[RCSE] Transmitter Repair
My Futaba 8UF is acting up. Where should I send it for repair? I need a place with quick turnaround, quality service and reasonable prices. Thanks, Erik Alber Portland Area Soaring Society Vice President The Resin Head http://NuanceHLG.8k.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] caulking for bag, which one?
I am going to make another attempt at bagging a composite wing. I'd like to try using the method a plastic sheet with caulking on 3 sides. Is there a best caulk(or a material to stay away from)? Thanks, Martin
[RCSE] Open Unlimited RES
I think it was Tom Copp that started this thread and the comments have been fascinating. Obviously everybody has their own idea about what RES/3-Function/Bent Wing is. Well here's my stab at it. Feel free to hit delete at any point. Built up RES airplanes have always been fun to fly and hard to land. They often break wings on launch, and have relatively short legs when trying to cover ground. Spot landing are a test of energy management and skill, especially in the wind. For the most part the older designs use flat bottom or other funky airfoils, (Remember the Mark Why?). The airfoils have always been rather thick to maintain strength in the wing. Not to much experimentation was ever published, or at least no definite conclusion was ever reached about optimum airfoil design for this class. When computer radios and stronger composite sailplanes came on the scene RES airplanes died the death they deserved as prime contest sailplanes. After all full house composite planes could launch higher, range further, and land slower than the RES ships. Airfoil design for camber changing full house ships became a hot topic and airfoil experimentation really took off, (pun intended). Understandably, further development on RES ships pretty much slowed down and died at this point. That doesn't mean that they couldn't be competitive today in the hands of a good pilot. If you recall Joe did ok with one at a contest here in Socal in the last year or two. As a RES coordinator for the Gulls here in San Diego I have run 4 to 6 RES contests a year for the last few years. We have had Nostalgia legal ships, a wide variety of both kit based built up, and scratch built composite ships and even the new molded RES ships all flying in the same contest. The only thing they had in common was that they were all Rudder/Elevator/Spoiler. The trick as always, has been to get enough people interested in flying RES to take the time and trouble to build something and bring it out to fly. To that end, why not consider an Open Unlimited RES class. The rules are Rudder/Elevator/Spoiler period. Open up some interest in developing higher performance RES ships without mandating that somebody spend 100 hours at the bench meticulously gluing balsa pieces. Anything goes... I'll bet after a few years of development there would be several designs that could give the majority of full house pilots a run for their money, (no I'm not crazy, RES design are getting better). Like anything else it's going to be practice and skill. You may have noticed in one of Tom's comments he made a rather veiled reference to a new toy. Given enough interest, designers and manufacturers will come out with new high performance toys. Tom, if you need a beta tester give me a call. I love to fly RES. As for classes, fly what your local club will support. I don't see a nationwide trend in any direction for RES. If you can come up with a designation that can get enough of a popular movement going nationwide, then that class should be the AMA class. Your opinion may vary... Garth RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] caulking for bag, which one?
I use the cheapest, white latex caulk I can get. 99cents at home depot when on sale. Your bag will seal better if it can fold flat without any big wrinkles in it. Doc - Original Message - From: Martin Cleary To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 8:05 PM Subject: [RCSE] caulking for bag, which one? I am going to make another attempt at bagging a composite wing. I'd like to try using the method a plastic sheet with caulking on 3 sides. Is there a best caulk(or a material to stay away from)? Thanks, Martin RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Antenna length/type and mixing
Is there a rule of thumb for the length of an antenna? I know that people run antennae through carbon booms, but that makes the entire internal antenna worthless, as the carbon absorbs the great majority of EMR. So there winds up being a little squiggle of antenna out of the back, which I think is not so great, aesthetically speaking. So I'm thinking of using a couple of pieces of music wire sticking out of the fuselage, probably aft, to work as antennae. So my questions on this are: 1: How long should the antennae be? 2: Can/should there be more than one (so that the body and its few carbon parts never completely block them)? 3: Is there a modular way to connect antenna wire? Can you use connectors with it so I don't have to resolder if I decide to put the gear in a new ship? My second question is simpler: my radio (a Futaba SkySport 4) does not mix chanels. The plans I'm building from are a V-tail. I have a few options: 1: Put an electronic mixer in the ship. Does anyone have a recommendation? 2: Put a mechanical mixer in. I don't like this idea, as space is cramped (it's a 29 wingspan. Things are tight and light.) 3: Use my brain's built-in mixing capability and give each thumb one ruddervator. 4: Use the Top Secret Hack That Makes My Radio Mix Channels. I prefer #1. Actually, I prefer #4, but I think it's a little less likely to work out. Now I'm gonna open up the TX case and fiddle with things. -J RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] Open Unlimited RES
