RottenRow

It’s always better to repair rather than replace, whether it is ovens, cars or even models or radio equipment. Spending a few tens of pounds on a new oven element has to be preferable to spending hundreds on a new oven, neither of which is made in the UK nowadays. It’s ‘greener’ as well, so you’ll be doing your bit for the planet too… Brian.

I can’t see where it states that, but there again it doesn’t say that it has a BEC either. I suspect that it doesn’t. Perhaps it’s intended to multi-motor applications where several ESCs would be installed and there would be no need for a BEC on each one. I’d still do a check for 5V on the SW pad, and if there is nothing then connect it to B+ and see what happens. Brian.

That's strange about the swapping over of the battery connections between different versions of the board, but it looks like yours is correct going by the B+ and B- markings on the board you have. If you look at the part number printed on the board, you will see that yours is V2 and the one in the Ali Express photo is V3. None of this is surprising for Chinese stuff! Yes my suggestion for the correct way to connect it was as you have written. I was thinking that SW perhaps stood for switching regulator output. That SW pad doesn't appear to connect to anything on the front side of the board, but no doubt it does on the back, and it could be traced. If you have a voltmeter, you can check between the SW and B- wires for 5V dc when the battery is connected. If you don't have a voltmeter a battery checker of the type used for flight batteries will do. I have found another seemingly identical ESC here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006113220552.html? This one has a connection diagram, which shows the SW connection as being for a switch, with an odd description. Perhaps it's for an arming switch? If that is the case, perhaps the ESC doesn't have an inbuilt BEC at all, and you'll need to power the receiver via a separate 5V supply. Or perhaps it just another poor translation? Even this advert shows a mixture of V2 and V3 photos. Without better data, all you can really do is experiment with it and see what you get. Brian.

The Ali Express photo shows battery positive (B+) as the second solder pad from the bottom and negative (B-) as the bottom one. Your red and black wires seem to be the other way around. I would imagine the receiver PPM signal would go to the top solder pad, the +5V supply to the receiver on the next pad down, and the negative supply to the receiver on the bottom pad along with B-. I would check the receiver voltage with a meter before connecting the ESC to a receiver to make sure it is correct. If you have powered up the ESC with the battery connected backwards you might have damaged it. Brian.

Thanks for the download Peter. That was very thoughtful of you. I can see (from the length of the very detailed article) why only an abridged version was included in the printed magazine. However there is no reason for the link to the full length article not to be included in the magazine alongside the QR code, for those amongst us who would want to download it onto a PC rather than a ‘phone. Brian.

Yes even those of us who have been flying models for years, decades even, could never have imagined all of the rules and regulations that are now being thrown our way! Good luck with your new heli. Brian.

Yes the 4+ looks like the one you want, see here https://www.flyingtech.co.uk/electronics/irangex-irx4-plus-24ghz-4-1-stm32-multiprotocol-tx-module This one can still be put into serial mode if necessary so would also work with an OpenTX or similar transmitter, should you ever have the need. Brian.

Warm LiPos following a flight will help to warm your fingers up again if you hold them in your hand… I did exactly this on Sunday between flights. Brian.

Some of the multiprotocol modules have a small rotary selector switch with which to set the protocol required. One of this type would work with your transmitter and allow you to control your indoor drones. These just use the PPM signal from the transmitter, and require no modification to the transmitter itself. Other multiprotocol modules do not have the switch; these rely on using the transmitter to set the required protocol, and will only work with transmitters with suitable firmware such as FrSky etc. running OpenTX as one example. You’ll need to check whether the module that you are looking at has the selector switch fitted. As you said, FrSky’s own modules (XJT etc) only transmit on FrSky’s own protocols (ACCST or ACCESS depending on the module) and won’t work with other protocol receivers, which I guess your drones have fitted. Brian.

The other thing that doesn't seem to have been addressed is the inability to view embedded videos without accepting cookies. That happened at the same time as the pop-up issue started last Thursday. Perhaps this is the intention... don't agree to cookies and you can't see the videos. Brian.

I don't know if this website is of any use to you, it's in German but does have a lot of photos of the build of one of these. “https://www.rc-network.de/threads/de-havilland-dh-82a-tiger-moth-m-1-3-8-laser-cut-bausatz-valueplanes-baubericht.780695/page-10” (Remove the "" marks I had to add, I couldn't paste the link above without them for some reason). Around pages 6 to 8 you can see that the cross tubes on the cabane that Manish mentions has metal fittings installed, which have cross-drilled holes for the pin and bolts. Brian.

I forgot that these checkers have a button marked 'type'. After connecting to the battery to be tested, the 'type' button must be pressed once to change from LiPo to LiFe. This doesn't affect the voltage readings but changes the range of the percentage calculation to suit the lower voltage of LiFe cells. The left hand side of the display shows the battery type selected. If the button isn't pressed, the checker defaults to the LiPo range, which is probably what is happening here. Brian.

