June issue feedback

[David Ashby - Moderator]

OK, the June issue should be with subscribers any day now and in the shops later this week.

Let us have any thoughts, queries, comments you may have. We do listen to everything we hear and try to factor your thoughts into the mag where we can.

Thanks as always, your support and posts are appreciated.

David and Graham.

[Bladerunner]

The new Nijhuis Spitfire looks fantastic. I bet this one will prove to be very popular.

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Looks good in the flesh too Bladerunner. I saw it fly last month and it's a peach. He's working on a Sunderland flying boat now!

David.

[John Gibbins]

Made the smaller Spitfire (electrified) and if the larger one flies half as well then it is a good one.
The new Futaba 2.4 looks good but I am confused in that to get it working you switch tx on near to the rx then press a button on the rx to log on. Does this then permanently remember the combo so that the next visit to the field or even the next flight stays live? With my scale models taking 10 mins to rig there must be something that I have missed.

[David Ashby - Moderator]

John

I saw the big spit fly last month and it looked very impressive.

What you're refering to with the Futaba 2.4 is just the initial linking process. You do this just once to introduce the tx and rx to each other. So you only fly that model as it were.

Sorry, perhaps I should have made it clearer.

David.

[ZigZag]

A note for Graham Ashby in response to the Hangar 9 Piper Cub review in the June issue. The classic J3 Cub is flown solo from the back seat, with the front seat (right on the C of G) being for the occasional passenger. With such a well detailed scale model it is a shame that the pilot in the kit reviewed has been placed incorrectly. Please, oh please, move your pilot back!

[Ian Lloyd]

Will there be a Bushwhacker page?.. It does not seem to be here yet?..

[David Ashby - Moderator]

It's in the June issue page 62 Ian - free plan.

David.

[Ian Lloyd]

Thanks David, But I meant a Web page.. :-/

The link to the page mentioned in the mag, (Pg 66) , modelflying.co.uk/bushwhacker is not yet active.. I was wondering if it is still going to be created, as there are going to be additional Photo's on there...

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Ah oh sorry Ian, yes sorry for the delay it will be there in a day or two. I know it's pitiful excuse but Tom our web editor had two wisdom teeth out this week so he's been a bit out of the equation. He's back on Monday and we'll have some extra pics for the Xtreme glider and the MVVS brushless motors (taken apart) as well.

David.

[Mike Rolls]

Hope all this isn't too long - but you did ask!
I like the ‘Switch On’ and ‘Counterpoint’ articles. Even in this Internet age when news can go round the globe far faster than a magazine can get the same information to its readers, I find these articles of interest.

Tony Nijhuis’ bigger Spitfire looks a sure fire winner.

The review of the ‘Xtreme’ was a good one, with possible minor snags mentioned.

I usually enjoy the readers’ letters – this month was no exception.

The review of the Futaba 6 EXP 2.4 was interesting, although it bears out my comment about the speed at which information now travels – I think it is fair to say that the comments of users of this equipment which can be gleaned from the various fora give an even fuller picture for prospective purchasers.

I very much like the ‘Model Magic’ feature – this month’s Ju 87 looks a particularly fine piece of work.

The ‘EDF for all’ column was, I thought, very good – just what someone thinking of dabbling in this particular discipline would find useful.

‘Vintage Awayday’ I often wonder if this sort of article really has a place in a model magazine, although I must say that I liked this particular article.

‘Project Bushwacker’ I do wonder if we need yet another high wing trainer spread over several months. If one accepts that there is a need for the article to introduce beginners to R/C there are already surely far and away enough designs for a suitable one to be featured – especially if it is one with an existing track record with beginners.

I found the ‘Sticky Stuff’ feature very useful and interesting.

The test of the Thor 45 was of no personal interest, but with more and more modellers ‘upsizing’ and turning to petrol I can understand its inclusion.

‘Hillside Blues’ I found an enjoyable, thought provoking article.

The Seagull Decathlon review I thought was, again, a useful one for anybody thinking of the model.

The beginners’ series continues to look as if it covers most things the tyro needs to know – although doesn’t it to an extend show that the ‘Bushwacker’ is a duplication if recent beginners’ articles?

The tests on the MVVS electric motors I found of particular interest. Too many people are, I feel, turned off electric power by the vagueness and incomprehensibility of motor designations. An article such as this identifying the actual performance specific set-ups will give is first class.

I like the plugging of this site in ‘Online Marketplace’.
(It is too long - continued in part 2!)

[Mike Rolls]

Part 2

As usual the Wizard of Oz has an interesting article (especially as I still have a 1949 ED Bee and a 1952 ED 246!)

I liked the R/C technique article – again useful, well informed comment and advice.

The Piper Cub review – same comments really as for the Decathlon

Overall – another good issue.

However; now the down side. Only two models featured which weren’t ARTF. I realise that ARTF is the dominant portion of the market for many, but when you look at the huge numbers, with new releases just about every month, it is clearly impossible for any magazine to review them all, or even a reasonable proportion of them. Someone looking to buy model X isn’t going to be interested in an issue which doesn’t review it as a reason for buying the magazine. Is the balance of how much of the magazine is devoted to reviews of kits (whether ARTF or the increasingly rare BIY) compared to other aspects the right one? Personally I feel that the reviews take up too much of the magazine.

