Re: [RCSE] F5B
Hi Mike, You can research this some more in the high performance forum at www.ezonemag.com, the choices are very, very large here. For motors, Plettenberg are currently top of the heap, with Hacker following up the rear. All of these motors are geared, and most competitors are using RFM carbon fiber propellors. For speed controllers, Schulze and Kontronik are the heavy duty manufacturers. Hacker's controllers are being used more in F5D Pylon than in F5B. For models, well, here it gets broad. You can look up the individual airframes, but the short list includes Avionik (from Russia, produced by Sergey Sobakin, an engineer at Sukhoi), Surprise (I believe from Austria, manufactured by Rudi Freudenthaler, same guy that makes the RFM props), Ariane, Lea, Scorpio, Vanessa, Simba, Victor. the list goes on here. It really depends on whether you're looking for 7 cell, 10 cell (F5F), or open class aircraft. You can check out nearly all of the motors, controllers, and Avionik planes at www.icare-rc.com, and some of the motors, controllers, and many planes like the Surprise series at www.shredair.com. Hope this helps, just ask if you're looking for more specific info. Dan - Original Message - From: "Michael Conte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 2:03 PM Subject: [RCSE] F5B What's are some of the best models, motors and speed controls for flying F5B? Mike RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Siagon ( war story)
I see that the US has resumed airline service to Viet Nam. It reminds me of my last trip to Saigon over 35 years ago. Chuck Anderson Saigon Saigon looked like any other city at night and the lights at Ton Son Nhut Air Base just another runway. Once on the ground, normalcy disappeared. There were airplanes parked everywhere. We parked in between two C124s and in front of a C133. All dwarfed our C97. Ground time was limited to 3 hours so the loadmasters were untying the cargo while we were taxiing in. The flight engineers were busy refueling and servicing the plane while the Aircraft Commander went to base operations to file the flight plan back to Cebu. The Navigators had completed all their work for the return trip before leaving Clark so they sacked out in the cockpit. My station was at the nose wheel to be sure no Vietnamese approached the plane. The ramp was a fascinating place. There were numerous civilian cargo aircraft of various makes, a number of C124s and one gigantic C133 parked right behind us. It was a moonless night and off to the west scattered tracer fire could be seen streaking skyward while a C47 flew back and forth west of the field dropping flares. As the night wore on, the tracer fire increased and the C47 began dropping flares closer to the base. The C130s parked on the other side of the runway were now clearly visible in the light from the flares. Finally the flares were falling on the C130 ramp across the runway. The parachutes on the flares did not always open and burning flares were bouncing off C130 wings. Behind us, the C133 was starting engines when he suddenly shut down all four engines as two C47s raced by at high speed on the taxi way with the tail off the ground. The C47s swung around on the runway and took off without an engine run up. I decided the C47s must be Puff gun ships. A jeep raced up and the driver shouted "Everybody in the bunkers! The base is under attack!" He ran over to the plane, stuck his head inside the hatch, and repeated the message.The senior loadmaster was up front completing the weight and balance form. When he heard the base was under attack, he flipped the aluminum weight and balance notebook over his shoulder and evacuated the plane. The notebook landed with a loud clatter near the rudely awakened navigators and they proceeded to rapidly evacuate the plane. I had walked about half way to the bunker when the navigators passed me at high speed and ran right past the bunker. The bunker appeared to be constructed of sandbags with a sand floor. There were a number of people in the bunker and the two errant navigators soon joined us. After a few minutes, it became apparent that we were not the only occupants of the bunker. The air was soon filled with the buzz of mosquitoes. One of the local airmen had a bug bomb but all it did was force us out of the bunker. We spent the rest of the attack outside sitting against the bunker watching the fireworks as C47 Puff gun ships hosing down the area to the west of the field with streams of fire. After a couple of hours, the tracer fire died down and the Puffs stopped firing. The runway also reopened as two Skyraiders landed. Finally, our Aircraft Commander came back from wherever he had been during the attack and said that we were cleared to leave. As we got on the airplane, the Aircraft Commander ask the load master how much time he needed to finish tying down the cargo. He said that the cargo would be tied down by the time we got to the runway. As I leaned out the right cockpit side window to monitor engine start, I noticed that the C133 was also starting engines. We finished starting and were ready to taxi before the C133 so we would be the first off. As we rolled down the taxiway to the runway, the tower advised us to expedite our engine run up because there were reports of sniper fire near that end of the runway. The Aircraft Commander ask the flight engineer how much engine run up he needed. The engineer replied, "Just take the throttles up slow." We wheeled on the runway without stopping and the Aircraft Commander slowly advanced the throttles. I noticed the flight engineer doing a quick mag check as I punched the stop watch to starte the takeoff acceleration check.. We had not had time to calculate takeoff speeds or acceleration checks so I used the ones we had calculated for the takeoff back at Clark. I figured that, under the circumstances, it was close enough for government work. Takeoff was normal and we climbed out without incident. We landed at Cebu 27 hours after we had left Clark. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Brand new, Genie LT/S hybrid for sale.
