SCALE MAG

[Andrew Thomson]

To messrs Wright and Jones ,
If you read the whole article as sent then the rationale for electric flight being "niche" is given - less than 10% of 300 flyers in our immediate area fly electric powered models.That is niche by anyones standards ! It may be more popular down south but that is just a small part of the country ! Lots of trade advertising and lots of largely dissapointing experimentation with electric flight does NOT make it mainstream . The only exception would be for indoor flying.
Before you spend a not so small fortune equipping for electric flight , find and read an excellent article in one of the mags about 6 months ago about the relative costs and benefits of ic vs electric.This truly reveals electric to be the lame duck second choice on cost , power and realism.On noise grounds I concede it is a clear winner and fot those unfortunately constrained against their will , I concede a silent plane is better than no plane at all .
Back to the bunker.

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Many flyers I know (prob 50%) now play in both discipines, perhaps it's the company I keep!

[Antony Wright]

lol Maybe you are right Dave :)
Whereas electric may not be as popular in the north as yet - it is improving. I dont yet fly electric as I have already stated and yes I have read some of the articles matching cost for cost, but I do believe that eventually it will take a much larger chunk of the hobby. Its only natural. Its like computers. I got involved in them when they were only just coming into the average household. Folk back then said it would never catch on - it was too gimmicky. But take a look now - not only are they in a large percentage of the households but it is being intergrated into everyday things too. I guess some would call it progression (my wife wouldnt).
But give electrics a chance to prove themselves and we will see leaps and bounds taking place in all areas including a drop in the prices. We may even see the manufacturerers standardising fittings etc - cor now wouldnt that be helpful :)

[Antony Wright]

Oh I wouldnt dream of taking away your engines David :) When I was a young lad I used to watch my dad setting up his engines and thought one of these days I want one of them. Well now I have and I love IC - but Im being practical and know that electric will continue gain in popularity given some time (and a few improvements). But I shall still want to fly my IC as well. After all it sounds far more like an aeroplane than an electric does - even if it is only 2 stroke Im using :)
(Of course you could always fit sound gernerators with mini speakers etc as some folk have done).

[Tony Jones]

Why does this have to be an either or thing? Electric flyers who bang on about 'messy noisy slimer engines' are as boring as ex-smokers who now demand that everyone else follows suit. And why do some I.C stalwarts have to slag off others who simply fly with a different power source.

Anyone is quite entitled to raise the issue of excess coverage of electric flight in RCME if they feel that is the case (and they obviously do) but to rail against something that is simply a variation of what they themselves do - namely RC modelling doesn't make sense to me.

It appears some people just can't bear other people doing something a bit different. Now't strange as folk - as they say.

Best wishes
Tony Jones

[Andrew Thomson]

Dear All ,
David , your home location and the number of indoor flyers you know may be a good indication of why you know 50/50 .
To those who still fail to understand - those of us who are for want of a better term , traditionalists , who believe a real plane requires a real engine unless there is an excellent overiding reason why this cannot be so , do not want our monthly hobby magazine filled with articles month on month which we consider of nil interest and for the free plan and build article to be useless to us as it is not i/c and therefore too light and frail without much modification .
Mr Ashby , why should we part with our money for a magazine that in the most part fails to interest us much any more apart from the occasional issue ? The drop in regular buyers and subscriptions is because the only thing we can be sure of more months than not is that it will dissapoint !! We therefore take it , or more often leave it , on a monthly basis.
Electric modelling IS different and NON compatible with traditional modelling , the airframe design , power design and method and subsequent performance are all different . If there are so many "mainstream" electric flyers then let them subscribe to "Electric Flying" or similar , there should be enough of them to make it viable according to you ! Leave our magazine alone . We wish you well with your interest , but do not compromise or interfere with ours - we do NOT want to join you !

[Antony Wright]

Your quite right Tony - it doesnt have to be - and shouldnt be - a question of either or thing. After all its all about flying model planes. As they say about umberellas - what goes up must come down. Planes go up by remote control and they come down by remote control - they do pretty much the same type of things while in the air.
Yes there is a difference between electric and IC and yes IC has been around for a lot longer. Electric IS the new kid on the block so to speak but its growing up fast and is showing it is very capable.
At the end of the day - so long as we are all enjoying OUR hobby then lets just get on with it and have fun doing it.

