[RCSE] 8-18 poway contest
Fred, thanks for the kind words. It's good to be back in the soaring game. Career and family have stretched my free time in recent years, but I am really enjoying my foray back into it. BTW, Fred kicked out butts at the club contest. He is amazingly consistent! Aaron Valdes Aerospace Engineer TRW Unmanned Air Vehicles 858.592.4201 direct 858.592.4228 fax RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [RCSE] Re: M5 end pins or not
I agree with John O'sullivan. I'm sorry you had a problem with Fred. But the fact is, it's a great receiver regardless of the pin placement. End pins often make them too long, while the M5 pins often make them too tall. It's a moot point. I am sure Fred is fuming over the fact that you posted part of his personal message on a public forum and I hope he does not have any reservations about making products for R/C Soaring as a result. Scott Wathey -Original Message- From: John O'Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 1:55 PM To: Ed Berris Cc: Fred Marks; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RCSE] Re: M5 end pins or not Ed Berris wrote: Fred, you have addressed the G connector but that's not what the conversation was about. My e-mail to you was about the demeaning and angry reply to a customers' input. This note just amplifies that. What I was trying to do by asking your customers for their input on what they would like to see was to give you some information that I thought might encourage you to offer this option. Instead you have chosen a rather combative response. Very strange. Don't you care what your customers would like to have from you? What a shame that you have chosen to be so closed minded and angry sounding. Perhaps a better response might have been to consider what you are hearing. If for some reason it is not feasible, you could always just say thanks for your input. In that way you wouldn't sound so offensive and you would make a better impression on the very people that have helped make you successful. Think about it. Ed Ed: You had an issue with Fred Marks, to which he replied to you personally. As a private exchange, I think you over-stepped good manners in partially quoting on the exchange, out of context, parts of your interpretation of Fred's replies to you. If you are asking for support in your vendetta against Fred, you should at least provide all the information on which you are basing your grieviences. I have no association with Fred. but have admired the way he has worked to make the cutting edge technology in R/C gear available to the masses at an affordable price. I, too prefer end connections to my receiver and Fred has provided this feature in many of his receivers. I would have posted to your survey, but I felt that it was a one-upmanship thing on your part. If you have a problem with FMA, deal with it on a personal basis. John O'Sullivan Nova Scotia 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] DARTS contest
Jim B., Thanks for posting that excel file! That was just what I needed to convince me to order a LoLo. It was really interesting to see the rounds in this format and dude that was some really fine flying. Looked like rounds 4 and 5 were in some really tough air, but a 10 minute sled ride? Pretty impressive stuff! Do you think a GPS system could be developed that would be able to download data that would let you see the flight in 3D? That would be too cool!!! Therms, Joe Original Message Follows From: James V. Bacus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: RCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Jack Strother [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RCSE] DARTS contest Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:05:55 -0500 I recorded both days of the DARTS contest on the LoLo logger, but below is a link to an Excel workbook (approx. 3mb in size) of just the five rounds flown on Sunday, the better of my two contest days. This is using the latest LoLo software that has a few more stats in it. ftp://66.106.109.240/pub/DARTS_MoM_081902.xls I am still a little surprised and examining the data, I knew the air was tough but jeez, I never got above launch height on any flight, and I did max one of those 13 minute rounds where I flew to the limits of my vision downwind, but obviously it wasn't very high. I hit a 710 ft launch in one round, I wish my launches were a bit more consistent, we were being assigned to different winches on each round, but the variation is probably more due to conditions. Jim At 07:13 PM 8/19/2002, James V. Bacus