At the NATS the last two years RES has shown a lot of support and plane development. Go to Rich Burnowski's site to see the composite RES stuff he has for sale. Also RES has passed the rules portion of the AMA rule book process and I think will be in effect this coming year as an AMA official event. So you may want to use that set of rules for your contests. Jack Iafret [EMAIL PROTECTED] Keeper of the Nostalgia Rules - Original Message - From: WARNER GARTH [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 11:04 PM Subject: [RCSE] Open Unlimited RES I think it was Tom Copp that started this thread and the comments have been fascinating. Obviously everybody has their own idea about what RES/3-Function/Bent Wing is. Well here's my stab at it. Feel free to hit delete at any point. Built up RES airplanes have always been fun to fly and hard to land. They often break wings on launch, and have relatively short legs when trying to cover ground. Spot landing are a test of energy management and skill, especially in the wind. For the most part the older designs use flat bottom or other funky airfoils, (Remember the Mark Why?). The airfoils have always been rather thick to maintain strength in the wing. Not to much experimentation was ever published, or at least no definite conclusion was ever reached about optimum airfoil design for this class. When computer radios and stronger composite sailplanes came on the scene RES airplanes died the death they deserved as prime contest sailplanes. After all full house composite planes could launch higher, range further, and land slower than the RES ships. Airfoil design for camber changing full house ships became a hot topic and airfoil experimentation really took off, (pun intended). Understandably, further development on RES ships pretty much slowed down and died at this point. That doesn't mean that they couldn't be competitive today in the hands of a good pilot. If you recall Joe did ok with one at a contest here in Socal in the last year or two. As a RES coordinator for the Gulls here in San Diego I have run 4 to 6 RES contests a year for the last few years. We have had Nostalgia legal ships, a wide variety of both kit based built up, and scratch built composite ships and even the new molded RES ships all flying in the same contest. The only thing they had in common was that they were all Rudder/Elevator/Spoiler. The trick as always, has been to get enough people interested in flying RES to take the time and trouble to build something and bring it out to fly. To that end, why not consider an Open Unlimited RES class. The rules are Rudder/Elevator/Spoiler period. Open up some interest in developing higher performance RES ships without mandating that somebody spend 100 hours at the bench meticulously gluing balsa pieces. Anything goes... I'll bet after a few years of development there would be several designs that could give the majority of full house pilots a run for their money, (no I'm not crazy, RES design are getting better). Like anything else it's going to be practice and skill. You may have noticed in one of Tom's comments he made a rather veiled reference to a new toy. Given enough interest, designers and manufacturers will come out with new high performance toys. Tom, if you need a beta tester give me a call. I love to fly RES. As for classes, fly what your local club will support. I don't see a nationwide trend in any direction for RES. If you can come up with a designation that can get enough of a popular movement going nationwide, then that class should be the AMA class. Your opinion may vary... Garth RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] RES Is Not Todays Unlimited Ship
In a message dated 11/10/01 6:09:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: there is no way RES can compete in the long haul with the ships of today. If you go with the slick airfoil, you do not thermal, you get a great thermal airfoil you do not penetrate, both cases relative to the full span camber changing wing. I love the RES/NOS contests, and I fly an ancient one with nothing special, but those days are past. Even on the day that the air is great, the odds of an RES ship beating the Unlimited ship even in the circle landing task is slim, JMHO. In 1997 I won the Nostalgia Class at Visalia. The event was actually misnamed--it was in reality RES. I was flying a nearly kit-stock, 19 year old Craft Aire Viking Mk.1. This ship easily gave up 300 ft. of altitude on every launch--but thermalled very well. It was difficult to land, enhanced by the fact that I had been flying modern planes most of the time. The plane had a score which would have placed it 51st overall in the open class. That old $65 plane beat 230 planes that weekend--most of which were kilobuck masterpieces. I agree with Marc that a RES ship cannot beat a modern glass slipper in the long haul but disagree that is cannot EVER beat a modern ship. Besides that is not the point. RES and NOS should not be expected to beat Hera's, Icons, Psychos and the like. The RES planes should be less expensive and easy to fly. The Nostalgia planes should only be nostalgic. If you want to consistently beat a bunch of Addictions you better get one and practice a lot (and borrow some genes from Joe). Most avid and true spirited Nostalgia flyers would rather do well with an unusual, rare, or old sailplane than win with the best design available for the class. RES is a bit more competitive but I think the planes should still be built up to keep the costs down. I think Visalia has the right idea here--their RES contest in May is for Builtup Bentwings. I may be a bit pollyanna here but I hope RES and Nostalgia become popular for the pure joy of flying the planes and not the competition. Mike Clancy LSF V 92 RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] RES Is Not Todays Unlimited Ship
