andy watson

I'm a Futaba user- which has been bomb proof for me. However, if you have narrowed it down to Spektrum/Hitec then (if it were me) I would go Hitec. They are very much the smaller of the 2 brands in this country (I understand Hitec are much bigger in the states) but I have a problem with spekky gear. To be very fair I will start by saying there are lots of people that use spekky gear without problems, but I am also very aware of what seems to be a regular series of reports about spektrum gear losing signal. There are various reasons given for this, but the truth is no one has really come up with a completely universal explanation. For this reason I would go Hitec.

Not sure if I managed to be confusig in my OP or not. I was after general feedback from anyone about whether they would attend something like this IF it was near them, rather than just looking for people who actually are nearby. If so, what would you like to see. Either that or there is very little interest- which is fair enough. I doubt getting the general public attending in any kind of numbers, if at all, is beyond what I am thinking at the moment- as a non commercial event the advertising budget would be approximately £0!! However I could use local clubs such as Oldham (cheers Jon) & Bury as a starting point, along with others via e-mail. So although the actual spread of the emails wouldn't be huge, it should be pretty well targeted at the right people. Given the relatively small number of attendees this would also simplify keeping an eye on everything. Good idea about a boat pond though- I guess RC boat clubs would be reasonably used to doing such things. There was a car/truck lay out at NME too that I would imagine the club set up themselves.

I have been reading the Northern Modelling Exhibition thread with interest, and it seems to me there is a real sense of shame that it won't be continuing. I didn't want to take that thread OT, so I have started this one. Several of you know I am a teacher, so in principal at least I have access to a couple of sports halls at weekends. I am wondering if there would be any enthusiasm for an indoor static exhibition with indoor flying that was run by/displayed at by a number of clubs or individuals in the north west. I am not thinking about this in commercial terms. I would imagine I might be able to get the halls at a reasonable rate, so a nominal attendance fee should cover costs. Clubs would be responsible for their own models- so none of the security costs incurred at the NME. I think I could also offer free stands for trade (or again a nominal cost). There would be some outside space available if taxiing etc of bigger stuff was wanted. I see a number of advantages compared to a club fly in event. Firstly it is weatherproof- so could be held in the depths of winter if we wanted and give people something to do, secondly it would be a chance to meet with other fliers that are reasonably local. I am asking for ideas that could be incorporated to make it better, but also whether this is something that people would make an effort to attend (it would be just off the M60 in Oldham). Should it be aero only, or widen it out to other disciplines? Please discuss.

Rob, I can have a chat at the auction if you want, but I can probably sort out the school for a day long indoor/outdoor exhibition of something similar to the NME concept. I would guess that a number of local clubs would be interested and we could easily set up an indoor flying area as well as static displays. I would have to check (school is a PFI build, so run by a private organisation outside school hours) but I doubt the cost would be prohibitive and traders might be willing to give it a shot if they got pitches for free/nominal charge (at least in the early years before we jack the prices right up!!). Obvious options would be keeping it aero only, or inviting some of the other modelling disciplines along (which I found some very interesting and some left me cold).

I went to last years LMA show in Bradford with my 3 year old son (I was trying to sell him as a scale pilot!). I remember thinking at the time just how quiet it was-especially compared with the Wigan show. In fact it was more like a club meeting- everyone knew each other and there were virtually no "walk-in guests". Despite that it was fantastic fun. The LMA boys are all as mad as a box of frogs and will talk about their projects for as long as you can stand it, then they will carry on some more! Seriously though, they are so committed to this hobby it is incredible. If you get a chance to go to one, then grab it.

Thinking back to the event last year, I can't imagine there was much scope for increasing the number of punters- I remember it being very busy. So if a lack of profit was the reason then it must have been due to high costs. I can imagine the rent of the hall was very high, but I also remember seeing a lot of security staff. I also know my models were insured from the moment they left my house until they returned. I guess all this pushed things too far.

Colin, Although described as "lack of support" could it be read as really saying "we didn't make enough money out of it to be worth our time"?

