John Muir

Take care with Radiomaster receivers. They are meant for use with a multiprotocol module or Radiomaster transmitter as they need 'fine tuning' of the transmitter for them to work properly. FrSky transmitters don't have that capability as it is not needed with their own receivers. They may work with reduced range but you've got to be aware.

I had a look in an old plans handbook and I think that might be an RM239 by Brian Peckham. The plan is still available from Sarik Hobbies if you want to have a look yourself. Right wingspan and the tail looks the same?

If you want to test the servos just unplug the esc and plug in a battery from an i.c. plane instead. Better than risking another esc.

There are a few of these flying at our place. I was training somebody on one yesterday. It is a well sorted, well designed model that does practically everything nicely. The 2200 batteries are a bit small. We tried those a while back and could only get about four minutes out of them without discharging them excessively. Yesterday we were using 4000 and 4500mAh batteries and they give a comfortable 7 or 8 minutes which allows for a decent lesson. Surprisingly (to me anyway) the plane still flew perfectly well. It seems very tolerant of the weight and forward CG. There are guys here flying them on 5000 and 6000 packs, although how they manage to cram them in beats me. You will enjoy flying this one Toto.

Haha, if it felt like work I wouldn't do it! I just have nerdy inclinations. I must say my spreadsheet is much less colourful and extensive than yours Leccy. Mine seems dull now.

I do. Spreadsheet and everything. So I can say that last year I flew on 78 days and had 382 flights for a total of over 52 hours flight time, which, by my standards isn't too bad. I also keep notes about each session with anything odd, unusual or that might need attention included so I don't forget stuff. I had a twelve year break from the hobby and started logging when I came back as I regretted not having decent records of what I had gotten up to previously. I tend to fill in my log while I've got batteries on the charger and it doesn't take long. It's interesting.

Sorry, meant to say, the MPM would still need fine tuning for the X8R as it might not be bang 'on channel' due to the clone chip. Alternatively, you could put Mike Blandford's Universal firmware on the X8R and it will 'autotune' the receiver to the tx automatically.

RSSI is useful, but only once you've established what is 'normal'. I always check my logs when I go home and if the RSSI plot looks similar to the last time I flew that plane, I'm happy. Any obvious differences mean something's wrong. And it does give an indication of flying too far away providing the warning level is sensible. I just don't get any warnings in practice. 30 paces (however long your legs) is marginal and I would consider totally inadequate for a FrSky receiver, but I don't know what should be expected of a Radiomaster receiver. If it is the transmitter restricting the range, i.e. if the X8R has less range when tested with the MPM than with the FrSky module, then I would give up on it or switch to Spektrum or Lemon receivers which use a different chip to FrSky. Of course there is the possibility that the tx is simply faulty and is transmitting at reduced power across the board, but the only way to find that out would be to range test with a different protocol and see if the problem persists.

I agree GG. I range test on reduced power and walk until the controls stop working. That's usually well over 80 paces with FrSky gear. I check the RSSI at that point and reckon that should be my 'Oh No' number. It's generally at about 30. The default warning values usually work fine in flight but I do have one receiver that reports RSSI values consistently about 10 less than the others, so I reduced the RSSI alarms for that one to avoid being annoyed by that lady in the box when I'm flying. The range is not an issue, just the RSSI calibration is different. Going by RSSI numbers alone as a guide to range is pointless.

Graham, you have not tuned a receiver, you have tuned your transmitter to match each receiver. As it isn't possible to do this with a FrSky tx or module the receiver's performance may well be affected. I believe Radiomaster receivers are only suitable for use with MPM based transmitters which include the fine tuning ability. Your only valid test will be to try the X8R receiver with the FrSky module and compare it against the X8R with the Radiomaster's internal module. That will give you a true indication of relative tx performance. The Radiomaster receivers can't tell you anything because they almost certainly won't work well with the FrSky module. (P.S. dump the Bourbon and try a nice Speyside malt. That fixes everything. For a while)

The problem with the Radiomaster receivers appears to be that they need to have the transmitter tuned to each specific receiver to compensate for poor quality components and/or poor QC. You can do this with the MPM but not a genuine FrSky module as there is no need for this with proper FrSky receivers. With up to date firmware and a FrSky receiver on matching firmware you will almost certainly get very good range. With a Radiomaster, who knows? It might be a decent match, it might not. My FrSky stuff all works very well. The Radiomaster receivers have long threads full of complaints and problems over on RC Groups where the they appear to have come to the conclusion that some of them are fine, while others are not. Personally, I don't feel this inspires confidence.