Les, who cuts cores for the big Genie and the LT/S, sent me a set of his proprietary cores to try out. Having nothing going on the workbench at the time, I bagged the wing and mounted it on an LT/S fuse I'd built with a saddle to fit it. Being proprietary I can only tell you that compared to the Genie airfoil blend, this one is thinner, flat bottomed and lower camber with 128" span and about 1025 sq. in of wing area. Les said it would be fast and have a very, very flat glide. Yesterday at 57 degrees and today at 67, it was unseasonably warm to provide a chance for first flights. I used a short high start. After a few hand glides I put it up. It went straight up, really too steeply, so I've moved the towhook forward a little. Les's claim of good legs and a flat glide were right on and it is a nimble and responsive ship. With the flaps fully down it tracks very nicely and is so easy to land. I do see that, as expected with the thinner airfoil, it needs to be kept level and moving right along to handle best, rather than being flown on the point of stall. The all up weight was only 69.2 oz. for a 9.72 oz. wing loading. . . .too light for me for this much wing area, but it sure slows nicely for landing. For windy conditions, it is a good candidate for some interior ballasting with sheet lead along the fuse sides or bottom. In any event, this one deserves more usage than it would get in my hands. I'm just too happy with my big Genies and regular LT/S's. On request, I'll e-mail a sheet of information about it and group of pics. Airframe price will be $695, not counting servos or shipping. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] Re: product discontinuance
I figured something was up when I got an email from EMI saying they were doing an audit for a Lockheed licensee wondering how many Electras I have sold total, year to date and each quarter this year. I responded that I had not sold any Lockheed designs from DJ Aerotech or any other company. It was the truth and I figured it was the man trying to get information on DJ Aerotech. I'm sorry I didn't sell any. I'm happy Don and Joe are putting an end to this money grab. Mark Isthmus Model Co. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] Discontinued P-38 and a question
Heh...they were still doing that in the 80's. I remember timidly asking Grumman for some info on the F-14. I was pretty suprised when a package came with a bunch of color 8x10's of every plane Grumman made, among other things. I then went on a letter writting jag, to pretty much every airplane mfg in the country (along with anyone else who had a cool looking ad in Aviation Week). Soon I was inundated with photos, 3-views and posters, and literature, often of obsure (to me) products. The strangest of which was a poster with a map of Soviet air defenses (I think from Honeywell or Rand). -Original Message- From: Jim Deck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Dec 10, 2004 1:21 PM To: RCSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [RCSE] Discontinued P-38 and a question I'm older and can remember, as a grade school youngster, writing for Fairchild for information on the "Flying Boxcar" and receiving about a pound of great photos and details. I got these from Northrop as well - wish I still had the stuff. Nowadays, I guess I'd get referred to the company's merchandise web site. But that was back when industry was still encouraging young people to become engineers rather than exporting jobs. Off my soapbox, Jim Deck RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Discontinued P-38 and a question
A sad state of affairs indeed. One wonders if the producers of the foam P-38 gracing the cover of the latest MAN have paid EMI its toll? And, speaking of historic airplanes, it occurs to me that all of the airplanes(the Sikorsky seaplane excepted) in the new movie, "The Aviator", fall under the same domain as the late "Road Kill" P-38 and Electra. And, speaking of movies, why , outside of the extensive use of CGI, did thy choose to remake every aeromodeler's favorite movie, "The Flight of the Phoenix"? I'm older and can remember, as a grade school youngster, writing for Fairchild for information on the "Flying Boxcar" and receiving about a pound of great photos and details. I got these from Northrop as well - wish I still had the stuff. Nowadays, I guess I'd get referred to the company's merchandise web site. But that was back when industry was still encouraging young people to become engineers rather than exporting jobs. Off my soapbox, Jim Deck RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] URGENT another product discontinuance and EMI
