drone near a full size aircraft...someone has to do something to stop it before there is an accident....to describe everyone as "sheepies" is a bit of a statement and a half.....I do agree that we fly toy model aircraft...but todays toy model aircraft are very sophisticated in what the can do and be used for.....so 3 cheers for the people who represented our interests...and did the best they could on our behalf....also I agree that its hard to enforce the rules...but they are are there to be used..my view.... ken anderson...ne..1...rules dept. I've nothing against the SMAE/BMFA and have in fact been a member ever since the late 50's - early 60's. And I didn't describe 'everyone' as sheepies. But I have been on protests, though not toy plane ones. Though a personal effort of mine was to write directly to the Duke of Edinburgh, then patron of the SMAE (now BMFA) many years ago, taking care to check and use the correct 'protocols' to successfully and single-handedly save our flying site from closure by the Forestry Commission But people don't seem to realise how we let these gradual imposition of 'rules' and costs creep up on us. Our site is in the New Forest. and the vehicle track from the road also leads to a barbecue area and the start of a long cycling path. Now it's all closed. Not because of the 'virus' (though that was the initial reason) but now because of 'ground nesting birds' which is a recently imposed restriction - four months out of every year. How the birds managed fine from 1066 (William the Conqueror) up till now we shall never know. And we have flown there since about 1958 when the field was handed back to the 'public' by the military. But from some years ago each of us has to buy a 'permit' at 5 quid (now 10 quid) a year and 'competitions' are no longer allowed without 'special permission'.

Poplar ply is quite light. And amply strong. I also think the unsheeted structure is quite nice. So much so that if I had the kit I would be tempted to sand off all the laser burns, fit some extra evenly spaced stringers to the fuselage to maintain the shape, leave off all the sheeting, and cover the whole plane with transparent yellow film. It would end up very light, so low(ish) power could be used. Flying stresses would be low, it would look lovely, the shape is instantly recognizable, but it would be more interesting than "Yet another Spitfire". Not always, but sometimes I like 'model planes' to look like model planes rather than real ones

Posted by Steve J on 13/06/2020 21:49:18: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 13/06/2020 20:52:07: The registration process was just a 'knee-jerk' "We must be seen to be doing something" reaction to an unproven event at Gatwick. You have got to hand it to the DfT. They managed to amend the ANO to add registration and testing in a knee jerk reaction to the December '18 Gatwick incident six months before the incident. Truly impressive. Sadly thought, not quite in the same league as EASA. They managed to get a notice of proposed amendment on the regulation of drones out three years before Gatwick. Bully for both. the DfT and EASA. Not that either should be involved. Toy planes are not 'transport' and we have been told we are free from the chains of the EU, which my toy planes are unlikely to overfly.. The assorted official mouths, plus MPs, Police, etc. saying "We must regulate these things" immediately after Gatwick, and their following speedy implementation must have been pure coincidence. Result? We've now got a set of unenforceable rules and more regulations about playing with toys. And all because the majority, sheepies to the last man, meekly accept this nonsense.

Posted by bert baker on 13/06/2020 17:05:03: I’ve got a little AE 0.5 and it’s a sod to run The old engines were very variable. My ED Baby ran perfectly, as did my ED Bee and ED Racer. But the ED Hornet I had was hopeless. The Frog (Flies right off the Ground)  engines were fairly good and their '150R' of 1.5 cc was competitive with the Oliver Tiger Cub in 1/2A team racing at a third the price of the Oliver. The owners founded 'Jetex' as well. The DC Dart was quite good but all DC crankshafts were too soft and bent if the prop ever touched the ground. And the needle valve 'barrel' on DC engines ALWAYS became unsoldered. Cox engines were good but the glow heads, which burnt out often even if you used the correct low voltage, were much more expensive than regular glowplugs. . Eta 29's were brilliant. I had three over time. The company owner was a noted jazz player as well as an excellent engineer. Then there was the Rivers Silver Streak. I had one as a Christmas present. Cost as much as an Oliver Tiger and designed to compete with it but never could. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 13/06/2020 21:34:12