I was wondering the same thing when I read this yesterday. The 3% doesn't seem to tie in with the voltage readings. It looks like whatever is providing the 3% figure is perhaps assuming that the batteries are LiPos not LiFe. If it's one of those horrible little black 'battery capacity controllers' (as they are labelled) then they are meant for LiPos. And the cheapo ones are very inaccurate even then. Sadly that includes the ones sold by Overlander at the Nationals a few years back for example, where they had a bin full priced at a few £ each. All will be revealed no doubt. Brian.

You can buy this from B&Q. 25mm x 2mm x 1 metre length. https://www.diy.com/departments/black-varnished-drawn-steel-flat-bar-l-1000mm-w-25mm-t-2mm/254141_BQ.prd Wickes also sell some sizes, but only upto 20mm wide in 2mm. Brian.

Don't give up John! Could you make new bottom hinges, with the pivot point offset? Something like this drawing. The modified hinges would mount in the same holes on the spar. The actual amout of offset required would probably be quite small. The wingtips would then move on an upward arc as the wings are folded (viewed from the rear). Brian.

I have just completed my response; took about an hour and a half in total. I used the BMFA's response for some guidance, but as I am a model aircraft builder and flier only, not drones, I did try to make my answers specific to my own interest. I didn't feel that I was qualified to provide answers to some of the drone-specific questions. As I fly both from both clubs and other locations I have answered accordingly (with the prospect of requiring RID in mind). That French site is interesting, and concerning. I don't know for how long that has been in force but it would be interesting to know how well it is being adhered to (by model aircraft fliers and drone fliers). Of the three clubs of which I am a member, only one has made contact with its membership about the consultation (this was before the BMFA's e-mail to members on Thursday). I have brought the subject up at both of the other clubs but have since heard nothing, which is disappointing but not really unexpected. As I mentioned in a previous post, apathy will certainly not help us. Brian.

Good advice John, At my club’s recent AGM I gave a short speech about this and the previous consultation. Unfortunately there was very little interest amongst the members present, most were unaware of the proposals or the consequences that they will bring. Sadly the apathy of the majority of model aircraft fliers won’t help them when they start complaining about various conditions being imposed upon them in the near future. Brian.

Also be careful if buying from the BMFA classifieds. A long-established scammer from Norfolk is once again preying on the unwary. Brian.

Graham, A couple of points that are perhaps worth thinking about: Using the XJT module in your Radiomaster transmitter will completely eliminate the entire RF section of that transmitter from the equation. Assuming that Jake (its original owner) never had issues with that module then you should have some confidence that the module itself is alright. Which really leaves your receivers. If your X8R won't bind with the XJT then there is probably a version or mode difference. You could flash your X8R with the UNI firmware, this will allow it to bind with the X8R irrespective of the version or mode. Then you could compare the results obtained between the different makes of receiver. In addition, the XJT will fit any transmitter with a JR style module slot in the back, such as Taranis etc. Perhaps you could try somebody else's transmitter with your module and both makes of receiver, though I wouldn't have thought that the tx itself would be relevant if you aren't using its RF section. Also, rather than a sacrifical model, could you install your test receiver and battery into a model that has its own transmitter, receiver and servos etc., then fly the model normally (or get someone else to) whilst monitoring your Radiomaster tx for loss of telemetry signal. Just a normal trainer or something. Your receiver won't be controlling anything. Brian.

It sounds as though you are trying to get a job with the CAA… you seem to have their kind of mindset. As a member of a couple of power clubs, and also sometimes a ‘rogue’ flying willy-nilly off cliffs (to use your terminology), I believe that the CAA shouldn’t favour one over the other, and the BMFA should back every one of its members, not just those in clubs. Perhaps you could define the ‘us’ for which it would be a win-win. Brian.

Surely if the law at the time of an incident requires these, and the flier involved in the accident isn't complying with that law, then the insurance company has a good reason not to settle the claim. That is unless the insurer specifically states otherwise on the policy documentation; I can't imagine that will happen. At the last BMFA AGM that I attended (2019) a similar question was raised then, about the insurance position if a model flier didn't possess or complete the relevant proof of competency, which was just being introduced at that time. The answer from the insurer's representative was along the lines of they would probably not be concerned about this, but would not put that into writing. The only way of knowing the position would be the first person who finds himself in that position... not a good time to realise that one isn't insured after all. Brian.

Just to make things clear here, Rob Buckley, who provided some of the recent replies above, is the Secretary of the LMA. This means that he was instrumental is writing the joint BMFA/LMA response above, which he hasn't made obvious here. I'm not suggesting anything at all here, just making people aware, as non-LMA members would probably not know this. Brian.

A VAT invoice is only required by law if both the supplier and customer are VAT registered (ie generally business to business transactions). In this case the supplier VAT number must be shown. Retail sales might have a more simple invoice with VAT inclusive prices, although the VAT number might still be included somewhere. When you buy something from a retail shop you usually get a receipt, not an invoice. These usually show tax inclusive prices. If you look up an item on HobbyKing that is available both from the UK and Global warehouses, the prices at the UK warehouse are exactly 20% higher than at the Global warehouse, due to the 20% VAT. The price also states ‘including tax’. Brian.

The ways to attend the AGM, including zoom, were in the e-mail announcing the AGM, received (by me at least) on Friday 3rd November at 18:45. Brian.