I think that's a Superfly. The tailplane is on the bottom of the fuselage with a one piece elevator. The Yamamoto seems to have the tailplane halfway up with a split elevator. Also the wing shape is slightly different.

I don't think the R88 will work very well with a proper FrSky transmitter as it can't be fine tuned like a Radiomaster. There's no need with genuine FrSky receivers but the Radiomaster receivers aren't made to the same tolerances so sometimes won't work properly with FrSky transmitters. So nothing to be gained there.

Too slow, as usual.

That particular prop is designed for engines and is heavier and sturdier to stand shock and vibration. Electric props, such as the APC 'E' series are lighter and more efficient. The Master is also a more 'traditional' design whereas APC props use a more sophisticated blade design which is also more efficient. It means you should get more thrust from an APC for the same power.

460W still isn't a huge amount of power but considering you flew it on less than 200W, it's going to seem fantastic! I'd order a 12x10 prop for it which will produce a little bit more grunt and try that. You've got plenty of headroom on the setup by the looks of things.

Still got a mark 1. Last flown in 2019 though. Used an assortment of brushed motors in gearboxes and brushless motors over the years, starting with 2S and 75W, eventually ending up on 3S and 160W. I think the control surfaces might have been blowing back at times with the higher power but it still flew brilliantly for what it is. I liked it so much I went to the bother of making a new cowl from a lemonade bottle. Being made of polystyrene it's looking pretty rough, but not as bad as the one in the OP's pictures!

There's a picture of a Gangster 63 made by somebody in New Zealand on the Mick Reeves website with the electric power train details underneath: Moto 35-48,900kv 815 watt on 12 x6 prop.80amp ESC 4s 4200 lipo. The chap doesn't say how it flies but you'd have to assume he was happy with it or he wouldn't have sent a picture.

Are you sure that's Oracover? I imagine that finish would be easier achieved with coloured tissue and paint applied over a laminating film base.

Geoff, there are a number of reasons why your vision might not be as good as expected. The most common one is that the lens capsule (like a very thin membrane bag which the lens fits into) has gone cloudy as a result of the operation. This is sometimes referred to as a secondary cataract and is very easy to fix. There's no operation involved. You just stick your head on a a gadget a lot like the ones they use at the optician and they use a laser to open a hole in the membrane. It takes seconds, you don't feel anything and the resulting improvement in vision is instantaneous. There are other possible causes but I can't think of any that would cause your vision to be worse than when you had the cataract and if there was a serious problem with the implant then the optometrist would have been able to spot that straight away. So wait and see what the clinic says. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

Funnily enough, apart from the colour, that's exactly how mine looked. Twice.

KK Eaglet my Dad built in the early to mid sixties, then a Mercury Magpie glider I built myself. These both flew quite well. Then I tried free flight power (Aeromodeller Golden Wings club free plan Humbug), control line (Phantom Mite) and S/C (Veron Mini Robot) with no success at all. Then somewhere around 1973 I bought a Kamco Kadet, OS25 and Skyleader Clubman radio which was built quite quickly but then languished in various houses until the mid eighties when I finally got around to joining a club and learning to fly it. Never looked back after that. Really liked that Kadet.

I would build the Domino as a spare or backup for your Arising Star and, if you haven't done this already, get a second transmitter and set it up as a buddy box for both models. Take both to the field and make sure you have everything with you to make them work and learn to get the engines running and tuned yourself. Then the only thing limiting your stick time will be instructor availability and, unfortunately, the weather. If you can be ready to go at the drop of a hat you will get to fly whenever an instructor is free, no excuses, no equipment problems, and, even if you have a 'heavy landing' you have a spare plane in the car ready to go. Your instructor will be happy and impressed and you will get more flying time. If both planes survive then you'll have two good sport models or something to sell on to the next learner who comes along.

Hi Geoff, that's laser surgery Martin's describing. A laser re-shapes the cornea, the clear front surface of the eye, to reduce or eliminate your prescription. It was flavour of the month for a while but seems to have fallen out of fashion a bit in recent years. Nothing at all to do with a cataract though.

The symptoms of cataract are reduced visual acuity, sensitivity to bright lights and glare and loss of colour vision. The cause is a cataract i.e. a clouded and sclerotic crystalline lens. A cataract operation addresses the cause not the symptoms and, unusually, provides an almost instant and often perfect cure. It is one of the most successful operations of any kind performed regularly with fantastically good success rates and very few complications. It's not perfect, but it is the only option proven to work. You can give vitamins a try if you like but I'm willing to bet you'll be dead of old age long before you see any measurable improvement.