John Muir

1. 53   2. I/C sport   3. 10-12, Mercury Magpie FF glider    

Mode 2   East Scotland (Dundee)   East Scotland (Dundee)   Instructor   (In our club of 71 members we have 3 mode 1 pilots. One learned abroad, one in England and one switched as he found it easier)

Thanks for fixing that Phil.  

Oops, I messed up that link I put in a few posts back, and forgot to put in a description. So now the text is disappearing under the adverts up the right hand side. Sorry 'bout that. Won't happen again.

Doesn't matter if it's full size or model size, aeroplanes is aeroplanes and physics is physics. We can't even blame aerodynamic differences because we're talking about effects on the ground. So I'll stick with what makes most logical sense to me and which seems to support my own observations.   But hey, each to their own      John.

EAA   Scroll down to page 3 for an interesting article by a hands-on engineer on the toe-in/toe-out debate. This guy seems to have practical piloting experience to back him up. Very similar conclusions to PDR on RCMF.   I have to say that a couple of my models with wire taildragger undercarriages have 'acquired' some toe out (not to mention negative camber) over the years and seem quite easy to handle on the ground. I removed the toe out from one smaller model by manfully twisting the legs till the wheels had a touch of toe in, but I thought it made the plane more of a handful on the ground, so put it back where it was before.   Toe out for me.   John.    Edited By Phil Wood - Moderator on 01/11/2009 18:36:49

I think it's that smelly old stuff you used to have to put on with a brush. What was it called? Paint? It is a lovely finish. Isn't it a Super Sixty? Over an hour flying a Super Sixty? I'd have dozed off. Haven't a clue about the mystery models though, sorry.   John.

I'm trying to deregulate the flying of lightweight models at my club but there is no way I am going to be happy to let any old fool who hasn't flown for twenty years turn up at our field and start chucking a forty powered aerobat about willy nilly, just because he's says he's good. Like most people with any common sense (the favourite phrase of he anti-rule brigade) I like to make sure that the people I am going to be sharing a field with have at least a basic level of competence ( no guarantees, I know) so that I can feel relatively safe in their company. The A or bronze test is as good a way as any of acertaining this. Whether a club actually needs to rubber stamp the A certificate or not is up to them, but to not have a test at all is asking for trouble. I remember the old days too. I remember meeting a guy with missing fingers. I remember the cuts I picked up myself. That's why I use a stick now and strongly recommend others do the same. I too had a long lay off and returned. I bought a Seagull Boomerang as a refresher model and wasn't allowed to fly it solo till I sat my test. It was inconvenient and faintly irritating but I did it because a) them's the rules b)I wanted to make sure everybody knew I could do it and was, therefore, reasonably safe c)practising for it brought back my flying skills quickly, in a structured way and reminded me of the basics. If I'd gone straight back in with an aerobatic model I'm pretty sure I'd have ended up with some bad habits and possibly a broken model. Elderly returnees are common in this game and I have a certain sympathy with the 'never needed a certificate before, nanny state, health and safety police' attitude (I am almost one of them, but I'm only a youthful 52) but the world moves on. Models have changed. Flying fields are busier. Attitudes have changed. Live with it I say.

My club, of which I am secretary, insists on the SAA 'bronze' (BMFA 'A' equivalent) before you can fly unsupervised. This has worked well for years. However, lately we've had an influx of new members who have some experience on 'park flyer' foamies and can fly these perfectly well, but can't use them for their bronze test because they don't have wheels, or won't take off from our grass. They generally want to progress to bigger, more traditional models and take their bronze, but in the meantime, technically, can only fly with an experienced bronze holder supervising. I say technically because I've been finding that if they are allowed to fly their foamies unsupervised they get a lot more stick time and their flying with bigger models improves a lot. So I am currently trying to get the club rules changed to allow a quick test by a committee member to make sure these people can fly their foamy safely and let them get on with it. I reckon an electric model under 1kg fits the bill for this. They'll not be allowed to fly anything bigger than this till they get the bronze. They then continue with their training in the usual way with an instructor and a regular model, to get their bronze. I hope this means in future trainees won't get fed up waiting around for a flight and the learning process will be quicker. And I can't see that it's likely to compromise our safety standards at all. I think it fits in quite well with the BMFA's new requirement that a model weighing at least 1kg be used for the A test (I think that's right?). John.

Second the last two posts

Hi Clive,   I think the it only becomes a requirement to ask for a notam if there will be five or more models operating at the location at the same time.   John.