I'm bumming cuz this week the RC Soaring gods discountinued the product Sun. While I worked every day transmitting music from EMI up to the heavens its still raining here in Louisville. Howver I must have gotten the atttention of the god of battery chargers, cuz my Infinity 1 got damaged when I let its supply battery run down,which apparently confused some chip. The number on it was still Aveox (no not the music company or that evil licensing company either:-) But when I called to see about sending in for some fixin, a really nice lady explained that they hadn't been the Robbe outlet for over a year. I wanted to go nuts on her about how they are letting customers down and maybe even start a way off topic thread about them on the RCSE, but she continued before I could get to the key board. "We have a few refurbished Infinities left and could do an exchange for $45 plus shipping...(which got it to me for $65 2nd day by the way). It took me a second to run thru how I might fit some comment about the recent Pres election or how us Americans are all theives but came up with a meek and whispered 'Any chance you could exchange my Infinity 1 for a new model 2?" There was a killer pause which actually gave me time to lament losing access to micro electric P-38's forever, but I held my breath in anticipation, finally she said,"Yep, got one left, and if can get your's here quick, we'll get it on the road!" OFF I went, screaming down the subdivision roads, kids diving, school buses with flashing red lights and flags out honking, but I got to the post office just in time to next day my dead hulk of an charger on its way to its new home, so that the captive #2 could be free'd! It came today and I already have it working its variable and automatic magic in the basement work shop. Every once in a while I hear it call to me...beep beep beep. Damn I forgot about what that rant was about I was gonna jump in on to displace some more fun rc soaring stuff Sorry Gordy
Re: [RCSE] product discontinuance
Simon Van Leeuwen wrote: Although LM does not cater much to the public sector, they are still spending an incredible amount of your tax dollars. I would have thought this sort of stupidity on the part of M/EMI would strike at the very hearts of Americans and what you stand for... Unfortunately a large number of Americans believe in stealing everything they can. Actually, this is true all over the world but in America we prove again and again that we love crooks. We keep reelecting them to office. :( michael RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] product discontinuance
More to the point is the veiled threat by EMI of some sort of litigation if anyone were to persist in publically hi-lighting what you point out. This threat is baseless, and a primary tactic used by such organizations to quell attempts to sway judgement. If it can be proven, and EMI were called on the carpet by LM for uttering such threats, there would be hell to pay. This steps outside of the law. All I can say from across the border here in Canada is "the squeaky wheel gets the grease". Admininistration at LM are the folks to approach, they control the contractor (in this case EMI). If LM condons their actions, then its on to your local/state legislators. Technically, the law may be such that infringment includes producing miniatures of any sort, but unless the holder of the patent(s) is not approached directly, the execution of the law will remain. Public shame often has greeater consequences than any change in lawful process. Although LM does not cater much to the public sector, they are still spending an incredible amount of your tax dollars. I would have thought this sort of stupidity on the part of M/EMI would strike at the very hearts of Americans and what you stand for... Quoting Martin Usher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Is "EMI" the English company, "Electrical and Musical Industries" that sell > music recordings and the like? They're one of the bunch that's klumping > around trying to make life difficult for file sharers. I don't want to get > into the merits and ethics of file sharing except to point out that a lot of > material that's out there is historic and much is in now in the public domain > but these companies don't respect this -- they assume that they have the > right to hold and enforce copyright over everything indefinitely > (unfortunately they've already managed to extend these timelines over the > horizon). This might be good for their bottom line but it has a very negative > effect on our culture. > > Its strange that anyone at