wrote: Maybe the lack of attendance was due to weather, there are usually about 10 more guys at this contest, but too bad for them because this was an exciting one. You see, sunny and calm and all good air makes for a nice day out, but does not test the pilots flying and air reading skills much. Take some marginal weather, add a little wind, then use a seeded man on man format preferably with rounds just long enough that most people can't max them and the game gets very interesting. This was what it was all about last weekend and it was some of the most competitive flying I have experienced this year. It's in conditions like this you see pilots have to make tough decisions in a rapid fashion, make hero or zero moves, and make saves and extend flights in exciting ways. It's in conditions like this that pilots can bury the flight group by being the guy that can use his wisdom, skills or strategy to stay up a few minutes longer than the rest of the guys in the flight group. And there was some burying being dished up Dayton style, a dish served cold. But with five rounds flown each day, there was enough opportunities to either serve that dish, or eat it, even in the same day. Thanks to Bob Massmann CD, Jerry Shape CD and the entire DARTS club for hosting a straight up good time contest in a seeded MoM format. The DARTS club field is a very nice field to contest from, they have a shelter to provide shade and yuk, rain protection if needed. They have seven strong real balls winches with all the equipment to do the MoM format in style. Hats off to all the pilots this weekend, that was some awesome flying guys, that's what it is all about. Jim At 05:39 PM 8/19/2002, Shape wrote: Thanks for the kind words Jack. If I do say so myself, Sunday was one of the more interresting contests I have attended or CD. Wild scoring changes all day. One why to make it a fliers contest is to make the tasks for difficult. I don't have the sheets in front of me but I don't think there was more than 8 maxes in the 13 min rounds, but the level of competion was outstanding. Jerry Shape - Original Message - From: Jack Strother [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: RCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 1:04 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] DARTS contest The D.A.R.T.S. contest had 18-19 contestants per day. Not enough for a Level V contest, either day. 8-) Its a shame that local support for this fine seeded Man On Man contest is waning. The Darts have been doing this contest for years. Day one was hosted by CD Bob Massmann with 8 minute tasks all day, Winds gusting to 20 mph from the south, most of the day kept your game tight. Thermals, if any, were tight and fast. Most tried sloping on the tree lines, Paul Siegle has left his Zenith in the top of one of the biggest trees. The S.O.A.R. was well represented by Jim Bacus, Tom Kallevang, and Jack Strother 1st - Jack Strother 2nd - Don Harris 3rd -Tom Kallevang ( I think) 4th - Jim Bacus 5th - I forgot. Day 2 was hosted by CD Jerry Shape, who was inspired by his attendance to the Chicago Fred eariler this year. started the day off with a 10 minute task, three 13 minute tasks and another 10 minute task to finish up. The winds were WSW and variable. total overcast day with storms looming to the south and east. A very interesting day, where you had better know
[RCSE] BSS Mid-AM
The Bluegrass Soaring Society will hold its 26th Annual Mid-America contest at Jacobson Park in Lexington KY on August 24th and 25th (OVSS contest #6). Classes to be flown will be Unlimited, Standard (yes, you can fly 2M in Standard) and RES. Duration tasks will be announced on the day of each contest, with standard L6 landing for both days.. SKEGS WILL BE ALLOWED ON ALL CLASSES OF SAILPLANES FLOWN. Fees per day will be $10.00 for one class, $15.00 for 2 classes and $20.00 for all 3 classes flown. Your friendly CDs will be Frank Foster (Aug 24th) and AJ Bhattacharyya (Aug 25th). Awards will be given for 1st through 4th place on both days with a single award for best 2 day overall score. Lunch will be served on Saturday the 24th, compliments of the BSS. Dinner will be at Mi Mexico on Richmond Road following Saturdays contest. Directions to the contest and area hotel information can be found on our old web site (still functional) at :http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/bluesoar/. Come one. Come all. http://members.aol.com/bgsoaring/index.html __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] Changing TX frequency on a JR 8103 module?