Engines, you've got to love them eh?   What plug are you using? OS engines like OS plugs (No8 or A3) which are slightly shorter than other plugs and quite hot. Other plugs stick out into the cylinder head and have the effect of changing the timing slightly. Something like a Firepower F7 for instance could make the engine kick back and be a pain to tune. If you haven't got an OS plug try putting an extra washer under the plug you've got.   The other thing that makes engines start backwards is if they're very wet (almost flooded). Try taking the plug out and disconnecting the fuel line then give it a quick burst with the electric starter. You might get a spray of fuel out the the plug hole. Put the plug and fuel line back on and tap it with the starter again. Once it's running leave the plug battery on for a minute or two and then give the thing a good rev to clear its tubes. Hopefully it'll keep going and give you chance to let it warm up properly and get the top end tuned.   If it's started eating plugs you've maybe got a bit of a previous blown plug coil battering about inside the cylinder. You'd need to take the head off and look for little bits of metal and clean them out.   Sorry if I'm teaching Granny to suck eggs here. You may have tried all this already. But you never know, might be useful?   John.

The trick with an air bleed screw is to screw it out till the hole is completely open then slip the point of a pin into the hole and screw the bleed screw back in till it just traps the pin. The idle should be not far off at that. Remember unscrewing the bleed screw makes the engine leaner at idle (the opposite of a twin needle carb) so if the hole is completely unobstructed the bottom end will be very lean. Better to err on the rich side and put up with a slight splutter in the pick up. And I'd agree with the previous poster that it's best to keep the top end a little rich as well.   The FP40 is no power house, but is very light for a 40 (not much heavier than some 25's). If you do change the engine you will get a lot more power and performance, but you might need to put some lead on the tail to preserve the handling. A 46 2 stroke works well, I've got a Thunder Tiger 46PRO in my Wot 4 and it goes very well indeed.

I got a nice pair of wrap around sunspecs from my local huntin' shootin' fishin' emporium for about six pounds. Sold as safety glasses for shooting. Good tint and keep the wind out of your eyes. They also do the yellow 'contrast enhancers' as the shooting people like them. You might also see pink tinted ones for dull days. I think you can get similar things from B&Q  or Homebase sold as straight safety glasses. Cheap as chips and quality guaranteed as they have to be up to a certain standard and kitemarked. No use for prescription wearers, sorry, but perfect for cheapskates like me.   John.

Thanks Pete,   Been reading this forum for ages, only the second time I felt the urge to post. Probably be easier now I've broken the ice.   John.  

Pete, Maybe it's electric power. I always feel the noise of an engine, especially a two stroke, get's the heart rate up. I.C. engines also seem more intimidating and are certainly a further complication and something else to go wrong. The more calm and less worried you are when you fly, the less likely you are to crash? Hence you got on better with gliders before.   Or maybe it's the relative cost. When I took this hobby up originally the plane and gear set me back an awful lot of money, so when I flew I was always a bit up tight about trashing my investment. Then I had long break, as you do, and when I returned I was pleased to discover everything was now much cheaper in real terms (plus I now had more money) so I was less concerned about crashing, so found, perversely, that I didn't crash. It was all much easier and quicker too, with ARTF being the norm.   Your post really struck a chord as I found my flying much better second time round as well. I think maybe mental attitude has a lot to do with it, as I wasn't bothered about impressing anybody, took my time and didn't try to run before I could walk. Tended to be a bit more over-enthusiastic (and nervous) when I was younger.   John.

I don't know how you could allow the clunk to go to the front of the tank without getting stuck there. How does your heli flying pal do it? I thought heli tanks were much the same as fixed wing ones.   In the video you'll notice the fuel only runs to the front when the plane is in a steep, or vertical dive. The guy does this repeatedly to demonstrate his point. For the fuel to run forward, the plane has to be decelerating, so the engine must be idling and the prop acting as a brake. When this is happening the engine needs very little fuel and will keep going on whats sloshing about in the cylinder and fuel lines. When the throttle's opened up again, there might be a small hesitation while it draws fuel, but it won't be as bad as on the ground because the prop is being turned by the airflow which will help keep the engine going. If the engine was providing thrust, accelerating the plane, the fuel would be at the back of the tank anyway, even in a dive.   Obviously, if you kept the plane in a steep dive long enough, the engine would stop through lack of fuel, but by then the engine's pick up would be the least of your worries.   JM