Lockeed/Martin or any similar company could put > monetary value on these old designs. There's no value at all -- they're part > of the historic record, of our culture, but they're worthless beyond that. > Nobody in their right minds would build a copy of a P-38 or an Electra for > day to day use, the technology's long obsolete. They're just an icon of that > era. If I were a LM shareholder I'd be a bit concerned about this because it > suggests that the company's suffering financial stress -- this attempt to > license these designs to hobbyists is the corporate equivalent of rummaging > through the sofa for loose change. > > Martin Usher Radius Systems Cogito Ergo Zoom RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Speaking of spare change
For Sale, two Airtronics receivers. 1 ea. 7 ch P/N 92765/ 72 band (top plugs) $37.50 includes shipping 1 ea. 8 ch P/N 92785/ 72 band (end plugs) $42.50 includes shipping I have crystals on channels 24 / 36 / or 49 if needed, included in the price. These are negative shift, the same as JR and will accept new or old Airtronics / JR style servo plugs (just be sure to use the correct polarity) E-mail me if interested. Mike RemusLOFT Glider ClubFort Wayne INLSF Level 5 #112Remember; Dreams are the seedlings of reality. Dream Lofty dreams!
Re: [RCSE] Re: product discontinuance
Too bad that Lockheed has no appreciation for the goodwill toward the company that modeling their designs provides them. I know that I can have just as much fun flying a model that is not a scale or sort of scale Lockheed/Convair/General Dynamics etc. as I can with one. So aside from the disappearance or reduction of the availability of kits, I won't really be affected. I'm not into scale warbirds anyway. Modeling of their designs in the past has probably inspired a lot of the engineering and business talent they have today. Recruitment that didn't cost them a dime. Admiration and respect that they can no longer expect. No doubt there are Lockheed employees/modelers that will feel the same sense of loss that their brethren in the modeling community will also feel. Regards, Ed Jett - Original Message - From: "pfsiegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 10:47 AM Subject: [RCSE] Re: product discontinuance RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] F5B
What's are some of the best models, motors and speed controls for flying F5B? Mike RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] product discontinuance
Is "EMI" the English company, "Electrical and Musical Industries" that sell music recordings and the like? They're one of the bunch that's klumping around trying to make life difficult for file sharers. I don't want to get into the merits and ethics of file sharing except to point out that a lot of material that's out there is historic and much is in now in the public domain but these companies don't respect this -- they assume that they have the right to hold and enforce copyright over everything indefinitely (unfortunately they've already managed to extend these timelines over the horizon). This might be good for their bottom line but it has a very negative effect on our culture. Its strange that anyone at Lockeed/Martin or any similar company could put monetary value on these old designs. There's no value at all -- they're part of the historic record, of our culture, but they're worthless beyond that. Nobody in their right minds would build a copy of a P-38 or an Electra for day to day use, the technology's long obsolete. They're just an icon of that era. If I were a LM shareholder I'd be a bit concerned about this because it suggests that the company's suffering financial stress -- this attempt to license these designs to hobbyists is the corporate equivalent of rummaging through the sofa for loose change. Martin Usher
Fw: [RCSE] product discontinuance
This message is forwarded from Don Stackhouse and Joe Hahn at DJ Aerotech Tom H. Nagel Columbus, OH - Original Message - From: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 11:23 AM Subject: product discontinuance > Paul, Tom, > > I included a copy f the message below to RCSE, as well as some of the other > lists, since I felt that it was something that many of the subscribers to > RCSE would be interested in. > > However, I quit RCSE about a year ago (the vicious attacks, lies and > character assassination as a means of suppressing alternate viewpoints got > to be more than I felt like putting up with), and if I remember correctly, > I think RCSE has some sort of filter to keep out messages posted by > non-subscribers. Did this message ever get posted on RCSE? If