I understand that the new JR radios carry a warning NOT to Change the crystal in the module, against the FCC Rules. .bc([EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.widomaker.com/~conk Williamsburg, VA 23185 On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Tom Watson wrote: This issue has come up at least twice in the past year or so...and it seems that every time it does, Horizon gives a different response (last time, they said swap TX crystals to your hearts' content; this time, they're saying no). Bottom line: I don't believe anything Horizon says. Last go-around, I think I posted an extensive article on radios that I found a couple of years ago, which includes detailed discussion on why the TX RF deck (i.e. the module) should be tuned for a specific frequency and why, in fact, a given tuning 'point' cannot possibly cover all channels in a band. I can dig it up again if there's interest. You'll hear testimony here from people who switch crystals anyway to save the cost of a module (foolish, IMHO) and it will work sometimes, but I don't think the risk is worth it (and the risk is not just to your plane, but to others whose channel could be stepped on from a poorly configured TX). Bottom line: Sounds like the choice is yours, but personally, I'll keep a separate module for each channel I fly. Your mileage can and will differ, so no need for someone to start a religious war here... Tom --- Original Message --- From: Craig Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] Changing TX frequency on a JR 8103 module? Does anyone know _definitively_ whether a Tx module is tuned for a given channel? For example, I purchased my 8103 on channel 26 (72MHz) and I've had no problems using a channel 22 crystal in the same module. However, I recently checked with Horizon Hobbies and they hinted that the module itself needs to be tuned to the specific crystal being used. (The salesperson even went so far as to recommend buying the Tx/Rx crystals in pairs so they would be matched!) 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] Re: M5 end pins or not
I'm not sure what input Fred has in this matter. He is not manufacturing the rec's, I think they are being fabricated elsewhere. Retooling may not really be an option for this design at this point. Hopefully, he is looking at maybe an 8 or nine channel rec for the future using similar technology and maybe our input could be used in the design f the next generation. I noticed 'end' plugs a several years back when I bought my 'new' radio (JR-642). I had seen Futaba and others with their top plugs, but I typically like small models, and the JR R-600 rec looked real nice and small. That was more influence on my purchase then any other. I felt that any major brand radio would be functional, reliable and fairly easy to use. But the smaller rec would fit my models better. Thus I am a JR shop. I hope that Fred will ultimately accept the input from users (both current and potential) when working on future projects. .bc([EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.widomaker.com/~conk Williamsburg, VA 23185 On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, John Erickson wrote: Gents, I understand that it is hard to re-tool a design. The manufacturer thinks about this before starting production. That being said, for the uses of a small, dual conversion receiver, I can only think of small fuselages and an end plug is the way to go. The top plug uses up about 1/2 of space and there is always a kink in the wiring. The end plugs on a receiver like the Hitec SuperSlim are a fine design for minimal fuselage planes. JE -- Erickson Architects John R. Erickson, AIA From: Ed Berris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:40:59 -0700 To: Fred Marks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] Re: M5 end pins or not Fred, you have addressed the G connector but that's not what the conversation was about. My e-mail to you was about the demeaning and angry reply to a customers' input. This note just amplifies that. What I was trying to do by asking your customers for their input on what they would like to see was to give you some information that I thought might encourage you to offer this option. Instead you have chosen a rather combative response. Very strange. Don't you care what your customers would like to have from you? What a shame that you have chosen to be so closed minded and angry sounding. Perhaps a better response might have been to consider what you are hearing. If for some reason it is not feasible, you could always just say thanks for your input. In that way you wouldn't sound so offensive and you would make a better impression on the very people that have helped make you successful. Think about it. Ed - Original Message - From: Fred Marks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ed Berris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 11:31 AM Subject: Re: M5 end pins or not Ed, If you think uit is practical to have evry manufaturer revert to the old *G connector, we do have a difference of opinion. We have always been very responsive toour customers and I resent the implication that we are not. Fred - Original Message - From: Ed Berris [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 1:57 PM Subject: M5 end pins or not Fred, I'll continue to send the posts that I have been receiving so that you can see for yourself what your customers would like but I must admit that a couple of the replies that I have seen from you seem to suggest you really don't care what customers would like to see. Maybe I misread your response regarding Mark Miller's suggestion but it had a rather sarcastic ring to it when you responded by saying: And a 4th, impractical, one. You credited someone that agreed with the idea of top load plugs as being Smart So let's see if I get this. If someone agrees with you they are smart? But, if they don't then they are idiots? Is that about right, Fred? I don't know, but I was lucky enough to own and operate two very successful companies. A good part of our success came from politely listening to my customers. Smug or sarcastic replies just never seemed to go over very well. How about keeping an open mind? Ed 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-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] Changing TX frequency on a JR 8103 module?
