Paul Marsh Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Was wondering if there was a "safe" age when flying under BMFA insurance and other factors should you keep using older equipment? Although 35mhz is good, older equipment may be a risk due to age, even though physically it might be in good condition. Now 35Mhz isn't being replaced with newer stuff, due to being obselete - mainly suppliers not supporting the protocol, is it wise to keep using really old equipment, as older it gets, more possibility of it breaking down. The reason why I'm raising the subject, as I was this afternoon setting up a GeeBee on a previously good Futaba 138DP dual Conv Rx and was running the engine, deciding the plane will probably crash, so using a temp 35mhz setup (and had no 2,4 rx spare) would fly it. However, I turned off turned on, did the controls, and the rx stopped working - just like that. The engine went to full power and had no way of stopping it. When I took the rx out, it was dead - as I tried another 35mhz one and battery, etc ok. Needless to say, I won't be using any more old stuff again. Any person agree or disagree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Thats a huge generalisation Paul based on one incident which may or may not be an actual receiver fault! Some of us are still using 27mhz.! Cheers Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Thats a huge generalisation Paul based on one incident which may or may not be an actual receiver fault! Some of us are still using 27mhz.! Cheers Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marsh Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Well, it's not isolated. Over the past few months, I've found that some other rx's were packing up, just going dead. Now I have 2 GWS 8ch rx's dead, a JR Apex rx and a couple of Futaba ones go. One of the xtals was faulty, but found on the GWS, both the Xtal and Rx had given up the ghost. Luckily, all finds were on the bench, not in the air. Most of my 35mhz are still working, probably less than 5% have died, but having a 5% chance of the radio failing due to that I think is taking a risk. I can't do things when I was 15 - being in the gym team then. We all start to wear out, things drop off and can't start in the morning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 paul I heard of a 2.4 rx that failed should we stop using them ? should we stop flying airframes over 5 years old ? how many use 2.4 rx's that have been in crashed models ? responsibility to fly safe lies with the individual, not the bmfa or our insurers. I can guarantee you one thing though, the same folk who where blaming 35megz for their crashes, are now blaming brown outs or loss of bind etc. I have no concerns about 35 megz myself, "deciding the plane would probably crash" then attempting to fly it does concern me though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew birkett Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I do honestly feel there is a reason for that....... I used to crash control line models, must have been bad lines, I believe pilot error plays no small part, 27, 35 or 2.4 a wrong stick is a wrong stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marsh Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 The plane is a 120 size Gee Bee. It's all structually sound, but not the most forgiving aircraft to fly. Also it was bought from a swopmeet, where someone had put it in, although minor damage, such as spats, firewall and cracked cowl. I will still use 35mhz, but will make sure everything's 110%, although you should do it for 2.4. quote: "responsibility to fly safe lies with the individual" - that's what I mean, you can see a defect in a airframe, but older rx's have more componants that can fail. Capacitors dry out and don't work as well as when they are made. I don't want this to go in a slanging match (35 vs 2.4), just want to know how people perceive using older equipment. For example you wouldn't use reed sets in a rc model now. Would you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme jones Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Paul, although I have upgraded to 2.4 I still use my Futaba F16 Tx's, mainly for training. They and their Rx's are still working fine after 20 years. They are on their third or fourth batteries and are checked for range a few times a year. Yes they are more likely to fail as they get older, but no more so than brand new equipment. Electrics tend to be most reliable in the middle of their lifespan. Graeme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 its not a slanging match Paul, sorry if it came over that way you can still have 35 serviced, and a lot of it is very good quality how many use servo's that are a few years old ? just as important. taking off and flying the gee bee's no problem, its the landings that can bite you. good luck with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme jones Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 John - good point about servos. I've had to replace many at 10 years +, due to wear in the feedback pot. Graeme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marsh Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Also switches and batteries come under age. Just replaced a lead on a switch which was giving a high resistance - which I'm going through my older models now. Usually servos last years, but occasionally one goes. Luckily I noticed the bad switch. The servos kept pausing, thought the battery was low, but although not been charged for a few months was 90% full (non-low discharge vapex battery). So battery ok, switch repaired and giving full voltage under load at the rx end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Posted by Paul Marsh on 02/01/2014 13:41:17: Was wondering if there was a "safe" age when flying under BMFA insurance and other factors should you keep using older equipment? Age of equipment is irrelevant for the purpose of insurance and in fact, if a totally unforeseeable fault were to cause an accident it's quite likely that there wouldn't be the basis of a claim against you so the insurance would not cover you - it only covers against claims where you are at fault. Knowingly using equipment that you know or suspected to be faulty would definitely contravene the ANO if you were flying a > 7kg model though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piers Bowlan Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I don't think it is so much the age of the equipment that is the issue but where and how it is stored. Years ago I kept my Tx (Fleet) in my garage with my aircraft, so it should have come as no surprise when I discovered corrosion on the main circuit board. I learnt my lesson and duly replaced the Tx with a more up to date system but I wonder how many modellers in the UK still keep their radio gear in cold damp workshops and garages during the wintertime? Perhaps there should be a poll! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatMc Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Posted by Martin Harris on 02/01/2014 17:28:45: Knowingly using equipment that you know or suspected to be faulty would definitely contravene the ANO if you were flying a > 7kg model though. Martin, I think that applies to any model irrespective of weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Blake 1 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I too am still using my JR Apex 7 bought new in October 1989 with the original receivers and some of the servos no problems. I have good flights and some with unintended landings One advantage of 35 mhz these days with all others going to 2.4 is I don't have to wait for my frequency number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I did consider that , Pat, before posting (and why I used the word "definitely" ) but with a >7 kg model the legal responsibility is to reasonably expect the flight to be completed safely whereas if you aren't actually endangering a person or aircraft with a smaller model there's no offence committed. I'd guess interpreting subjects like this is why the legal profession are able to make the money they do... Edited By Martin Harris on 02/01/2014 18:12:40 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 no martin with any model you must not recklessly endanger person or property its very clear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Exactly - using old equipment which happens to fail (or not) without endangering anyone hasn't contravened the law whereas the act of using equipment that you consider might possibly fail in use on a larger model is a specific offence. I'm not suggesting it's a good idea to fly any model using dodgy gear! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flite08 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Posted by Paul Marsh on 02/01/2014 14:56:59: For example you wouldn't use reed sets in a rc model now. Would you? Err.. well.. yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin b Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Posted by Flite08 on 02/01/2014 19:51:25: Posted by Paul Marsh on 02/01/2014 14:56:59: For example you wouldn't use reed sets in a rc model now. Would you? Err.. well.. yes Actually there seems to be a "new" class of RC models aimed at old pre digital / proportional equipment. There's lots of people talking about it. You could say freeflight power models should be banned as there is no control over them (other than preflight trimming) whatsoever ! kevinb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaunie Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I think this is a fairly straightforward issue, as long as you have taken all reasonable steps to ensure the equipment you are using is fit for purpose and continued use then there is no problem. In other words if your equipment passes its range check and inspection shows no developing faults then it is fit to fly. Remember all this old kit is assembled with old fashioned through-hole technology and good-old lead based solder, apart from black wire syndrome this gear will probably last longer than modern SMD/lead free technology. Equipment can fail at any time, new or old. This is the bathtub failure curve, if it does not fail early in its cycle life then it will continue to work for a long period of time, it is difficult to predict when the curve will start to climb. Shaunie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 correct shaunie there is always a risk only way to eliminate it is don't fly free flight has the same rule as r/c take all precautions etc etc 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.