not, any > chance one of you could forward it to the list for me? Or, do either of you > have Mike Lachowski's e-mail address? > > Thanks, > Don > > >As some of you on these lists may recall, three years ago we were > >approached by EMI, a company hired by Lockheed-Martin to administer their > >trademark licensing program for them, regarding our Roadkill Series P-38 > >kit. It is Lockheed-Martin's policy that ANYONE (no exceptions) must be > >properly licensed by them to legally make models of any of their aircraft, > >including the ancestor companies such as (but not limited to) Lockheed, > >Martin, General Dynamics, Convair, or Consolidated. > > > >We had the choice of either discontinuing the P-38 kit, or obtaining a > >license. During the negotiations, we were told of various benefits to us > >that being license holders would include. > > > >We decided to try it their way, and invest in a 3-year license. The cost > >was a token amount for them, although it was not a token amount for a tiny > >company like ours. Still, if the benefits outlined to us were real, it > >would be a worthwhile investment. > > > >To make a long and painful story short, the benefits did not materialize > >to any significant extent. In addition, they are now insisting on a much > >bigger cost (from our point of view, but not in their eyes) for renewal of > >the agreement. Given that the real benefits we experienced fell well short > >of what we'd been led to expect, and did not even justify our original > >investment, we simply cannot renew at anything even close to the proposed > >terms. There are plenty of other kit subjects from companies that do not > >subject us to this sort of treatment. > > > >We do have a few remaining of the two kits that are subject to this > >license. We are discontinuing production and sales of our Roadkill Series > >Lockheed P-38 and Model 10 Electra, effective either 12-31-04 or when the > >existing inventory of these kits runs out, whichever comes first. If you > >want one, better get it quick, once they're gone, there will not be any more. > > > >As far as the other Lockheed-Martin related kits we had in development, > >some Roadkill Series, some bigger, and some giant scale, those will never > >see the outside of my computer. > > > >We're sorry to have to take this position, but they have really left us > >with no real choice. > > > >As far as any pressure on EMI or Lockheed-Martin from any of you reading > >this, in reaction to this turn of events (such as what some list members > >did three years ago), please refrain from doing so. We do appreciate your > >concern. However, we were told by the good folks at EMI three years ago > >that they "could make it difficult for us" if that occurred any more (even > >though we had nothing to do with the actions of others back when it > >happened, having in no way asked anyone to do any such thing), and I can > >only assume that threat still stands. At this point, Joe and I are > >relieved to be rid of this whole unpleasant affair. > > > >Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://www.djaerotech.com/ > > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Re: product discontinuance
Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech wrote: As some of you on these lists may recall, three years ago we were approached by EMI, a company hired by Lockheed-Martin to administer their trademark licensing program for them, regarding our Roadkill Series P-38 kit. It is Lockheed-Martin's policy that ANYONE (no exceptions) must be properly licensed by them to legally make models of any of their aircraft, including the ancestor companies such as (but not limited to) Lockheed, Martin, General Dynamics, Convair, or Consolidated. We had the choice of either discontinuing the P-38 kit, or obtaining a license. During the negotiations, we were told of various benefits to us that being license holders would include. We decided to try it their way, and invest in a 3-year license. The cost was a token amount for them, although it was not a token amount for a tiny company like ours. Still, if the benefits outlined to us were real, it would be a worthwhile investment. To make a long and painful story short, the benefits did not materialize to any significant extent. In addition, they are now insisting on a much bigger cost (from our point of view, but not in their eyes) for renewal of the agreement. Given that the real benefits we experienced fell well short of what we'd been led to expect, and did not even justify our original investment, we simply cannot renew at anything even close to the proposed terms. There