Hi guys OKmost of the radio manufacturers have very broadband RF sections on their low to mid priced transmittersthose with no module. You can change the crystal in these...but, like horizon noted...i wouldn't go over 15 or 20 channels one way or the other...you will end up with too much of a mismatch and high SWR...this limits the power actually getting out of the antenna and the reflected RF doesn¹t do the output transistor any good either. The transmitters with modules are usually tuned and matched to even tighter tolerances so that changing a crystal may throw you into some high SWR problems...the flip side is that since the crystal isn't user replaceable it would make it illegal to change in the eyes of the FCC...and by extension if after changing a module crystal you had a crash and hurt someone, you would be guilty of negligence in the eyes of the law...with federal law to back it upthey are not that expensivebuy a separate transmitter module. Kevin O'Dell N0IRW RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] The X-C boys out west are doing just that.
Joe, check out http://xcsoaring.com/, I think that they have some articles on it. You're right way kool, but I suspect that the equipment is bigger than our contest airplanes will allow. Jack At 08:00 AM 8/20/2002 -0500, you wrote: Jim B., Thanks for posting that excel file! That was just what I needed to convince me to order a LoLo. It was really interesting to see the rounds in this format and dude that was some really fine flying. Looked like rounds 4 and 5 were in some really tough air, but a 10 minute sled ride? Pretty impressive stuff! Do you think a GPS system could be developed that would be able to download data that would let you see the flight in 3D? That would be too cool!!! Therms, Joe Original Message Follows From: James V. Bacus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: RCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Jack Strother [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RCSE] DARTS contest Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:05:55 -0500 I recorded both days of the DARTS contest on the LoLo logger, but below is a link to an Excel workbook (approx. 3mb in size) of just the five rounds flown on Sunday, the better of my two contest days. This is using the latest LoLo software that has a few more stats in it. ftp://66.106.109.240/pub/DARTS_MoM_081902.xls I am still a little surprised and examining the data, I knew the air was tough but jeez, I never got above launch height on any flight, and I did max one of those 13 minute rounds where I flew to the limits of my vision downwind, but obviously it wasn't very high. I hit a 710 ft launch in one round, I wish my launches were a bit more consistent, we were being assigned to different winches on each round, but the variation is probably more due to conditions. Jim At 07:13 PM 8/19/2002, James V. Bacus wrote: Maybe the lack of attendance was due to weather, there are usually about 10 more guys at this contest, but too bad for them because this was an exciting one. You see, sunny and calm and all good air makes for a nice day out, but does not test the pilots flying and air reading skills much. Take some marginal weather, add a little wind, then use a seeded man on man format preferably with rounds just long enough that most people can't max them and the game gets very interesting. This was what it was all about last weekend and it was some of the most competitive flying I have experienced this year. It's in conditions like this you see pilots have to make tough decisions in a rapid fashion, make hero or zero moves, and make saves and extend flights in exciting ways. It's in conditions like this that pilots can bury the flight group by being the guy that can use his wisdom, skills or strategy to stay up a few minutes longer than the rest of the guys in the flight group. And there was some burying being dished up Dayton style, a dish served cold. But with five rounds flown each day, there was enough opportunities to either serve that dish, or eat it, even in the same day. Thanks to Bob Massmann CD, Jerry Shape CD and the entire DARTS club for hosting a straight up good time contest in a seeded MoM format. The DARTS club field is a very nice field to contest from, they have a shelter to provide shade and yuk, rain protection if needed. They