Roger 2

Hi all I use the garage that is attached to the bungalow, the usual appearance is one of ground zero after a nuke going off. But !!! I have only voted a bit messy!!   The reason being that 3 months of the year we are away and the car has to sit in there with my planes ( not my idea). So it then has to be very tidy.   Roger Edited By Chris Bott - Moderator on 24/04/2012 22:52:35

Hi all I am a traditional model builder, although I still fly (only in very good conditions) a 30 yr old Keil Kraft Ivory Gull that has foam cored wings.  The other eight are all trad, a couple being from the DB stable.I know it's stupid but foamies just don't hack it for me, although I have seen a very nice P51 that rang a few bells !!  Cheers  Roger

After my Albatross glider broke another prop and the brushed motor (at a height) shook itself to oblivion, (this was it's 3rd brushed motor ); I ordered:  1 A new 35-XYH series brushless motor 2 A new 40Amp Hobby Wing controller3 A new 3s 2200 lipo pack. This was the 15/11/2011 and I got them 3 days later. I modified the fuz to fit the motor etc and fitted them. Everything seemed fine but after a minute or so it kept going into alarm.....beeb...beep...beep. Tried to contact Giantcod ..ended up e-mailing description etc of fault etc ...not good enough...etc.. After a few rounds of e-mails it was decided that I had to send back the controller for examination.  Now it was the 24th November and I was going to Germany for 3 weeks the next day . Sat on the sofa late at night, 2nd glass of wine in hand...... thoughts.......... if it was in error why was it still operating as that would be dangerous?????.  Do you know that when a lost model alarm (tucked deep in the fuz) goes faulty it goes ....Beep...Beep...Beep .  The reply from Giant cod the next day was ..."Well every one has one of those days."   Thank you Giant cod

Hi all Just to completely alienate myself on this web site. How about a psychoanalytical check on the people posting on this topic.... Would it show up "The Speedy Gonzales" on the roads?  Type of model aircraft /speed ...etc against their views on the Motorway legislation on Britains roads. WAIT FOR IT .....I fly scale old time biplanes . My latest is a scale DB Cirrus Moth .  Not fast, nice to fly , it will never compete in a pylon race. I would vote for the keeping of the 70 mph speed limits  Cheers  Roger

HI all I was not trying to make any implied accusitions to any one, I am suggesting that peoples expectations and wants in this world, do not in every case heed others. We live in a world where people have "rights" some expect more rights than others, people no longer wish to work for or even wait for any thing. " I want it I should have it." It applies even down to clearing up whether it is a smash on the M1 or rubbish from a picnic left to rot.   It would now seem to even apply to the manner people drive or would like to. Every one can find and justify his driving manner, legal or not.  I will possibly now have to sign the post as Victor Meldrew!!!  But I would still advocate the 70 mph limit, I also believe, as I stated earlier that we appear to live in a more agressive time.  Cheers  Roger   

Hi all I did say in one of my earlier posts; I cannot understand the need for greater speed, the only conclusion I can make is the : ..."no one is telling me what to do scenario. I still think this is true, but we now seem to be living in a more aggressive era .   People are now in my way......you are driving too slow..... look at that dodderer, he could be doing another 15mph faster....she/he shouldn't be on the road.....etc..etc...etc.   What happened to common courtesy? Any body remember being tought to drive defensibly? Being told to set of early incase of problems? I agree there are some on the road that shouldn't be, a lot due to legal reasons, some too old, some with instabilities. That is life. I still feel that the go-faster people probably havent had to pick any "sticky bits" up .  Before you all say another Anglia driver, my car a Merc is 3l v6. Cheers  Roger .  

HI All I still maintain that the 70mph max is enough,  The type of car I feel is not an issue, any so called jealousy over whether or not, size matters is again not an issue . (Where have I heard that before ????)  As I understand it, on the motorways the limit is 70mph and the usual leeway is 5% + 1mph giving ~ 74.5 mph before the courts would take any action. Just calculate the reaction time and distance travelled for say a middle aged person at this speed.  The very rapid deceleration in the last 1 inch ( is what we have been told on this forum does the damage) will make enough strawberry jam to have spoiled my day in my earlier occupation. Ask someone like Rob from one of the earlier posts what it's like at the messy side of things.  I cannot understand the need for greater speed, the only conclusion I can make is the : ..."no one is telling me what to do scenario.  Cheers  Roger