I think Nostalgia is going to continue to be a fun, low pressure event, but RES is going to go competitive based upon what is showing up at the NATS and starting to be offered by the manufacturers. The rules for Nostalgia and RES are written to drive to the above scenario. Of course the CD can control this by his/her call out on what is legal at any particular contest, but this would kill RES early in it's life if the AMA rules for the event are not followed consistently. Manufacturers will/can not develop equipment for multiple rules sets for an event with limited participation (at this point in time). RES should grow over time with consistent rules and the manufacturers see that they can sell more than a couple of kits a month. Jack Iafret [EMAIL PROTECTED] Keeper of the Nostalgia Rules - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 11:38 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] RES Is Not Todays Unlimited Ship In a message dated 11/10/01 6:09:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: there is no way RES can compete in the long haul with the ships of today. If you go with the slick airfoil, you do not thermal, you get a great thermal airfoil you do not penetrate, both cases relative to the full span camber changing wing. I love the RES/NOS contests, and I fly an ancient one with nothing special, but those days are past. Even on the day that the air is great, the odds of an RES ship beating the Unlimited ship even in the circle landing task is slim, JMHO. In 1997 I won the Nostalgia Class at Visalia. The event was actually misnamed--it was in reality RES. I was flying a nearly kit-stock, 19 year old Craft Aire Viking Mk.1. This ship easily gave up 300 ft. of altitude on every launch--but thermalled very well. It was difficult to land, enhanced by the fact that I had been flying modern planes most of the time. The plane had a score which would have placed it 51st overall in the open class. That old $65 plane beat 230 planes that weekend--most of which were kilobuck masterpieces. I agree with Marc that a RES ship cannot beat a modern glass slipper in the long haul but disagree that is cannot EVER beat a modern ship. Besides that is not the point. RES and NOS should not be expected to beat Hera's, Icons, Psychos and the like. The RES planes should be less expensive and easy to fly. The Nostalgia planes should only be nostalgic. If you want to consistently beat a bunch of Addictions you better get one and practice a lot (and borrow some genes from Joe). Most avid and true spirited Nostalgia flyers would rather do well with an unusual, rare, or old sailplane than win with the best design available for the class. RES is a bit more competitive but I think the planes should still be built up to keep the costs down. I think Visalia has the right idea here--their RES contest in May is for Builtup Bentwings. I may be a bit pollyanna here but I hope RES and Nostalgia become popular for the pure joy of flying the planes and not the competition. Mike Clancy LSF V 92 RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] RES Is Not Todays Unlimited Ship
At 09:09 PM 11/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: I do not know who wrote this, but, if you feel that RES ships can compete with Unlimited ships of today, I would reference to Bill Friend. Bill beat his head against the wall for two years trying and really had nothing to show for it and all it did was mess up his full house skills to the point that he is out of the hobby and building an ultralight. Bill was nearly a level five and a very knowledgable pilot, but there is no way RES can compete in the long haul with the ships of today. If you go with the slick airfoil, you do not thermal, you get a great thermal airfoil you do not penetrate, both cases relative to the full span camber changing wing. I love the RES/NOS contests, and I fly an ancient one with nothing special, but those days are past. Even on the day that the air is great, the odds of an RES ship beating the Unlimited ship even in the circle landing task is slim, JMHO. Marc Oh I don't know. I have been flying RES in Unlimited contests almost exclusively for the last 5 years and I feel that I could have done little better with a full house ship. The modern full house ship has evolved into a model where stability and visibility have been compromised to maximize performance. Unless you have excellent eyes and good reflexes, then most flyers would score better with a more stable model even though performance might suffer a little. I have beaten a lot of Unlimited full house ships with my RES model over the last 5 years. Haven't won any Unlimited contests lately but that's not the reason I go to contests. The reason I go to contests is to have fun. When it stops being fun, I will find a new hobby. So far, I've been having fun for over 50 years. He who thinks that second place is the first loser has already lost a wonderful hobby and gained an obsession. :-) Chuck Anderson RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [RCSE] Thermal and slope sims