have seven strong real balls winches with all the equipment to do the MoM format in style. Hats off to all the pilots this weekend, that was some awesome flying guys, that's what it is all about. Jim At 05:39 PM 8/19/2002, Shape wrote: Thanks for the kind words Jack. If I do say so myself, Sunday was one of the more interresting contests I have attended or CD. Wild scoring changes all day. One why to make it a fliers contest is to make the tasks for difficult. I don't have the sheets in front of me but I don't think there was more than 8 maxes in the 13 min rounds, but the level of competion was outstanding. Jerry Shape - Original Message - From: Jack Strother [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: RCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 1:04 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] DARTS contest The D.A.R.T.S. contest had 18-19 contestants per day. Not enough for a Level V contest, either day. 8-) Its a shame that local support for this fine seeded Man On Man contest is waning. The Darts have been doing this contest for years. Day one was hosted by CD Bob Massmann with 8 minute tasks all day, Winds gusting to 20 mph from the south, most of the day kept your game tight. Thermals, if any, were tight and fast. Most tried sloping on the tree lines, Paul Siegle has left his Zenith in the top of one of the biggest trees. The S.O.A.R. was well represented by Jim Bacus, Tom Kallevang, and Jack Strother 1st - Jack Strother 2nd - Don Harris 3rd -Tom Kallevang ( I think) 4th - Jim Bacus 5th - I forgot. Day 2 was hosted by CD Jerry Shape, who was inspired by his attendance to the Chicago Fred eariler this year. started the day off with a
[RCSE] SKEGS WILL BE ALLOWED ON ALL CLASSES OF SAILPLANES FLOWN.
Just a tongue in check notice, but I am seeing this kind of header in many of the contest around the area. The rules change proposal cycle period is real close to being over. Would someone Please !!! submit a rules change proposal to remove the skeg limitation from RES, or at least make it option able. Jack Strother LSF President Loveland, OHLSF 2948 RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] GPS system was The X-C boys out west are doing just that.
Do you think a GPS system could be developed that would be able to download data that would let you see the flight in 3D? That would be too cool!!! Yes if the market was there, one can buy small GPS units that are about the size of a large postage stamp with a weight of ~8grams. Add an antenna ~8 gms and a small battery and one could have a system good for several hours the size of a mini servo. This is purely a question of market size, If one were to sell only 1 unit, it would cost 10K+, if one sold 10K units then it would be about $150.00 To give you an example: The 8gm GPS is made by uBlox, it has an internal CPU that is idle 40% of the time, so it has more than enough CPU horsepower to log all of the flight data, the caveat being that the software development kit that allows you to download your own custom code to the ublox receiver is $5000 (this was the price 18 months ago when I last checked) Next Item to consider: without local correction GPS altitude is not so accurate, +/- 50m and barometric pressure has al sorts of problems with a good static reference port that is not effected by airspeed. The GPS can be made much more accurate, (+/-10cm) , but this requires more equipment a ground station that records the current atmospheric distortions of the GPS signals, and a more capable receiver in the plane. One can do amazing things with the technology, it is simply a problem of wether or not the market would support such efforts. Using the similar (slightly larger) technology I built a small unit the size of a computer mouse to put in my teenagers car.. The whole purpose of the device: Friend: How fast is this car.. Son: I can't show you, my Dad is an AS***OLE and put this tracking device in that records when I speed. I don't even need to look at the data, it's just there as a reminder that Dad is watching and as a outlet to avoid peer pressure. Paul RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Futaba Super 8
The Super 8 is sold. Thanks to all that responded. Maurice
[RCSE] Mark Gellart
Hey MarkPing me will ya?? Brian _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Please help me assess slope!