[nasa_steve]

Andrew;
i'm sorry but i fly both electric and petrol power and i want to see both in the magazine that i buy. since when has electric been non compatable with traditional modelling??? this statement is typical of the " i don't want to change" brigade. well sorry to disapoint mate the change is here AND to coincide with that change, so has RCM&E as well as most of the other magazines on our shelves today. i'm afraid electric flight is becoming main stream and thus the magazines must reflect that fact otherwise they WILL lose out on a big market.
just a point i must make here the information that you refered to regarding the cost of IC vs ELECTRIC was flawed as i pointed out the following months mag as the information the chap used for his thesis was 12mths out of date. therefore i must say with the rate at which ELECTRIC is progressing the costings he put together were well out of date by the time they were printed. there is nothing between them now in fact as it stands it is now more cost effective (if you use that as a gauge) to fly electric than IC.so most definately NO LAME DUCK!!!
don't get me wrong i do love IC but, i'm afraid you also need to move on, as they say if you can't beatem join em!!! ELECTRIC power is here to stay!!! you seem to live in an area that is contrary to the rest of the country. in my club at least 30% fly electric only and another 5% fly both and that number is growing by the month.
as i've also said before ARTF aircraft are as it stands all that are put forward for review by the trade. so its very difficult to review a traditional kit if none of the suppliers/manufacturers submit them. so what do you do?????

[Andrew Thomson]

Dear Steve ,
Condemned from your own mouth - read your own words - You claim electric is mainstream yet in your own supposedly electric area club you admit only 35% at most fly electric - that is a minority in anyones' language and certainly not enough to justify the level of electric content in any mainstream mag.It most certainly shows electric is NOT mainstream.
Model flying is not all the same as the basics of airframe and power design etc are fundamentaly different and NON compatible . A free electric plan is of absolutely no use to a traditional modeller.
You condemn the comparison article I referred to . Frankly , from prices most of us observe locally and in mags , I doubt many gave your "follow-up " letter much credence as it was obviously not as well researched , grounded in fact and coherently presented as the original article .
You present a scenario where all mags have to follow the same path because of the emergence of some new ( and from your own words minority ) trend , however incompatible , or face dire consequences . You could not be more wrong if you tried !
This all started because of Mr.Ashby wondering why he had falling subscriptions in essentially a growing market (bmfa MEMBERSHIP BASED ).Now you know why !
Continue as you are or not at your own commercial peril . You (collectively)posed the question and got the answer . If you don't like it then tough !We have already largely lost a reliable desirable monthly hobby mag , certainly one worth subscribing to. We trad modellers can only gain financially if you do not put your house in order by keeping our money in our pockets , even more so than now. As previously stated we do not want to change , there is no reason to or need to .Electric power is different , inferior , but does have a place - on its own outside of trad modelling.
You will end up losing your job by not listening to ( by your own admission ) the majority. Make your choice ,we already are and the clock is ticking for you.

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Yes Geoff..what have you started here...!

Andrew or Mr Thomson if you prefer- LOL. Well done, great post and some good points of course....such passion, such anger, perhaps a bit too much anger ? ..

Tell me where have we stated that subscriptions are falling? At RCM&E they're growing infact.

It's a big hobby mate and there's room for all. I'd venture that most flyers simply like aeroplanes whatever the power source.

I know many i.c. flyers who'd knock me down and apply some foot to the head therapy if I asked them to fly electric....but they still like reading about electric models and all the new developments in this arena.

Ok, enough raw emotion gentlemen. I've started a new thread, lets see what people do fly and what they think of electric flight.

[Tony Jones]

Andrew
Different yes, non compatible? That's a very big claim. My electric and I.C models are built on the same bench and flown at the same field without - as far as I'm aware - any compatibility problems.
As as someone with a foot in both camps I can
TELL you that leccy and I.C have much, much more in common than than they are different.
Of course, you are fully entitled to suggest as forcibly as you wish to the editor that electric is of no interest to you personally, that many share that view, and that the magazine should reduce its coverage of electric flight.
Why not leave it at that and forgo the diatribe against electric as branch of the hobby?
Best wishes
Tony

[nasa_steve]

andrew
let me tell you this electric flight is MOST definatley not inferior ( i fail to see how a 17' 6" lancaster can in anyway be inferior tell that to Mr Nihuis) and its no longer a niche market i can catagorically state that if it were none of the manufacturers would go down the electric route and there would not be any electric models availiable to anybody. you seem to have a personal mission to pooh pooh anything that isn't IC thats your problem not the rest of the modelling market. its time that you sat up and smelt the coffee my friend a very well known model shop chain has currently a 50/50 sales record of electric vs IC models going out his door in the last year or so. on top of that 80% of model sales are ARTF in origin with the remaining 20% stake in conventional builders kits. that just about sums it up in my eyes.
incidentally i merely write the odd review for RCM&E i don't as such work for the mag only occaisionally when requested. in fact the last i wrote was an IC reveiw. so i do bat on both sides of the fence but i just fail to see what the problem is. any magazine has to reflect the market as it stands. currently the electric flight market is growing at an undeniable pace and as such every magazine reflects that whether you like electric power or not. if ic based products make a bigger impression then the mags will reflect that as well.
let me ask you this if a daily paper or the radio for example prints/reads a story on something you don't like the look or sound of will you decide that day that you won't read the paper or listen to the radio??? your attitude seems to be if i don't like it then no one else should either! strange no??