You could try crrcsim; it's free and it can work with your transmitter if you build the interface-cable or buy it from Jan Kansky; I do believe there's a problem with JR-transmitters, but apart from that, I like it a lot (I use Futaba and Multiplex). You can so thermal, slope and DS. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crrcsim/files/ FMS is not bad either, but I don't think ther's DS in there. http://simulator.home.pages.de/ Stefan. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: zaterdag 10 november 2001 23:36 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: [RCSE] Thermal and slope sims Due to lack of daylight flying time, I am looking for references from users of the R/C glider, and slope simulators. Must be capable of using my own tx. Which program out there is the best for thermaling, sloping, is it possible to practice DS on them? Paul Cox Louisville, KY LSF1/LASS -Nice landing, that won't be hard to fix... RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] RDS/Sonic
I am in the process of building a Bowman's Sonic. Has anyone built this plane using the RDS system. Any construction tips? How well dose it hold up to combat? Bill RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] RDS/Sonic
Bill. . .I don't know this airplane, but as to how the RDS works in combat ships, I've heard from several fellows with foamies that if the drive shafts are selected to allow some surface flex that the RDS take a pounding and keep on going like that famous Energizer Pink Bunny! - Original Message - From: Bill Rose Haymaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: soaring [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 9:00 AM Subject: [RCSE] RDS/Sonic I am in the process of building a Bowman's Sonic. Has anyone built this plane using the RDS system. Any construction tips? How well dose it hold up to combat? Bill RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
Jack; Chuck is absolutely right on this issue. RES gliders have difficulty maintaining optimum line up during approach. Once off the perfect approach heading, correcting back to center line is extremely difficult. Consequently, loss of landing points is most likely to occur from lateral displacement. Although what you say is true about the relative size of the area for a perfect landing score, that's largely irrelevant in RES competition. Let's take a much more likely case where you're displaced two feet (24) from the center line. With the current runway landing, that's going to cost you 23 landing points. If the landing were being done to a spot on a standard 25 foot AMA tape, that same landing would only cost you 8 landing points. The bias becomes even more extreme as you're farther from the runway centerline. Assume your nose is six feet from runway centerline after landing. With a runway landing, you'll lose 71 landing points whereas the same landing on a tape only costs 24 points. IOW, landing points decrement at a three to one ratio from lateral displacement during a runway instead of a spot landing. Fred RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same time as someone else who may not be experienced. Richard Hallett wrote: Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in defining skill. snip snip My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to say instead of RE the two servo class meaning the only limitation will be the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with just two servos beyond the expected?? Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a contest requiring a balsa based model. Rick -- Lincoln Ross RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Re: glassed leading edges on builtup wing
An intermediate possibility is Sig sanding sealer. Probably not as hard, certainly not as strong, but a fairly pleasant job if you spread it out fast before it starts to dry. You can make a squeegee out of end grain balsa sheet. Sands nicely. You can put the glass on at an angle to increase your torsional stiffness, maybe. Kristopher wrote: I have an old 2m builtup plane I am finnaly getting around to finishing up. The leading edge is fully sheeted, but the sheeting is fairly soft. I have thought about glassing this leading edge dbox with light glass and epoxy, then covering the back half with oracover. Has anyone done this before? Seems to me it would greatly improve durability. Kristopher -- Lincoln Ross RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] RES vs unlimited
As always, Chuck knows what he's talking about (see below)! If you had the old spot landing task, RES ships would be fully competitive in Unlimited, at least in the hands of a good flyer. This would open up a lot of interesting possibilities for design improvements, potentially bring in some new blood, lower the average cost of planes, and possibly have other benefits as well. As I've said on here before, I dream of the day when an RES ship wins unlimited in a big contest. However, if the contest is decided by landing points on a runway or shuffleboard landing task, that ain't gonna happen. There is no practical difference in the thermaling performance between the full house model and RES. The only real difference is in the ability to float down the landing string at very low speed and spike the spot when the time runs out. Flaps will always have a landing advantage but the advantage can be minimized by getting rid of landing on a string as done at the nats. Since RES models do not have the precise lateral control near touchdown, landing exactly on the string is much more difficult. Going back to the L4 landing option would reduce the penalty for slight lateral deviations and eliminate the ability to slowly float down the string waiting for the countdown to reach zero. Chuck Anderson __ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
