David Ashby - Moderator Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Some subscribers may have received their mag' today so I just wanted to say that I'll get the videos mentioned up on our video page here on Monday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchweight Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Got mine today, looks good. There's a full double page photo of a good friend of mine (Derrick Perchard) flying the Whitchurch Models Gloster Javelin (pg 94-95). I'd really like to get a copy of the original photo for him, can you help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted April 4, 2009 Author Share Posted April 4, 2009 Thanks Shaun - Hmm, not sure who took that. I'll find out and let you know. It could well be an Alex Whittaker shot but I'll check. Has anyone spotted the terrible caption error .... Edited By David Ashby - RCME moderator on 04/04/2009 12:52:02 Edited By David Ashby - RCME moderator on 04/04/2009 12:52:15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchweight Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Not yet! Just read the review of the BH Cessna 182. Top tip if you wish to cyano any transparencies such as light lenses and covers, in the scale model kit world, they dip the transparency into Johnson's Klear / Future, an acrylic floor polish that dries crystal clear. In fact it makes them sparkle! The plastic is effectively sealed in and you can then cyano without the fogging. I don't see why it wouldn't work in this context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Ireland Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Mine arrived this morning too, something to read in the pub this afternoon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdy Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 After rescuing my copy from my brothers trousers I got reading. Its great, but I won't pass coment till I have finished reading it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdy Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Is it: a. p111, where the camra isn't any where near the trim or b. p79, where the weights show are in fact iron, not lead, as shown by the Fe, and by the fact that they are magnetic- and I know because I have some. And no, that isn't nit picking..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Ireland Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Excellent article by Pete Lowe, very informative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Livsey Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Caption error? Is it parting shot? That's an F/A 18 Hornet, not an F-14 Tomcat. Another great read. RCM&E still the best mag around. Looking forward to a full days flying tomorrow. Forecast for the guys at Boston MAC looking good! Cheers Gavin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry Pollard Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Wish I could get my DVD from Peter Hawtin, am I the only one or are there more of us Have PM ed you on this David Garry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted April 5, 2009 Author Share Posted April 5, 2009 Well done Gavin not my error I hasten to add but still a bit Garry - no problem, I'll take that up and PM you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eck Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Great issue, guys - Not one, not two, but THREE EDF reviews! The JP MiG 15 in particular looks droolworthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 The notification in your last issue that moving a wire from outside to inside a Tx to make it less vulnerable would invalidate the CE markings and OFCOM statutes cannot be correct, these markings and inspections are for compliance with power output and compliance with statutes and have nothing to do with the routing of cables, if this was ever taken to court because of an acident the defence would be that the wire was moved to make it less vulnerable to damage and therefore was an improvement. To take the inferance in the statement to its ultimate conclusion, I as a builder of a model would not be allowed to substitute, horns, pushrods or use servo's other than those specified by the manufacturer or possibly use radio equipment other than that used in the original airframe, this is plainly a nonsence. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 Thanks Mike, that's the BMFA press release in our news pages You're refering to? Just for those who haven't seen it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryce Allcorn - BritFlight.co.uk Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Just to add to Mike's post, modifying the product from the manufacturers specification in any way will invalidate CE approval unless the manufacturer has recommended the change and has self-certified or had tested the product with that change in place. This doesn't meant it is unsafe, but just that it is not how the manufacturer specified and tested the product so therefore it is different. CE approval is simply that the relevant European health, safety and environmental protection legislation (product directive) is complied with and can be almost anything! I believe that an RC plane (plane itself, not electronics) has to be CE approved if bigger than 2.5m or if designed for use by someone younger than 14years old. The electronic all have to be approved. Also routing of cables is quite a big part of CE approval (depending on standards relevant and voltage) from the point of creepage and clearance and maintaining specified safe distances from LV and HV for example - not necessarily relevant to a LV RX but a valid point none the less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Further to the above, if indeed that is the case, using a Spektrum module in a Futaba Tx will by defalut not have Futaba's RECOMMEDATION and therefore will invalidate the CE approval? This would then mean that all module based Tx's can not be used with an after manufacturers module, I wonder why all these manufacturers are wasting their time producing them? Another thought, I have modified my car to have a SATNAV and Hands free phone, have I invalidated the "Construction Use" Regulations and indeed the "Type Approval" Clearly not. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryce Allcorn - BritFlight.co.uk Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 No Mike, the example you have given using 2 different makes of equipment makes no difference because you have not modified the equipment. CE approval is for the item itself, not something used with it. For example a tv remote that says 2 x AA batteries required is approved regardless of what make of batteries you install. With the car again it isn't relevant because I'm guessing you are plugging into the 12 volt supply socket - which is designed to provide a 12 supply. If you modified the wiring to provide a different socket then yes, you have affected the approval by modifying it. The point is modifying the item from its specification. A RX and TX would be tested independently because the approval is for each item, not the 2 together. If you bought a transmitter pack (TX, RX, servos, lipo's etc.) each item is tested/approved - not the pack itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 No Bryce I think it is you that are wrong, manufactures supply in car phones kits to be installed into the permenant wiring of a car, the same applies to SATNAV equipment. The CE directive is a Health and Safety compliance documentation to ensure that the output from a product does not harm any individual or domestic animal, by using a different module in a Tx you have modified the output of that equipment, using your argument the equipment no longer complies with the CE directive. See: http://www.siracertification.com/UserDocs/New%20approach%20directives/lvd.pdf Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Just read this in the directive: The Regulations apply to all electrical equipment, subject to the exemptions shown at Annex B, that is designed or adapted for use between 50 and 1,000 volts (in the case of alternating current) or 75 and 1,500 volts (in the case of direct current). The Regulations cover domestic electrical equipment and equipment that is intended for use in the workplace. Now going to read Annex B Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryce Allcorn - BritFlight.co.uk Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Mike, I spent a good few years type approving products for a safety test house, working with type approval for CE (EU & UK), UL, ULc and so on for domestic products inc. brown goods and products under the medical directive. CE approval also includes the Low Voltage directive. BTW, car kits are installed using DIN connectors, not cut into the wiring. It is really hard to explain and takes a fairly long time to be trained, a google search will not explain it in a way that should be taken as gospel I'll try to explain it differently: Take a transmitter which has been approved (CE inc EMC - for example) - the transmitter will be tested to make sure it meets the relevant approval(s) - the output of it will be tested (EMC) as part of that approval. By using a different receiver you have not changed the output from the transmitter. Next take a receiver which has been approved (CE inc EMC - for example) - the reciver will be tested to make sure it meets the relevant approval(s) - the output (low voltage analogue or digital signal) will be checked to make sure it meets the approval. The transmitter cannot make the output of the receiver be greater than that the receiver can produce and has already been approved - it simply can't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Bruce I do understand where you are comming from, but unfortunatly the above does not cover the alteration to the signal output of the Tx by using a different manufacturers product, by using a Spektrum module in a FF9 lets say, you have altered the ouput from 35Mhz as approved on its CE markings too 2.4Ghz, this completly changes the Tx output irrespective of the Rx. By the way car kits are fitted using any means that are available, most reccomend cutting into the wireing and soldering the wires to ensure a proper contact. To qualify myself as you found it neccesary to do, I spent 40 years in Courts on interpritation of law, contracts, and Health and Safety legislation. From what I have read so far, the CE markings are about quality control procedures and Health and Saftey legislation, I can not find at this time anything that would constitute a breach of the legilation by moving a wire from outside to inside a Tx case, which is where we started. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 From the EMC Regulations: ‘Apparatus’: in the context of the EMC Regulations, “apparatus” is defined as a product, with an intrinsic function intended for the end user, and supplied or intended for supply, or taken into service, or intended to be taken into service as a single commercial unit. Therefore Tx's and Rx's must be tested as a single commercial unit, which you can not do if using an after market module. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I have now read through the EMC Regulations and again I can find nothing which would constitute a breach by moving an external wire from a module to inside the case of a Tx. See: http://www.siracertification.com/UserDocs/New%20approach%20directives/emc.pdf If anyone can find the relevant legislation that would apply, please do point me in the right direction I would love to see it. Further to all the above, its a bit like the BMFA saying that all clubs must have a Child and Vulnerable Adult policy, this may be a requirement of the BMFA and or the insurance, but it is not a requirement of the Health and Safety at Work Act, as most amature clubs and its members are not at work, therefore the Act does not apply. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultymate Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 The Spektrum modules are CE approved specifically for use in certain Futaba transmitters ie the FF9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Johnson Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 But not by Futaba who are the original manufacturer who has to certify the output of the Tx as a single commercial unit. Mike 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.