Posted by Dickw on 13/06/2020 15:17:46: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 13/06/2020 12:34:25: Posted by Dickw on 13/06/2020 10:47:08: I am not aware of any plans for the BMFA to take over registration, and the bit you highlighted is just a simplified description and not part of the exemption. The exemption is valid until the end of June (unless it gets changed again!) provided you are a current member of the BMFA. After that you will either (a) have already registered with the CAA via the BMFA, or will (b) have to register direct with the CAA yourself. I suspect the bit you highlighted refers to option (a), As you are already registered best just to go and enjoy the flying. Dick That won't happen .................................... if you are referring to the suggestion that the BMFA (or the other three organisations) might take over registration then I agree. Your reasons why the BMFA would (could) never be responsible for registration are valid. However, I do believe the BMFA offered to the CAA to investigate the use of its membership system as a cheaper way of managing registration rather than the CAA building its own system. Everyone has to make their own choice of whether to obey the law, or not and run the risk of prosecution. Whatever your reasons you seem to be, like me, on the right side of the law, so no problems for us there. Dick Yeah. While I am unlikely to starve because of paying the nine quid toy plane tax my only reason for paying it was that the 'committee' who runs our site (it's not a club and I am a BMFA 'country' member) was that I didn't want hassle with that sometimes rather officious committee as its secretary is a friend of mine, though not a close one. I put my number on a couple of 'token' planes as I fly them often but have not bothered putting it on the rest. The registration process was just a 'knee-jerk' "We must be seen to be doing something" reaction to an unproven event at Gatwick. And as I said, it isn't working as a "seen to be doing something" reaction doesn't need to actually work. As for the BMFA scheme I didn't use it as I didn't see the point. I just took the silly test and paid via credit card on the first day the CAA registration web site was available and left it at that. Arthur C Clarke said all this idiotic modern bureaucracy we have to put up with is due to the over-refined food we mostly eat lowering human intelligence

Posted by J D 8 on 23/09/2018 11:33:34: ….....The upper wing was originaly held on by saddle clamps and 8 screws and took an age to put on,however a couple of years ago modified it with hooks holding the leading edge to the cabain and two wing bolts up through plate at the the rear. Edited By J D 8 on 23/09/2018 11:34:26 Of course. It's just another Boddington mediocrity. He turned them out like supermarket sausages.

Posted by Dickw on 13/06/2020 10:47:08: I am not aware of any plans for the BMFA to take over registration, and the bit you highlighted is just a simplified description and not part of the exemption. The exemption is valid until the end of June (unless it gets changed again!) provided you are a current member of the BMFA. After that you will either (a) have already registered with the CAA via the BMFA, or will (b) have to register direct with the CAA yourself. I suspect the bit you highlighted refers to option (a), As you are already registered best just to go and enjoy the flying. Dick That won't happen as a high proportion of model flyers don't join their 'respective organisations' and such outfits don't 'govern' anyone, not even their members. Also they obviously have no 'powers of enforcement' over the approx. 65 million plus people in the UK, any of whom might suddenly choose to buy, or even build, a toy plane. Personally I only paid the £9 toy plane tax because the voluntary 'committee' who runs our site insists on it and I couldn't be bothered to argue about it. Were it not for them I wouldn't have taken the silly test or paid the tax. I certainly don't 'embrace' the concept of paying a likely ever increasing tax, the present unenforceable regulations, and the likelihood of even more unenforceable ones.