Further to above- taken from the AR7000 manual. Applications Full range up to 7-channel aircraft including: • All types and sizes of glow, gas and electric powered airplanes • All types and sizes of no-powered gliders • All types and sizes of glow, gas and electric powered helicopters

Braddock, I couldn't disagree more- this is exactly the value of a forum. If it wasn't for somewhere like this you wouldn't be able to discuss it anywhere. I think it's important to remember that plenty of people use Spektrum gear day after day without any problems, but I think there are a number of serious questions that should be answered: 1) Horizon hobbies have stated that an AR7000 is not an ideal receiver for this plane. I would like to ask why not. I cannot see any link between the size of the plane and the requirement for additional satelite receivers. In fact spektrumrc.com describe an AR7000 as providing a "bulletproof RF link in all conditions". Not sure if this is official copy, but West Wales models offer a DX7, AR7000 + servos with a description of: "The big difference with DSM2 is that it not only flies any size model with absolute precision and complete freedom from interference". Although the wingspan is 80" this is a 40 size plane. Hardly a "big" plane. 2) Horizon hobbies have said .40 (2st) to .70(4st) engines are about the limit of these receivers- this is a very modest limit of sports fliers. Given the absolute priority of safety in the hobby (or if you prefer to stop customers models falling out of the sky and having to be replaced), can anyone point me to a single piece of literature telling customers not to use the AR7000 in a model over .46/.70 size engine. If this advice has been told to a customer direct from HH (and by inference passing responsibility onto the end user) then it should be easy to find the instructions to this effect. So far I have only found instructions to the contrary (see above). 3) Given HH have said a very modest sized engine will interfere with radio reception, have electric fliers been given any instruction about batteries having a similar effect? 4) If there was no fault found with the RF board then what possible benefit could be had from changing it? Maybe I'm a cynical conspiracy theorist, but if there was a fault then surely that would have to be classed under "their fault" and open up a compensation claim (and probably others). All I'm saying here is why change a perfectly working part? At least my argument has some logic to it, HH's doesn't. I'm not a spektrum user, except for a DX4 used for BnF planes. I reiterate my earlier point that many sets are in use faultlessly day after day- I have no axe to grind against them. What repeatedly astonishes me is the gushing praise levelled at HH customer service. When I look at the answers given in this case it appears to me they are questionable at best, highlight woeful communication skills in the suitability of their products and illogical. Will HH come onto the forum and answer these questions? I doubt it.

Any standard servos will be fine. If you bought the tx as a set with receiver and servos included, then those included would be perfect.

What scale are we talking about here? I would imagine tissue wuld simulate fabric very nicely at smaller scales- especially if the doping/painting is done with a light touch. On a similar idea- why not glass cloth it (with very light cloth), but then don't do what you would normally do and leave the weave unfilled.

Hi Tom, I either didn't read or forgot the bit where you said you were covering in tissue! I would replace the 'tex I suggested with a strip of tissue.

re. stitching what you describe sounds pretty much spot on. The "normal" technique for modelling this would be to use strips of solartex as rib tapes (Mick Reeves sells pinked ones, but most people seem to recommend tearing them to be more scale). Then use PVA glue or similar to draw lines across it to represent the stitches. This then gets painted with the tape. There are plenty of examples around in the various build blogs.

Am I right in thinking no really understands why satelite receivers are needed, or what the relationship is to the size of the plane? The only idea I could come up with might be big planes can be flown further away from the tx than a small one, but beyond that tenuous logic I couldn't think of a single reason.

I am assuming that in this case there is no significant CF content to the model- this would certainly be the case in most large models compared to small ones. I cannot understand why HH would suggest more satellites for a bigger model- assuming all other things are constant.

At the risk of kicking off a S/F argument...........why does a big plane need satellites any more than a small one? My receivers have no satellites and I have never had this issue.

