Funny now, but it could have been a lot worse

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

I don't have either of those transmitters.
​
I can bind at full throttle, so your statement in bold that it can't be done is incorrect. Sorry.
OK it's can't be done with those two transmitters, but it CAN be done.

What any of this has to do with Christopher Lee as Count Dracula is just beyond me, you've lost me there.

[ben goodfellow 1]

sorry chris private joke ........ considering this started with with a poke at me for fs settings and how i "didnt set it" , its fair to say it applies to txs ive used and on the ones i have it would be very hard to do . ive never owned a taranis or jr or what ever ,so how could i have ever set it wrong ? what i will also say is i had some post deleted today for being off topic ..so whats the difference here ... is it because it suits some of them when they want it too?

[ben goodfellow 1]

i could also post a list as long and boring as some on here ,of models hovering and doing close in low stuff ..are they all breaking the ano ...? jet low passes a 200+ .......stop them all......

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Who mentioned flying low breaking the ANO?

1. I merely stated that not setting a failsafe, when the facility is available, is a possible breech of the ANO.

2. KC questioned the wisdom of close in low hovering - no mention of ANO there.

You are confusing two different posts from different people making different points.

And.why post private jokes on a public forum - what's the point in that?

Chris is right - you posted - in bold (followed up with an admonishment in capitals to another member) something factually untrue as if it was an unqualified dogmatic truth. A simple admission that you were wrong will do. Perhaps the "private joke" is that?

BEB

[Don Fry]

Ben, make your mind up, have you thin skin, or thick skin. Thin skin, go away, you are boy amounts men, Thick skin, stick about while you learn and teach us to fly. Mind you seem to be having a bad week, last week you are a bit obsessive about installation, this week the moter parts company. Perhaps other weeks are better.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by ben goodfellow 1 on 17/06/2016 21:51:30:

sorry chris private joke ........ considering this started with with a poke at me for fs settings and how i "didnt set it" , its fair to say it applies to txs ive used and on the ones i have it would be very hard to do . ive never owned a taranis or jr or what ever ,so how could i have ever set it wrong ? what i will also say is i had some post deleted today for being off topic ..so whats the difference here ... is it because it suits some of them when they want it too?

No one "had a poke at you". You stated you "never checked it". I merely clearly established (for the benefit of avoiding any confusion or the less knowledgeble/experienced) that that was a poorly judged "joke" - not the actuality. So, the fact is no one said you didn't set it - in fact just the opposite I was clarifying that in fact you do!

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 17/06/2016 22:18:42

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Doesn't the DX18 or whichever have a throttle reversing option? If it does, you could perhaps start it after re-using a memory from an IC model and then realise that you needed to revert to "standard". Therefore, if my slight knowledge of Spektrum programming is correct, the failsafe would be set to full throttle.

Not saying you would - but you could, so the statement that you can't would be incorrect!

[ben goodfellow 1]

martin ..perhaps, im not sure on that as i never thought about reversing the throttle then doing the exact opposite of every bind i have ever done so maybe but it would have to be intentional.. and go right out the road that coupled with smart safe model match ....i think it would be very very hard or you would have to be very very stupid ....

Edited By ben goodfellow 1 on 18/06/2016 09:23:54

[Glyn44]

Welcome to "The friendly forum" Ahem...

[Don Fry]

Try harder Ben, I am used to insults by professionals. And for your information my sister frightens me.

[Dave Hopkin]

Given you track record with planes, Ben, you should invest in one of these might be safer for all those around you and by all evidence be a close match to your mental age

la-104620903795|crid:56932746355|nw:g|rnd:4008570177902515545|dvc:c|adp:1o5|mt:">http://www.houseoffraser.co.uk/Disney+Planes+Dusty+activity+plane/208389866,default,pd.html&_$ja=tsid:44970|cid:203432755|agid:10237783795|tidla-104620903795|crid:56932746355|nw:g|rnd:4008570177902515545|dvc:c|adp:1o5|mt:

Edited By Dave Hopkin on 18/06/2016 11:11:28

[Engine Doctor]

Nothing wrong with that with a DA 50 up front  Joking aside is this not getting a little bit out of hand . Its a forum to help one another not dig or belittle other flyers.  

Edited By Engine Doctor on 18/06/2016 11:28:50

[ben goodfellow 1]

wonder if they do a dracular one ..............the only problems i have had are with hh products ..spektrum ..eflite ..funny that innit ............dave id love to have a catch up at elvington.. or i can make an effort to attend any show you may be at @ ...go it in you ?

[ben goodfellow 1]

Posted by Donald Fry on 18/06/2016 10:56:20:

Try harder Ben, I am used to insults by professionals. And for your information my sister frightens me.

so what your saying is your used to insults ,,,,why would that ever be.......LOL

[Pete B]

Sorry folks, this forum deserves better than this...