Posted by MattyB on 12/06/2020 13:44:09: Latest version of CAP1789 has been published - the BMFA communication about it is here. Looks like no remote ID under Open category A3 privately built, but the distance from people/property stuff is still going to be a challenge for many pilots and clubs. Hopefully the national associations can get an Article 16 authorisation that exempts their members... Edited By MattyB on 12/06/2020 13:45:08 It's all nonsense anyway. 1) What percentage of 'quad' flyers, who are  the original  source of the supposed 'problem',  have ever heard of the BMFA? Or would bother to join if they had? 2) Nobody of malicious intent is going to put their ID on the plane, assuming the unlikely event they bothered to get an ID at all. 3) Remote ID's won't work. At the low altitudes we fly the system will have a very short range so very large numbers of base stations will be needed. And the CAA /ATC hasn't even got the capacity to fully monitor the NON-compulsory full-size 'squawk' system now, let alone monitor toy planes. 4) Other people in the area. How are modellers going to look out for them and look at his plane at the same time? I repeat - it;'s all nonsense. Take myself and the potential 'distance' rule. I'm neither 'godly' nor notably 'evil'. I mostly fly on a National Park/Forestry Commission 'official' site of about 2 square miles out of 200 square miles and the public have the legal right to 'peaceful enjoyment' on all of it, including our 2 square miles, which does have a couple of official warning signs but 'warnings' are all they are. We flyers on that site, the only one in the whole area,  are a minor tourist attraction so there are often spectators. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 13/06/2020 05:23:57 Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 13/06/2020 05:26:30

'Den's', (the Cox importer) supply of replacement glow heads is very erratic, a lot of the time he hasn't got any, inclusing right now. So don't forget to add £14.20 to the engine price for the head that takes standard glow plugs and the Cox engine tool to stop the head unscrewing when you replace the plug. If it does unscrew you will need a new copper gasket too. I'd go for the PAW any day. Though diesel fuel isn't exactly 'readily available ' at your local model shop either.

Posted by Brian Hammond on 11/06/2020 12:40:52: Hi Denis, I wait with baited breath,it sounds dreadful so far! The structure looks like it uses more trees than Nelson's Victory. And the rivets around the cockpit obviously came from the Titanic.

Posted by Stephen Jones on 11/06/2020 14:00:13:   I agree i looked into them a while back and their are other companies that offer the same products and operate in the same way as Bang Not so Good. . Look at almost anything made with plastic and it will probable of come from china, So if you but plastic props or anything plastic and cheap it will probable be ok. I use to buy little bits from them keeping the total cost low and i usually got my goods ok more than likely fake though. My girl friend wanted some wonder clips to do some sewing and they where expensive for what they are and so we bought some from Bang not so Good and we received some clips that looked like wonder clips and they worked but defiantly fake you could tell the differences compared to the real ones. So if you are happy with fake look a likes then you pays your money and you takes your chance. Steve Fake stuff is fine if you buy it only for the looks. - we've got a 'Renoir' painting and he certainly didn't paint on MDF But if it has to actually 'work' like toy plane stuff has to do, never!!! Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 11/06/2020 14:19:41

Always bear in mind that Banggood is just a Chinese based 'general trading company'. It doesn't make anything, nor is it an 'official agent' for anything you have ever heard of. As such it buys almost anything that is going cheap, from garden buckets through car parts to watches and jewellery. Then it sells it to you. Most of it is 'unbranded' and anything that is branded, including rc equipment and cameras, is almost certainly fake. UK trading laws? No chance.

Posted by Malcolm Smith 9 on 10/06/2020 16:05:40: I have been given a Art Tech Mini Pred v2.4G helicopter and although there was a few things wrong with it I have managed to get it running and the control functions seem to be working normal. There is however quite a lot of vibration when held down on a table with somewhat less when it is hand held. I have a set of new blades but the vibration is just the same. Can anyone please let me know if this is normal before I commence flying trials? You may find it's the blade 'tracking'. Put it on the table with a long heavy weight across the skids and some positive pitch on, look at the main rotor 'edge on', rev it up to a highish speed and see if the blade tips are at the same level. If not adjust the final links to the blades so they are. You might be able to check the tail rotor the same way. but it's less likely to go out of alignment. (In 'real life' if they have a vibration problem they get a brave guy who very carefully holds up a whitewashed broom to check this )