Hi All What a wonderful topic !!!!!!! On my left WILLY WIN  On my RIGHT WILLY ELL Willy win ? Willy ell!  I am at that funny age, where I watch my fuel consumption and fuel costs.  I am also of the opinion that how ever you look at it, speed kills,  As a retired physicist no longer working on body and brain scanning, I can tell you, the patient patching up procedures are interesting to say the least. Having in the past picked bits of brains and tissue out of my scanners after a couple of patients I am qualified to say this.  I have got such a car it can do blah blah blah ! so I want to drive at 80/90/100 mph; fine, so long as your brain operates at these speeds not just your hormones .  I feel 70mph is fast enough, irrespective of the technical inovations in your new metal box. As an example look at "born again bikers" who can now afford the fastest bikes around and then look at the statistics of their crashes.  Please note, I have made no comment on the engine size/vehicle type or driver sex .  Cheers Roger   

Hi Martin WOT ME CRASH!!!!!!!!.  Martin that is one very good idea. Thanks..... I have to admit that I am of the old school and tend to use exponential rather than rates. I wouldn't have used it with the rate setting.  I will possibly now just use a large deflection with as you say loads of exponential, I will think about it.  Cheers  Roger

HI All Thanks for all the advice, over the years I have always used this forum to good effect. When flying the bipe the plane is so forgiving, the stall is a non event; (ok you need to be able to co-ordinate your turns) so I couldn't be far out with the c of g.  I have in the past found it easy to use accurate kitchen digital scales and calculate the moments to find the weight needed at the c of g point. Something to do with being a retired physicist , fingers under the top spar is too easy!!  I was totally happy with the c of g position on the plans ( I wouldn't argue with the late DB my other DB planes fly and have flown well).  For some reason I never thought of going to the extreem and using rates and 3d type movements for the elevator on take off/landings. When you look at the ww1 bipes the amount of elevator used on the ground is phenominal. The short nose and heavy engine mass makes the balance a little precarious I think.  Again thanks to all Roger

Hi Tim Hi All Thanks for the replies  The model a Cirrus Moth has a serious undercart, bending it or repositioning it is not a possibility. The fuz is almost built around it , I think I am in the same position Tim is with the P47.  On the next outing (we have good weather "up norf" ).....I don't think . I will have more elevator for take off and landing and use the rates to make it swichable for normal flight. I feel that is the way home. I will prob have a go to check the c of g with the strings and wood equipment...just to prove my calculations.  Cheers all Roger

Hello BEB One of my reasons for the posting was for a simple check of the cof g, because of the problems of two wings and the pendulum effect. This seems easy enough to do and it would check my calculations . Most posting about c of g and bipes are instructing you how to find where it should be.  ThanksRoger

Hi Ian   Thanks for your reply, the plane is really nice to fly and I don't really think the c of g is miles out. It does't as you describe drop the nose when the speed is down on landing.   I like the idea of increasing the elevator throw, that would give more reaction to the prop wash. I will also have to practise my three pointers.   I think also that with fuel on board the plane is more nose heavy in any case which won't help it's ground handling. Had the wheels placed further forward I don't think it would be a problem ...but it is a scale type plane and you have to live with that .   After a couple of successful landings at the club (after it had been mown) I was told "we are not mowing every week just for you"   As a question Ian, do you resort to the calculating of the c og g same as me, or the fingers under the top spar method?   One thing if some one is kind enough to try and help me as you have done ...granny and the sucking of eggs don't come into it.   Cheers Roger Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 08/10/2011 16:57:00

I would like to ask what is probably a silly question, put it down to old age ....being a "Crinkly" I don't mind. My last big build was the DB Cirrus Moth, fitted with an SC52, it flys like a dream. The problem is on landing it loves to, at the final moment, peck the ground. Ok not every time, the grass has to be short the touch down perfect and with full up held on the elevator then you are ok.  I suspect that the c of g is a little too far forward but I am unsure of changing it.  With a biplane because of the top wing being above the body, there is a lot of pendulum stability so that the balance point is very hard to discern . I know from the plans the correct point so I am not asking how to calculate where it should be.  In the end I got my slide rule out (whats a slide rule you all say)... used a set of kichen scales and calculated the c of g as I added weight .  I cannot be far out because of how the model flies, and I know the early pilots in the real plane had the same difficulties. So I was wondering how all you "in the know" do it.?  Cheers  Roger

It's mine I tell you, it's all mine !  Roger

Hi KC I agree with all you say, but the Cirrus Moth has only been completed a couple of months. This meant that the battery/harness/ servos were all new. The Rx was one I have used in a glider and was well tested.  I had hit problems in the past with the transmitter with a noisy pot on the engine channel, it wasn't noticeable using I/C but it gave a problem sometimes using electric motors cos the cut off point would change.  That was one of the reasons to look at a new system, although it seemed to have "gone away ". I also think that our field is at times slightly suspect on 35Mhz, we had a spate of shoot downs a while ago. Roger