Thread locked. Go flying or do something else constructive.

Pete

[Pete B]

Following representations, I've re-opened this thread on the grounds that the safety issues under discussion justify a full airing - without the distraction of insults and silliness, hopefully

Please carry on in the manner and style to which the forum has become accustomed.....

Pete

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I think that failure to set and properly test a failsafe is much more common than we would like to admit - not the case among diligent members on here of course!

This view (about the commonality of the failure to set failsafes) is based on a little exrcise we did at our club recently. We fly in a public park and whilst safety is obviously a number one priority in any club (or should be) in ours it really does get to be "front and centre" due to the presence of the public. One of the things we decided to do was to draw attention to the importance of the failsafe - so we announced that over the following month committee members would be randomly asking members to demonstrate the failsfe on their model. We were not trying to "catch" people, our intention was to just check and where useful offer advice - hence the prior notice of the checks, hopefully giving people a chance to ensure that their "house was in order".

Well, no models/owners "failed" the test, everyone asked could demonstrate a full and appropriately functioning failsafe when ask to do so. Very good.

But,....it was surprising how many members did have a quiet chat prior to the month in question. During this chat they often asked a few key questions like "how exactly do you set the failsafe?", "how can you test it?"

So we achieved our objective - everyone has a failsafe set and knows how to do it - but we did become aware that that was almost certianly not the siruation we atarted with. A sobering thought!

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 19/06/2016 13:11:51

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Funny enough one of our Examiners has just recently done same thing BEB, posted on club forum and notice board with a start date for checks to begin, one or two asked question..well how do you do it as well

Objective achieved though

John

[fly boy3]

Having just aquired my first 2.4G set up and first electric plane (but not yet flown) I will incorporate a fail safe test as usual with my normal control surfaces, range checks etc, when arriving at the field. Cheers

[kc]

In a club flying environment how far away from other pilots and models should hovering vertically be done? And upwind or downwind of oneself and others?

[Don Fry]

At the risk of elf and safety reprisals, in a club environment, a plane hovering infront of the pilot box is OK. Persons in the pilot box can make representations to or assault, as appropriate, the hoverer ( English word?). Only people at risk are informed pilots.

[Jack Banner]

Pretty sure I wouldn't put up with someone hovering a plane (or heli for that matter) opposite the pilots box whilst I was on the flight line. It would distract me to much. It should be at one of the far ends of the strip, after the intention to do it has been indicated and all flying pilots consented.

[Don Fry]

Jack has got it about right, a distraction thing. Looking back at the original post, a small moter detached from a foamie, and pierced a bit of profilm. If it hit a pilot, a huge problem? Not suggesting structural checks are not made, Bets off if a big petrol motor detached, but it's a horses for courses thing. I would not be bothered, fly 10 metres further away on the leg, and make sure the hoverer is aware we can collide if he is not accurate. If that is not acceptable, one of us will land early.

[The Wright Stuff]

Posted by Martin Harris on 17/06/2016 22:11:18:

Doesn't the DX18 or whichever have a throttle reversing option? If it does, you could perhaps start it after re-using a memory from an IC model and then realise that you needed to revert to "standard". Therefore, if my slight knowledge of Spektrum programming is correct, the failsafe would be set to full throttle.

Not saying you would - but you could, so the statement that you can't would be incorrect!

An interesting technicality here - and I only know this from swotting for my A test, but the CAP658 wording is very specifically focused on the receiver:

CAP658 says: "Any powered model aircraft fitted with a receiver capable of operating in failsafe mode should have the failsafe set, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle on loss or corruption of signal."

Whether intentional or not, if read at face value, this suggests that if your receiver is capable of failsafe, then you should use it - no mention of transmitter. Hence you are obliged to use a transmitter that supports the setting of failsafe, if your receiver does.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Not too sure why you've quoted my post which suggested a way to mis-configure failsafe on a Spektrum receiver but to address your point, would it make any sense to have a transmitter which went into failsafe? It's the receiver which decides that it isn't getting sufficient information and it's time to go into failsafe - which can be set within the receiver or, as in the case of Futaba 35 MHz PCM for example, dynamically from transmissions sent periodically from settings programmed in the transmitter. Either way, on loss or corruption of the signal, it's information stored in the receiver which is acted on.

It is perfectly possible to configure failsafe on my Jeti receivers from a "Jetibox" which is a stand-alone programming box for various equipment, so the transmitter would not need to be involved at any stage - but failsafe would activate on loss of signal whether I was using my dedicated transmitter or my old Futaba one with a Jeti module...

Edited By Martin Harris on 20/06/2016 23:56:39