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[nasa_steve]

i feel the comparison chart is only a matter of time although i can give you a few pointers in the right direction AXI now have a good chart that goes with each motor on their website, E-flight now call the motor by its IC equivilant and many more are following suit. what is lacking as you say is the comparison chart directly. the thing with electric power is its versatility in the sense you can have a motor on 3 cells(li-po) that will fly sedately on a model weighing say 4lbs for instance yet with the same motor on 5 cells with a different prop you could fly a 6.5lbs rocket ship. this is where AXI have answered at least my curiosity in giving a reasonable chart alongside each of their motors worth a look.
regards
steve

incidentally the model in the avatar beside is an IC to electric conversion its 50" span and weighs 6.5lbs its highly aerobatic as well

[Antony Wright]

Now that is just what we want. Practical help sorting out the power comparisons. Now all we need Steve is a web address for that one you have mentioned :)

[nasa_steve]

okay here's the AXI website address when you click on a specific motor the comparisons are at the bottom of the page including some prop suggestions

www.modelmotors.cz

click on the uk flag for english version obviously. here's an idea as to what you're looking at;
2214 range 22 2st 32 4st
2810 range 32 2st 40 4st
2826 range 40 2st 60 4st
4120 range 46 2st 65 4st
4130 range 54 2st 70 4st
thats just some sort of idea it is a mine field and i don't pretend any different the best person to talk to certainly on the model motors(AXI) range is probably JOHN EMMS (puffin models) he is certainly the longest serving dealer of AXI motors. now there are cheaper alternatives but AXI are the bench mark as such.
regards
steve

[Antony Wright]

thanks Steve - much appreciated.
Antony

[Mike Rolls]

Andrew
As I flrt flew a model in 1947 I suppose I can claim that I am a traditionalist - or at least likely to be seen as such. I am intrigued by your continuous denigration of electric power and your appraent belief that only IC R/C is actually 'real' modelling. Over the past 6 decades I have flown:
Rubber powered F/F
Rubber powered RYP
Gliders - F/F, plus R/C in both slope and thermal guises
F/F power - sport, scale (0f a fashion!) and contest
Indoot microfilm
Jetex - F/F and RTP
C/L team race and stunt
R/C IC sport aerobatics
R/C electric sport aerobatics
R/C electric gliders.

Believe me - they are ALL real modelling

Mike

[airman]

Thanks for the details of the AXI web site. Had a look at it, and will be using it the future.
How long before other manufactures do the same?Although, I fly electric gilders, have so far been put of flying other types of electric models due to the mine field making the correct choice of motor etc.But with this information available, will be flying electric flight more.
Dave

[Mike Rolls]

Dave
One easy way of making sure that you get a working system first time is to talk to someone like John Emms at Puffin Models. First class service - my only connection is as a very satisfied customer.
Mike

[Erfolg]

I am surprised, and disappointed at the animosity towards electric models by some modellers.

Today electric models do not need to be as strong as a paper bag. With the advent of brushless and li-po drive systems, at affordable prices, it is possible to build a very durable model. Although the strength requirements or stress distribution is very different to ic. No need to dampen vibration, although the fuel load (mass) is generally a little higher with electric (and does not reduce whilst flying).

To get an understanding of who is doing what, look at the adverts. The trade is driven by demand, not ideology, bigotry or nostalgia. I suspect there are far more quite flyers than some believe.

Of the 5 clubs in my area, 3 are quite flyers.

Ic

a) Ashton on Mersey
b) Park flyers

Quite

1) Timperly
2) Civil Service Club (do not know correct title)
3) Bats


I personally am not interested in detailed reports of slope competition or contributions which are essentially pictures of models ( I want substance). Although I do read them occasionally

[Richard Wicker]

Plenty of food for thought in this thread!
Must admit that 'leccy models and A.R.T.F. leave me cold. OK, there have been articles on fitting sound systems to 'leccy Warbirds, (A recent one involving an A.R.T.F. P47 I believe). If 'leccy modelling keeps the noise Gestapo happy, what does fitting a sound system do? What's the next step, fitting wings to a mini hi-fi?
I indulge in RC & FF, mainly scale, some sport, but all IC. Maybe i'm lucky, 'cos at our club there are no noise restrictions, (run a big 2stroke with no silencer if you want) but to stay with the thread, i don't subscribe to the mag, only buying it if it has an article of interest to me -NOT OFTEN-! I do however have an order for "Flying Scale Models" with my local newsagent, as i used to have for "Aeromodeller" many moons ago.
Where is our hobby going? Well, as the owner of my local model shop said to me last month........"If there was a model plane that came in a box with wings and tail attached and radio fitted and charged, and the motor fired when you opened the lid, i'ld make a fortune".... I must be getting old!!
'Nuf said.

[David Ashby - Moderator]

You local model shop owner won't have to wait too long I recon Richard.

David.