Posted by Erfolg on 10/06/2020 16:33:15: Having received feed back that some believe that the kit should be built as it is or just saved, that is stored, I decided that in view of the significant amount of work or differences to fly the model as a current RC model, in deference to others sensibilities, I would just stick it away. I then got out my wallpaper and pencil, and redrew it for current use. which means a new front end, rearranging the wing to tailplane incidence, tailplane, rudder, undercarriage and a new sheeted aileron wing. Although it looks the same, it is now very different. As all the various kits, the body follows the same general formula of a box section with bits stuck on to provide a shape. Just like the full size. Just stick in a few formers. Then stick on the others side. Stick the body in a jig, then add all the cross members. Now this bit fooled me. I stuck in a doubler, then sheeted as per all the various kits. It is only later i have discovered that the front end of the full size was not ply covered, it was just canvass. Now a few formers and stringers have been stuck on. the all important Lipo and motor box have been installed at 90 degrees with no down thrust. I have a few more pictures to post tomorrow, as to where the project currently stands.   You are doing fine. A couple of points: 1) Later on you will have the side window surrounds to do from 1/16th sheet, as in the Mercury kit. I cut two out, window holes included, each from one piece of sheet, and two more exactly the same from 0.8mm ply. I checked that they matched exactly and then enlarged the window holes in the BALSA ones by about 3/32 all round. Then I stuck a balsa one and a ply one together, making a left and a right one with the ply on the outside, so the balsa ones form an 'inner recessed rim'. Then I cut the four windows from transparent plastic sheet to the 'inner rim' size and stuck them in from the INSIDE. Only then did I glue these panels in place. It all ended up very neat and avoids unevenness if you glue the plastic outside. (Most reall planes have a slight recess where the windows are.) 2) When it's all done, including sheeting the fuselage underside, don't forget to fair the sheeting to the longerons with about a 2 inch x 1/16 x 3/16 balsa piece roughly sanded to a 'wedge' and finished off after fitting, at each of the longeron places, as in the Mercury kit.  Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 10/06/2020 20:36:50

Posted by Tosh McCaber on 10/06/2020 07:42:13: Richard, much as we would like to buy from UK suppliers, tragically, a huge amount of what we we want online is only available via China (BG, HK, etc.)- this camera for example.   Edited By Tosh McCaber on 10/06/2020 07:42:41 Fake ones are. You've now bought two. Come on - do you really expect to get a 'good quality' camera for 12 quid  or  think David Attenborough uses a   'Professional' waterproof night vision 20 quid one for taking videos of fish in the dark Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 10/06/2020 13:38:10

Welcome. I'm fairly new here too but not new to model planes (maybe you aren't either) or electrics. I was somewhat reluctant to reply as in all forums of any sort you may get lots of replies, all different. However, here's how I do it. Do NOT 'embed' the motor in a block of balsa. Mount it via its mounting holes in a 'clear' space. Put a hole in the front or front underside to let air in and long enough to let air out, or better, another hole in the next bulkhead to let air into the rest of the fuselage . Just let the ESC hang on its wires in a space big enough to let air pass by but not so big that it can fall about all over the place. They are usually rugged enough that they don't need any foam protection. A bit of thin foam on the fuselage sides to loosely hold the battery. Do not stick foam on the battery itself. A secure structure in front and behind the battery to secure it longitudinally in the desired place, ideally so the  the C of G is right. Maybe with a little foam at the front. SECURELY mount the battery with a Velcro strap and a hatch to access it, you don't want to have to take the wing off every time. A hole behind to let air out. Ideally buy a 'wattmeter' but if not measure how hot the motor gets with a couple of fingers. 'Warm but not hot' is fine. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 10/06/2020 01:10:59