are plenty of other kit subjects from companies that do not subject us to this sort of treatment. We do have a few remaining of the two kits that are subject to this license. We are discontinuing production and sales of our Roadkill Series Lockheed P-38 and Model 10 Electra, effective either 12-31-04 or when the existing inventory of these kits runs out, whichever comes first. If you want one, better get it quick, once they're gone, there will not be any more. As far as the other Lockheed-Martin related kits we had in development, some Roadkill Series, some bigger, and some giant scale, those will never see the outside of my computer. We're sorry to have to take this position, but they have really left us with no real choice. As far as any pressure on EMI or Lockheed-Martin from any of you reading this, in reaction to this turn of events (such as what some list members did three years ago), please refrain from doing so. We do appreciate your concern. However, we were told by the good folks at EMI three years ago that they "could make it difficult for us" if that occurred any more (even though we had nothing to do with the actions of others back when it happened, having in no way asked anyone to do any such thing), and I can only assume that threat still stands. At this point, Joe and I are relieved to be rid of this whole unpleasant affair. Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.djaerotech.com/ RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
RE: [RCSE] New era or just hype?
Irony is: folks bashing Microsoft and Windows CE, and then saying "Don't
be rude."
Let's be clear - Windows CE is the base operating system on any Pocket
PC device (iPaq, etc.), but PocketPC is far more than simply Windows CE.
Windows CE, by itself, is pretty stable. Put some crappy applications
on top of it (or any operating system), and you're set up for disaster.
I'd say that you would need to give the transmitter a try before
judgments are made regarding Windows CE. I think that folks will be
pleasantly surprised with it.
- Dave
-Original Message-
From: Martin Usher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 23:57
To: Soaring
Subject: Re: [RCSE] New era or just hype?
I don't have a particular fondness for the Vole or its CE "operating
system"
but it'll probably work just fine since we're not planning to run
additional
software on the system (are we?).
The two processors are almost certainly an ARM to drive the display and
whatever Futaba's using in its current radios. Its not meaningful to
talk
about 'multiple processors', the things are so cheap anyway that it
doesn't
make sense to combine the functions (especially as the "Futaba"
processor
could do anything up to and including synthesize the radio signal).
I like the display -- a decent display has been long overdue on these
radios. I'd be concerned about breaking it, though (and it won't be
cheap to
replace). They seem to be using a reflective liquid crystal as well, the
sort that may have a rather narrow viewing angle and a dislike of
getting
hot (as in "I left it on the field in the sun while I was sorting out
the
winch and when I got back to it the dislpay was unreadable"). There are
better display technologies out there -- I think the "organic LED" might
be
the one that's the most robust but its too new to be in something like
this.
Maybe this is truly a solution looking for a problem? After all, we
don't
need the display when flying and we could just as easily program the
thing
using an external computer, even using something as small as a PDA.
Martin Usher
PS. I like the Palm OS. Its quite capable of running a radio, it'll do a
lot
more than two channels ("don't be rude"). I use both it and CE -- CE is
flashy but it does a relatively poor job compared to palm (you only have
to
look at the new HP iPAQ, the $600 one, to see what I mean -- it looks
really
good, and its a major letdown when you try to do anything with it). I
currently have a Nexio to play with -- a 5" screen, a $1200 price tag, a
battery life that's insufficient (and it runs down when the system is
not in
use, losing useful settings in the process). Palms are not as flashy but
they're more functional, IMO. Neither are suitable for an embedded
system
like a radio, though -- there are much better systems out there for
that.
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe"
and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note
that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format
with MIME turned off.
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and
unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