Hi All Well I have at last made my decision at last and purchased the 2.4 Ghz 6EX FASST system. The FASST system from what I have read does appear to be the Rolls Royce and the FHSS, a system with out the same redundancy built into it.  Yesterday at the field my beloved Moth decided to throw a "wobbler" with the surfaces jittering , (this was whilst doing a range test before flying!).  Last week flying I had a glitch but all went fine with no reoccurance so thought little of it.  So I have " gon an' bin an' dunnit", I can always use the "Futaba" look-alike cheap FASST rx's for other park flyer types, and real ones for my big gliders.  Thanks for everyones input, it has been appreciated .  Cheers  Roger

Hi all I agree with Steve I would be certainly happy to use such a buget system on a simple plane or park flyer.  I want a replacement for my Futaba 35Mhz system and feel that 2.4 Ghz Futaba is the way to go because of personal preferances.  I would like to have a good size model memory and with the cheaper price for the rx's the T6J seems to be winning, unfortunately it is as yet unproven. Even though my planes are not mega expensive turbine types the Cirrus Moth took 8 months to build and I would not trust it to a "buget" system, I would also hate the FHSS system to give up the ghost with my bipe stooging around aloft.  The next question is will the FASST system have a long life or will it go the way of the Beta-max video recorder?  I repeat .....DOH!!!!!!!!!! Roger

Hi all The decision to go to 2.4Ghz is a multi faceted one, the existing tx is getting tired, it has had a lot of use. I fly a mix of IC and EP, I am into older style planes, bipes and the like, the latest being a DB Cirrus Moth. I love the sounds of a four stroke and the smell of diesel, yeh! I know I'm a crinkley  We spend around 3 months a year abroad (Europe) and because I am banned from having dirty smelly planes in the motorhome I take an electric glider. Here the 2.4 Ghz would be an advantage not having to use continental frequencies.  I am an average flyer having started in the 70's, non of my planes need faster than fast servo's and lots of channels, 6 is more than enough. But the garage does seem to have a lot of big "moths " hanging up in it and the existing 6EXP is full. Hence my indecision over FASST or the FHSS systems  Cheers  Roger  Roger

Hello TW2 From the adverts in the RCM&E the 6EXP style Futaba system comes with either a 2.4Ghz FASST tx module or an old type 35Mhz one.  I had decided to buy the 2.4Ghz FASST system, then along came the Ripmax New Items 2011 magazine with the Futaba T6J system using the FHSS and S-FHSS modes. This is where I think this post has evolved from and also my indecision on which to buy.  When such abreviations are used it tends to rather confuse people, only the enlightened ones, understand the new language. Unfortunately all areas have this problem, mine (physics) extending to even the mechanics in the automotive world.  Cheers Roger

Well gentlemen....!!!!!! I have come to the position of needing a new tx... ok change that to wanting a new tx. I am a Futaba "dyed in the wool user ". I had decided on the same as I use; 6EXP but 3.4 Ghz. I saw the adverts for the T6J system and thought "thats for me" . After reading through all of these posts my feelings are Quote ...............DOH!.!!!!! I am a retired head of a physics dept and I am confused and I am supposed to have some technical know how. Bring back 27 Mhz .......brown I was on. Cheers Roger

Hi allThanks BEB for the nice remarks on my two bipes, you are quite right about them I think it is because they represent two eras in DB designed planes. The party trick with the Tinker is to land into wind vertically, the plane is really very light and in any breeze penetration is possible but at high rpm's. It is not the best of fliers but you cannot help yourself from loving it when you have the sticks also it does turn heads and I am always questioned about it. With the .15 engine you can take off "scale like" ...or in a couple of yards. On a still day you can have a days flying and not even dent the fuel container. Yes I know I'm sad but crinklies are like that. Cheers Roger

Hello Here are a few photos of my two biplanes. The second is a ~30 year old DB Tinker ...OS 15 and overpowered, still flying (has to be calm) still has the original DB Models transferes .  The first is my new just finished, newly flown DB Cirrus Moth ,SC 52 fourstroke powered. Together they look like little and large, I made a mess of uploading the imagesand put them in the wrong order sorry  Cheers  Roger

Hi all I would also rather not have the rudder electronically coupled to the ailerons, a number of the lads at the club in the past have suggested it to me but I have always shied away. I wish to do my own mixing "handaulically" as it were, that way you can go with or against the ailerons to say lift the tail up in a high angle turn, if required.  I'm still a crap pilot but I then cannot blame the transmitter lol.  I have used a servo for each aileron but have connected via a "Y" so I am stuck with mechanical adjustment of the differential throws. But that is not a problem or at least it hasn't been in the past.  Cheers  Roger

I have always been a biplane fan and from the interest at the field I think a lot of people are deep down. The Cirrus Moth almost seems to represent an era of model planes. My other bipe is again a DB model "Tinker" that is around 30 years old and still flying, In answer to the question of diferential aileron it is set mechanically. Cheers Roger