Erfolg Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Is this one of the subjects that the learned one, the BEB, has waxed lyrical over, some time in the recent past. The presentation of torque values in model circles seems to be so well established in the modelling trade, i expect it will not happen any time soon. I guess it comes down to that the present standard (in modelling) is to quote a value of so many newtons acting at a 1cm from the fulcrum. This is what most modellers have come to expect and use the value on a comparative basis. Most modellers in this era are not engineers or ex engineers, and probably could not care less how values are presented, as long as they are useful to them. You are of course correct Martyn, just do not hold your breathe whilst change occurs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogster Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I enjoyed Pete Lowe's article. I`m a sucker for a vintage biplane. However, the on board glow wiring diagram for his twin (Fig1) doesn`t look right to me. IIRC the -ve battery terminal goes to one plug and the +ve to the glow and then onto the other plug. There is no common return wiring and I don`t see how the on board glow can control the plug whilst connected directly to the batt -ve terminal anyway. I may be missing something ( I probably am ) but I do find it a puzzle. I wait to be corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Armstrong 2 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Posted by Hogster on 11/12/2012 16:49:20: I enjoyed Pete Lowe's article. I`m a sucker for a vintage biplane. However, the on board glow wiring diagram for his twin (Fig1) doesn`t look right to me. IIRC the -ve battery terminal goes to one plug and the +ve to the glow and then onto the other plug. There is no common return wiring and I don`t see how the on board glow can control the plug whilst connected directly to the batt -ve terminal anyway. +ve goes to one plug, -ve to the other, via the driver, acting as a rheostat, with the metal conducting body of the engine providing the path from one plug to the other, I think. But I could easily be wrong (my wife reminds me of that regularly). I wish I had the skills to build a biplane, though I don't have either a large enough car or enough storage space for anything as large as the Pup. Does look great. On switch orientation; I standardised on 'back for on' with one exception on my models and prefer to have them all the same way round. However I do have a slope soaring wing that could be vulnerable to switch of on launch, though its a Wildthing so practically indestructible and would not get far in that instance. The one exception almost crashed because I automatically 'switched it off' like the others after a flight and when the next flight came round it had been left on for too long. Now has an LED battery condition indicator visible through the canopy so that I have visual confirmation of off/on. Actually, now I think of it, all my IC models do now. The only ones without this sort of switch are electric. I haven't yet seen a ARTF electric include a safety switch in the instructions or a BNF with one as standard. So I'm in the 'safety is down to the operator' camp in the IC/electric debate. I know there was an article on how to rig safety switches in a recent issue. Two points; 1 Am I the only person whose Futaba TX always has to have the throttle channel reversed with an ESC? Nothing in the manual. Disconcerting on my first electric install. 2 If an IC prop hits you, it usually stops the engine. Electric will keep trying to bite until the throttle is closed or the battery is disconnected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogster Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 RA2: Thanks for the explanation. I see what you mean. Obvious when you think about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Startazz No1 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Well mine did turn up on Monday morning but to be honest i've only had time for a quick look through,i'm looking forward to reading up on the Semi-scale Reno Racer by Lee Smalley though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Smalley Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Martyn for someone who is a stickler for accuracy you seem not to be listening to other reviewers who have already told you that our reviews are edited and as a result what you read is not allways word for word what we type, no istead you seem to have ignored this. words i originally wrote are ". Being mechanical units they require their own servo to operate them, unfortunately provision has only been made for mini servos, now I am not sure about you, but I do not know of many mini servos with nearly 6kgf, as requested for in the manual" please send your emails direct to the editor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew767 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Hi RA2....No you're not alone. I think throttle has to be reversed on Futaba always. It certainly does on mine (T7CAP) and a friends (8FG). Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 On the torque unit issue Erfolg is right it is one of the "bees in my personal bonnet"! But then again, hell what chance the mag gets it write when so many servo manufacturers have it wrong in their actual data sheets!!! BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucksboy Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Can I ask why the digital edition is always behind the printed version? Bearing in mind the printed version is probably sent over the web to the printers. They then have to actually print the magazine and then post it out. The first mention of this months magazine is on the 8th, its the 12th now and its still not on line. Part of the appeal for the digital version is that all these delays are cut out. There may well be a good reason for the delay, I'm just asking why there is a delay. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 9 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I may just have the winter blues but I did not find this edition very exciting there was not too much of interest for me.. looking at the above it seems the highlight for most people was an ARF review. Maybe I just need more flying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Posted by Bucksboy on 12/12/2012 06:55:15: Can I ask why the digital edition is always behind the printed version? Bearing in mind the printed version is probably sent over the web to the printers. They then have to actually print the magazine and then post it out. The first mention of this months magazine is on the 8th, its the 12th now and its still not on line. Part of the appeal for the digital version is that all these delays are cut out. There may well be a good reason for the delay, I'm just asking why there is a delay. Thanks It's a plot to make us dump the digital edition and subscribe to the paper version. In my case they will be successful in the first objective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Armstrong 2 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 11/12/2012 23:09:56: On the torque unit issue Erfolg is right it is one of the "bees in my personal bonnet"! But then again, hell what chance the mag gets it write when ....... BEB Perhaps the mag gets it 'write' but not always right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Johnston Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Lee; not sure what makes you think I haven't read, or have ignored, earlier comments about the proof-readers. I'think I've read all such comments; but am simply saying that it's happened 'again', as it seems to every month. If, in your submission to the mag, you're stating technical terms 'correctly' and then the editor/proof-reader is changing them to be 'incorrect' then maybe they could be persuaded to come on this forum and explain why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prop Nut Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Why do I get this instead of the close-bracket I'm typing? Edited By Hellcat on 12/12/2012 11:08:35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Smalley Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 ok martyn but you wrote "Come on Lee, you must know it's 'N.cm' therfore indicating i am at fault (which lets face it, is generally the case) on more than one occasion you have been told, it has been changed by the editors and as a result is now technically wrong, but you still are pointing the finger at the original reviewer...... personally i think the mag is adding the faults just to wind people up .............long may it continue!! glad you liked the review anyway !!!! Edited By Lee Smalley on 12/12/2012 11:56:53 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garnell Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Hi Not sure where I go from here but so far my January edition has not turned up in Germany. Do I email somebody or just put it down to "being lost" ?? Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I think most of us recognise that the universal designation of servo output is not the same as is commonly used in engineering when defining torque. Yet by common usage by manufactures and users, has come to mean that it is the standard method of defining some aspects of servo performance. I am curious how the present system has arisen and come to be so widely accepted. On the other hand, the designation of N/cm does not seem to fit how servo performance is actually measured. As my understanding is that the value is defined @ 1cm, rather than per cm. I guess the real issue the practical implications of how the available torque can be utilised. Which BEB discussed in a recent article. I cannot get that excited at the present situation, yet do sympathise with those who see the present situation, something of a "dogs dinner. You do just live with it in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Johnston Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I think the reviewer himself will probably always be the one to 'look' wrong in these cases; it is after all your name that appears on the article. Maybe Mr Ashby is adding the faults just to make you look bad..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Smalley Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 and long my it continue!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Johnston Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Erflog, you say you are 'curious how the present system has arisen and come to be so widely accepted', - then you go on to say you are happy to just live with it as it is. I think you might have just answered your own question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Martyn I am not sure I am with you. I live with it because, that is how things are and life is short. I still cannot see how a system has come into being, in that does not seem to state what I think is implied. Right from the start, you would have thought, that the manufacturers would know there standard units, or if using heir own bespoke, would have stated what is intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olly P Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Andrew, As of last night mine hadn't arrived in Stockport, NW England either, so hold your horses for a day or 2 and it should show up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garnell Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Thanks Olly. Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Posted by Hellcat on 12/12/2012 11:06:26: Why do I get this instead of the close-bracket I'm typing? Edited By Hellcat on 12/12/2012 11:08:35 Because you are typing "semicolon close bracket" which the editor sees as a short-cut to the winky symbol. As in BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowerman Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I like Peter Lowe's articles, its nice to see someone who has no need to hide new purchases from SWMBO and can fully share his hobby with her. Now for the 'however' - In his article on Skis all is well untill para 11 when I ask myself 'how do we now fit the wing? Edited By Mowerman on 13/12/2012 10:10:03 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.