John Muir

Assuming the fuselage is similar to the old Phoenix 2000 I've got and you're using 3S lipo, then the Propdrive 2836 1000kv that I have in mine should work. On a 10x6 folder it shows 210W on the meter. There's enough headroom to go to an 11x6 if you feel you need more but it's perfectly adequate for my needs.

You could try a Phoenix Model Products Pzazz-E. Looks like the same sort of thing and all the conversion work's been done for you. Never had one myself but the kits are all laser cut and seem to have a very good reputation.

I hesitate to join this discussion as it it strikes me as all just a wee bit overwrought, but here I go anyway. Firstly, all this 'end of the world as we know it' ranting is misplaced on here is it not? The rules have already been established, no new rules are being suggested and, as I recall, the rules and exemptions recently announced were greeted with sighs of relief all around and much congratulatory praise of the BMFA. Business as usual was the phrase being bandied about. Nothing has changed. What we're talking about here is registration, nothing else. We knew it was coming and nobody was terribly worried about it, so what's new? Well it turns out we're actually going to have to do it and pay for it ourselves. To which I say 'Big deal'. So we're going to have to give up half an hour of our time jumping through a few pointless on-line hoops which prove absolutely nothing. Could be worse. And we're going to have to pay a fee. Anybody who flies model aircraft of any sort can afford an extra £16.50 a year. Not the end of the world. Having said that, £16.50 is far too much. A lot of casual drone users won't want to shell out that much just for the odd flight a couple of times a year and it will hold back the numbers registering, and the CAA's funding model will fail. I can't blame the CAA though. They've been told to get it done and make it pay for itself. Unless our government decides to subsidise the system, like every other government has done, which seems unlikely, we're stuck with it. We shouldn't be surprised, everything costs more in the UK.

I don't think there was ever any input from JR. I guess KST wanted to make a nice transmitter so, in the best Chinese tradition, they found a good one and copied it .

The Taranis uses the case from a radio called the KST T810 which never took off. It's obviously a copy of the JR design but isn't identical. FRSky saved a few bob when they decided to produce their own transmitter by buying the design off the shelf. No link to JR as far as I know.

The DFT module is exactly the same inside as the DJT module and I can assure you, from personal experience, that it works with V8, D8 and 'X' series receivers as long as they can be bound in D8 mode (it will say in the product description). I used one with all of these and it worked perfectly. I went for X8R LBT receivers latterly to 'future proof' myself and eventually bought a Taranis QX7 LBT version which, when loaded with the correct version of its firmware, also operates all of these receivers while making all the telemetry features of the more recent ones available. A word of warning though, if you want to keep things simple just get the module and some receivers, plug it in and get flying. The FRSky protocol is excellent but their transmitters are not everybody's cup of tea and it takes some work to get the best out of them. Do some internet searching and some reading before going down the Taranis path as one or two people have found themselves a bit bamboozled and ultimately disappointed. Personally I love my Taranis and wouldn't have anything else, but it isn't for anyone who doesn't like computers and tinkering around with stuff to see how it works.

Sad news indeed. I will miss his contributions to this forum, which won't be quite the same without him. He came across as a man of intelligence and common sense, and a generally nice guy. Condolences to his family.

My original Mini Robot could only manage a few feet in a gentle right hand turn. The DC Bantam did its best but the weight of the model beat it. Doped nylon, Humbrol paint and fuel proofer all adds up! Seemed sturdy though. I had a look and found one of those Veron leaflets from the OP that must have come with the kit. Never throw anything away. Must do a Cardinal or a Deacon some time.

My Mini Robot built from an original plan for electric power with rudder and elevator. Flies well but the wings fold if you loop it repeatedly.

Hi Tom, I had two of these over the years. They were great fun. I still have one in the garage but I stripped all the gear out last year as it hadn't been flown for a while. Went well with my OS25FP up front. I don't have a PDF but if you PM me your address I can send you an original plan, provided you don't mind it folded to fit in an envelope. It's slightly dog-eared and yellowing but still serviceable. Hope that helps, John.

The altitude record for a rotorcraft on FPVLAB is currently 9,898ft, set by a mini quad. So still 102 ft to go apparently.

What about the RCM&E Chapter One designed by Nigel Hawes. Lots of build information on this site and available as a plan pack from Sarik Hobbies. Has the advantage of having been designed for either electric or glow power, so no conversion to do. Otherwise very conventional and can be built with or without ailerons.

Don't think a capacitor would help. The problem with an overloaded BEC is heat. If it gets too hot the whole ESC goes into thermal protection mode or whatever and shuts down and stays shut down until it cools a bit. I remember that causing issues a few years ago with a helicopter at our place which used to simply fall out of the sky periodically. By the time the owner recovered the model and tested it, the radio worked fine. He blamed Spektrum until he eventually realized what was going on and fitted a receiver battery. I suspect it's quite a common cause of mysterious 'brown outs' or 'lost link' events. Once the ESC cools and starts working again the receiver sorts itself out pretty much immediately I think. Instantaneous 'brown outs', i.e. instances where the battery voltage drops below the safe minimum for the receiver for a moment, woudn't even be noticeable in flight, the receivers recover so quickly. Wouldn't happen with a BEC anyway, would it? It would either be delivering 5V or not working at all I would have thought. Not sure about that to be honest. John.

Further to what Jason was saying, I have a 30A ESC with a 2A linear BEC like the BLHeli and the instructions state that if using a 4S lipo the maximum number of typical 9g servos it can run is 3. With 3S it can handle 4 servos and on 2S, 5. I'd definitely get a 3A switching UBEC. Only a few quid and safer.