Now I didn't make it to the show in the end, but I did attend last year and have read the various views expressed. I think there is a danger of losing sight of the wood for the trees here. It sounds to me like Lee has it pretty much spot on- there were some areas that could be improved, but generally it was a very good exhibition and everyone presented the hobby in a positive light. We need to remember that model flight is a niche of model engineering, but it appears that "we" have held our end up well. Well done to everyone involved.

Not decided if I am going or not. I should probably have got my ar...... bum in gear and offered a model for display which would have netted me a free ticket. I seem to remember last time was about a tenner for entrance- which I thought was a bit steep. Maybe if I was more interested in the trans and stuff it would appear better value.

go on then.........

This is a great example of "creep". Something I am sure we all are guilty of- I know I certainly am. A plane is designed to be built in a certain way. I'm sure the designer looks at it and decides a couple of areas would benefit from a little beefing up, and adds some reinforcement. Then the builder starts on it and decides a few areas might look a bit weaker than wanted, and adds some more reinforcement. Obviously this all increases the weight. Then comes the power train. The plane now weighs 2kg instead of 1.5kg. So we want to power 2kg, but we don't want to be short on power. The conversion above of 1.8kg=4 pounds is pretty accurate, but most people would round up here if there was a bit more scope- so my example of a 2kg plane = 4.4 pounds........ well lets call it 5! The power requirements then get the same treatment. Simons (very normal and reasonable) assertion that 4 pounds requires 300-400 Watts actually starts from the very top of the "trainer" category, but potentially moves it into 3D/pattern category at the top end. I would imagine most people would be concentrating on the 400W end rather than the 300W. This means a bigger motor, and a bigger battery- as we have seen in this case the move from 3S-4S........increasing the weight again....... so we end up fudging a little more on the side of "caution" to make sure it's not underpowered, and allow some extra power to account for the extra weight of the things we put in to get the power/weight ratio up in the first place! And that is how we end up with a 600W trainer from a starting point of 250W! Just for clarity- none of this is criticism- especially of the specific model in this thread. Just a general observation of a thought process it seems we are all locked into.

I have had a similar issue to this with one of my early HK orders. The packge got picked up by customs, and ParcelForce- with their usual efficiency- managed to deliver the notification of the fees payable to our next door neighbours. Unfortunately we were in a boundary dispute with the neighbours- so they didn't bother passing on the note. I vaguely remember HK not really being interested until the 28 day delivery time elapsed, and being stuck without any information about who the UK courier was. In the end I copied the tracking number off the HK order and started pasting it into various courier company tracking systems until I found it with parcel force and was informed it had been sat in UK customs for weeks waiting for me to pay the bill. On the posiive side I kicked up a storm about their incompetence and managed to get the £13 fee waived! To my mind there is no question that the problem here rests with the courier, not HK- but I do agree with the OP that it isn't always as easy as it might be to identify which warehouse you are shopping from- especially if you don't shop there often.

Mick Reeves does Kevlar string which is excellent and very light.

That stuff looks excellent. If you track some down let us know where from.

I wouldn't have too many worries since you are not using BH retracts. I had a black horse p40 which had retracts made of butter. Completely ruined the plane and did knock my confidence in a brand which I had bought several of before. They do seem to be able to put together a lot of airframe for not a lot of money. However I might have a concern about this with this specific model. It's not cheap- I might be concerned that some of their budget choices had made it into an expensive model. Having said that (retracts excepted) the p40 was a very solid plane and I liked it a lot. If it is possible to actually see one before buying I think that might be a good idea.

I wouldn't have too many worries since you are not using BH retracts. I had a black horse p40 which had retracts made of butter. Completely ruined the plane and did knock my confidence in a brand which I had bought several of before. They do seem to be able to put together a lot of airframe for not a lot of money. However I might have a concern about this with this specific model. It's not cheap- I might be concerned that some of their budget choices had made it into an expensive model. Having said that (retracts excepted) the p40 was a very solid plane and I liked it a lot. If it is possible to actually see one before buying I think that might be a good idea.