- Original Message - From: Lincoln Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same time as someone else who may not be experienced. Richard Hallett wrote: Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in defining skill. snip snip My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to say instead of RE the two servo class meaning the only limitation will be the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with just two servos beyond the expected?? Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a contest requiring a balsa based model. Rick -- Lincoln Ross RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re:IO and [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
What a lead-in! I recently discovered that I still have my IO and will shortly be advertising it for sale. I agree, it is better than a Sagitta 600 on keeping the landing heading and it also has a leg up on the Sagitta 600 in L/D. If anyone is interested in acquiring a RTF IO, drop me a line - Original Message - From: Lincoln Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same time as someone else who may not be experienced. Richard Hallett wrote: Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in defining skill. snip snip My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to say instead of RE the two servo class meaning the only limitation will be the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with just two servos beyond the expected?? Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a contest requiring a balsa based model. Rick -- Lincoln Ross RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Single Stick Transmitters
There was some talk about Single Stick Transmitters a little while ago, and I have three. That I am selling all of them. One is a Kraft and the other two are Royal's. I just thought I would give the gang on the list first shot at them before I E-bay them... Dr. Dan Williams Broomfield, Co RMSA/PPSS/SWSA Bad roads bring good people and good roads bring bad people. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Thermal and slope sims
Due to lack of daylight flying time, I am looking for references from users of the R/C glider, and slope simulators. Must be capable of using my own tx. Which program out there is the best for thermaling, sloping, is it possible to practice DS on them? Paul Cox Louisville, KY LSF1/LASS -Nice landing, that won't be hard to fix... RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] Multiplex 3030 transmitter antenna alternatives?
Jay, I was having trouble with my vision when I first installed the rubber duck antenna on it. It scrambled the data stored in the eprom that stored model setup. The problem was Rf leaking inside of the Tx. I had attached the lead from the rubber duck to the pc board where the metal tab came out to attach to the end of the stock antenna. This left about an inch of antenna inside my vision to leak Rf into anything that would catch it. After some trouble shooting I finally realized what was causing the problem. I attached the lead from the rubber duck to the place where it would have connected to the stock antenna. No more internal antenna, no more Rf leaks and the duck worked fine after that. Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Elvis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] Multiplex 3030 transmitter antenna alternatives? Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:24:31 -0800 Recently tried using a rubber ducky type antenna with my Multiplex 3030 transmitter. It appears that the use of this particular rubber ducky antenna interferes with the transmitter's display, i.e., the normal display contents are scrabbled. For those who might be interested, there is further documentation of the problem at following web site: http://www.monkeytumble.com/mpx3030/antenna.htm Two questions: 1) Have any other mc 3030 users encountered this problem? 2) Has anyone found a rubber ducky type antenna that works well with the 3030? I'm looking for a shorter antenna alternative for DLG flying. Thanks, Jay Decker Portland, OR RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Wing induced drag coefficient
In Dr. Ing. Ferdinando Gale's book, Aerodynamics Of Radioguided Sailplanes,
(and in Theory of wing sections), the formula on p. 69 states that :Cdi=Cl
squared/pi x ARw for AR of infinite aspect ratio, and Cln/pi
x{(1/ARn)-(1/ARw)} for data obtained from a smaller aspect ratio than the
actual wing. Yet on p. 74 and the excercise on B-3 prob. B-9, the formula is
stated as 2x these fromulas. As this coefficient is needed in order to
obtain the over all drag of the airframe, which is the proper formula? Or am
I just missing something obvious?
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and
unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] RES models
I've been following the recent discussions about suitable RES models. What's wrong with dusting off that old Off-the-Ground/Ace Quasoar and building that up as-originally-designed polyhedral, but with spoilers instead of flaps? RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
Message: 5 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:54:52 -0500 From: "Richard Hallett" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two Down here in NZ we have a 2 metre class which allows the use of two servos only. A few years ago some guys had a serious go and created a model with rudder, elevator, ailerons and flaps for launch, all with only two servos. How you may be wondering, well I'll see if you can work it out, send in your answer and I'll tell you in a week or so who gets it right. NO answer from NZ accepted!!! Les. snipMy two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able tosay instead of RE the "two servo class" meaning the only limitation will bethe two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance withjust two servos beyond the expected??snip