That Wild Thing isn't dead, it's just resting. Takes more than a bit of lifting tape to kill one of them. I recently had to re-cover mine due to wear and tear, also treated it to a new pair of balsa elevons as the old ones had warped. Good as new and flying better than ever. Shame you never made it to the slope, better luck next time.

The Shuttleworth Collection's Avro Anson flew over here yesterday. I'm just north of Dundee. No idea what it was doing up here but great to see.

I use a HobbyKing NTM Propdrive 2836 1000Kv with a 10x6 propeller and 3S 2200 lipos. About 18.5A and 212W. Performance isn't earth-shattering but perfectly adequate. I've thought about fitting a bigger prop to up the power a bit but never got around to it. The 2200 lipo is probably a bit heavy and has to be mounted way back, right off the end of the battery tray so a 1500 would be better I think. I like my Phoenix, I fly it off the club field and sometimes take it slope soaring and it performs remarkably well either way for something so inexpensive.

Quite right. With a pitch difference of only 1'' the rpm change probably won't be enough to offset the thrust lost due to the pitch reduction. Sorry 'bout that.

Hi Peter, The 12x6 will rev a little slower, draw more current and fly the plane a little faster. The 12x5 will rev a little faster, therefore producing more thrust, meaning your aircraft will accelerate better especially from standstill or low speeds, but will produce a slightly slower top speed under power. The amps will be slightly lower because the prop loads the motor less. The differences probably won't be huge though and it depends on the plane which will be best. Draggy, slow airframe, 12x5, sleek and fast, 12x6. Also depends on your personal preferences. Lower amps is easier on the battery too, so worth considering. Don't know if torque effects will be very different. I suppose because the 12x5 is turning a little faster torque effects might be a bit more pronounced, but I'd be surprised if it was noticeable. If you were going from, say, a 12x8 to a 12x5, it would be another story. John.

Hi Rob, I'd suggest that if your current planes are still in one piece and you're enjoying flying them then you have three potentially brand new planes sitting there already. Just turn off beginner mode! Go to intermediate for a while, then turn that off as well and, all of a sudden, you will have three planes capable of doing more than just cruising around in gentle circles with you along for the ride. If you've learned the basics of control and orientation, now's the time to move on. Put yourself fully in control (it might take a little time and practice) and you will find that there's so much more you can do with your planes and your feeling of satisfaction will increase. Get another plane with beginner mode enabled and it will fly just the same as the ones you already have, it'll just look a bit different. Not much point in that if you ask me. Spend the money you save on extra batteries and a club membership. John.

I once had some DYS servos which had a fault that caused electrical feedback to the receiver and made other servos connected to the receiver glitch. I replaced an aileron servo on an old plane with one and the rudder went mad. I thought the old rudder servo had gone defunct and replaced that with another DYS which only made all the servos start playing up. I figured it out on the ground luckily but if your rudder servo has developed an issue that causes something similar, maybe just when it gets hot or when vibration loosens a component, that could explain the left aileron command.

This has to be down to either the transmitter or receiver as both aileron servos got a 'go left' command at the same time. If the transmitter is in regular use with other aircraft and the same thing hasn't happened with them, then it's the receiver. Can't even pretend to know what the fault might be that could cause a spurious command on two channels though. If you only use the transmitter on this plane these days, then it might be the transmitter. Only one other thought: you said the failsafe wasn't set. What if it was, but just not as you would have meant it to be? So a simple loss of signal might produce full aileron. In which case maybe a dodgy receiver aerial that loses its connection when it's vibrated. Or do I have an over active imagination?

For what it's worth, here's how I see it: I don't think the CAA is interested in how well we can fly, I think they want to be sure we know the rules as they apply to us. For BMFA/SAA members that means reading, digesting and, above all, following the guidelines as set out in our handbooks. These organizations may, I suggest, need to come up with an on-line test for us all to take which will prove that we have read and understood these guidelines, as simply being a member may not be enough to satisfy the CAA. Having completed the theory part of the A test (or equivalent) might be accepted as a substitute, the flying part of the test I'd expect to be irrelevant and getting everyone, including country members, through it, would be completely impractical anyway. For non members similar logic would apply but a CAA set online test would be taken which would reflect the rules that apply to them, including the 400ft limit and so on. How the casual drone purchaser is informed and persuaded of the need to do this will be somebody else's problem. Whichever group we're in, the essential purpose of the test will be to show we know the rules and doing an on-line test ensures, at least as much as is practical, that we have read enough of them to fill out the test form. It does look like if we want to continue to fly legally, we're going to have to provide some kind of proof that we understand our legal obligations, and that means some sort of test, but I don't see the A test becoming mandatory any time soon, or ever, come to that. I'd just like to add my thanks to our representative bodies for the excellent work done so far, John.

Pretty much, except for the having it fully under control and catching it part.

I went slope soaring today. Just me, my Wild Thing and Phase 6 and a couple of passing walkers. It was great and I flew for over an hour and a half of the two hours I spent on the hill, but, as a flat field flier primarily, I really do struggle with hilltop landings. In attempting to get the Wild Thing down somewhere reasonably close I managed to fly it straight into my right hand. And I don't mean I caught it, that just happened to be the bit of me it hit. Luckily it was just bobbling about in a sort of a loosely controlled hover at the time, so no damage done, but honestly, I've watched Speedster Den's videos and it looks easy. Must try harder. John.