That leads me to my second point. Whilst I appreciate that the magazine is called ‘Radio Controlled Models and Electronics’ is it perhaps time to think of broadening the scope? Modelling life outside R/C does exist. I make this point particularly because having flown F/F and C/L for many years I still maintain an interest in them and two of your competitors do cover those aspects as well.

I am having to cut down on the number of magazines I buy. There is simply too much duplication – for example everybody is now featuring reviews of 2.4 Ghz equipment – read one and you’ve read them all! This being the case, when my current subscription expires I doubt that I will be renewing; instead I will continue with the magazines which cover the wider spectrum – AMI, RC Model Flyer, and Flying Scale Models.

Mike

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Thanks Mike, and for taking the time with the feedback, much appreciated.

Sorry we're going to loose you, Do you ever compare the quality of the mags? you know, picture quality, quality of reviews etc.. or do they all seem the same to you?

David.

[Mike Rolls]

Hi David
To be honest, the quality of pictures etc., seem pretty good for all the mags nowadays and there is little I would argue with in most of the reviews (except some seem a bit long-winded). My subs still have about a year or so to run (got two years last time round) so who knows?

However - I really do need to reduce the number of mags I take - I HATE throwing any out and storage is becoming a problem. I probably have 4,000 mags in the workshop going back to the late 1940s - and that is after being heartlessly ruthless when we moved house in '03 and selling/giving away/chucking out hundreds over the years.
There was a time (let it be whispered) when I took 13 aeromodelling mags and newsletters on a regular basis, plus some on an occassional!
Regards
Mike

[RCM&E]

Ian Lloyd: My apologies. As David mentioned, I've been into hospital for to have my wisdom teeth removed under general anaesthetic (it was actually all four), so I've been out of the office for a few days. Unfortunately, the Bushwhacker images hadn't arrived before I left so they haven't yet been uploaded. They should be waiting for me in the office now; I'm back in tomorrow, so I'll make it my first job to get them up.

[Ian Lloyd]

Tom.
I hope you are feeling better after your trip to Hospital... No worries about the Bushwhacker page, Just a noob eager to get started!!....

[David Ashby - Moderator]

4000!!! good grief Mike.
If that was me I wouldn't need furniture, I sit up at the table on a pile of mags! You could prop up your workbench with them too..

[Graham Ashby 123]

"A note for Graham Ashby in response to the Hangar 9 Piper Cub review in the June issue. The classic J3 Cub is flown solo from the back seat, with the front seat (right on the C of G) being for the occasional passenger. With such a well detailed scale model it is a shame that the pilot in the kit reviewed has been placed incorrectly. Please, oh please, move your pilot back!"

Hell's bells you're quite right ZigZag, I'll tell the confounded fellow to sit where he's supposed to for future flights. My mistake, I'm so used to seeing Super Cubs rather than J3s, I didn't even give it a second thought. Rest assured, I shall give you due mention in part 2 of the article. Thanks for pointing it out.

[Patrick Adams]

Hi Graham just a quick note to say i bought
a hanger 9 cub a short while ago and ive finished it apart from one little job to do. The saito 82a motor is a perfect fit, cowel was very thin and covering was great once ironed back on.
Anyway one job to do, iam off to move my pilot.

[Cactus]

no spinner or dome nut on your exposed cub's engine shaft, tisk tisk ;)

overall quality of RCM&E is higher than other mags btw.
just wish the forum matched, only posted 3 times coz i just can't stand the layout.
hooray i hear you all cry :p

[Graham Ashby 123]

Ah Patrick, glad it wasn't just me! What do you think of the Cub on the whole? Would be interested in your comments to see if they tie up with mine.

[Graham Ashby 123]

Hi Cactus, rest assured a spinner nut is on order. Alas I didn't have it in time for the photos. Oh, and keep posting, it's good to have you on.

[Patrick Adams]

Hi Graham ref the cub, as i opened my hanger nine box with the usual anticipation
a new kit brings. I was very impressed with what i saw, a very well pesented and packed kit.
Apart from the cowel, upon closer inspection i found lots of star cracking in the gelcoat finish and one crack that was a little more worrying. I contacted helger distribution and was rewarded with a dont give a toss attitude from the guy on the line. After a while he said he could have a look at it for me if i wanted , then promtly offered to sell me a replacement.
Anyway grumble done with. I had no problems with the rest of the kit once i had done the ironing. My screen fit perfect by the way. So realy to sum up iam very pleased with the finished plane and eagerly awaiting some fine weather for a test flight. (Cowel sorted with addition of some carbon strands inside then refinished outside)
CHECK COWEL BEFORE YOU TAKE ONE HOME IF OK THEN ENJOY IT BECAUSE ITS A FINE PLANE.

[RCM&E]

Cactus: just to let you know that we're more than aware that the forum software could do with a few tweaks here and there – indeed, it's one of the main jobs being looked at 'behind the scenes' at the moment.

If you could let me know any specific changes you'd welcome, either by posting here on the forum itself or via email, it'd be most appreciated. That obviously goes for everybody else too.

[Mike Rolls]

Tom
It would be very helpful to be able to go to the first unread post of a thread since one last visited.
Mike