As you might have guessed I am a newbie on the brink of buying a foamie trainer. Anyway, today I went out and did an examination of my local slope. I've never seen anyone flying there and it's not listed as a site. Since I do not own a car this location is my only option. The slope is actually a huge man-made conical hill which was once used for skiing. It's 100m (300ft) high with slopes varying from vertical to a gentle slope. It has faces in every direction meaning that it should provide lift with any wind direction. Furthermore it's covered in high grass! That's the good news. The bad news is that there are floodlights, pylons, lifts and overhead cables. Most of these are concentrated towards the top of the hill. I'm wondering if would be possible to fly half way up the slope where there are less obstacles. Is this possible from a lift/turbulence point of view? Then I'm also curious about how to land. I know that aircraft always land into the wind but that would mean flying away from the hill...? Thanks in advance Gareth RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [RCSE] Please help me assess slope!
Gareth, -Yes, a slope will often work midway to the top. -Landing is often quite challenging on the slope. The most obvious way is by crabbing along the face of the slope. However, there are many, many different ways. The best of which will depend on the wind, the slope, your plane and personal preference. Each is tough to accurately describe. My current favorite is to loop into a landing. -The Cardinal rule of slope evaluation is: The only way to know is to FLY it. The only way to guess is to SEE it. We in cyberspace can guess, estimate and hope but with out seeing it, we have only a small chance of being accurate. Given what you've said, your site certainly seems plausible... Sorry to be so guarded but I've been fooled many times. Bill Swingle Janesville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RCSE] Please help me assess slope!
Sounds like a very manageable slope. Yes you can probably fly halfway up successfully. Two thirds might be better. Slope landings are basically done across the slope, as close to into the wind as you can get without flying away from the slope. If the lift is strong, you have to start out down below you, and bring the plane across the slope face while climbing up the slope to slow the plane. In gentle slope lift, you can just make a slightly lower pass, bring the pass in close to the slope, and slow the glider down by climbing just a little faster than the lift can support, and swish, a gentle sideways landing, wings level, or tilted just a little to match the slope, into all that tall grass you mentioned. When this becomes more familiar, it's not at all impossible to refine this technique so that you fly your slope pattern down below you on the slope, and do this 'climb to land' pass directly into your hand for a catch. In consistent slope lift, one nice thing is that you can almost always abandon a landing attempt and try again, simply by turning back out away from the slope. So it's often possible to try 10 or 20 landings before actually touching down. Dangerous Alternative: On a slope with a soft surface, you can use your height and speed to dive directly towards the slope below you, pull up at just the right moment for the conditions, come screaming up the slope, bleeding energy into a downwind stall just a few feet off the deck, and mush the plane into the grass, headed directly up the slope. You should do this landing after you have a few thousand successful landings under your belt and the slope is so familiar to you that you can fly an aerobatic routine, eat a sandwich, and instruct two or three newcomers all at once. Not for the faint of heart. If you can find a part of your slope that has a flat, or even better a concave surface facing the wind (called a 'bowl' in the world of sloping), this is particularly nice. A conVEX slope has the lift deteriorating off to each side, and a flight too far across the slope to one side or the other is hard to return from. A 'bowl' concentrates the lift into a reliable crescent band, and makes it easier to pass back and forth in front of you without worrying as you would on a convex slope about going too far off the sides where the lift gets ragged and turns into turbulence and sink. Lift, Scobie in Seattle -Original Message- From: ggareth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 6:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] Please help me assess slope! As you might have guessed I am a newbie on the brink of buying a foamie trainer. Anyway, today I went out and did an examination of my local slope. I've never seen anyone flying there and it's not listed as a site. Since I do not own a car this location is my only option. The slope is actually a huge man-made conical hill which was once used for skiing. It's 100m (300ft) high with slopes varying from vertical to a gentle slope. It has faces in every direction meaning that it should provide lift with any wind direction. Furthermore it's covered in high grass! That's the good news. The bad news is that there are floodlights, pylons, lifts and overhead cables. Most of these are concentrated towards the top of the hill. I'm wondering if would be possible to fly half way up the slope where there are less obstacles. Is this possible from a lift/turbulence point of view? Then I'm also curious about how to land. I know that aircraft always land into the wind but that would mean flying away from the hill...? Thanks in advance Gareth 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]
