• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Angry flier rants

#21
Here's my rant for the day... at least concerning the hobby (we're all well aware of the cluster foxtrot that the rest of the world is at this point...)

Adding yet another style of connector to my collection... the latching kind...

Molex, anderson, Deans, TRX, XT30, XT60, XT90, EC3, EC5, JST, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 2.0, 2.54...

And now 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 pin latching 1.25 connectors...

View attachment 169546

Because being short of any one cable can put a kink in a project; force you to wait for hung-lo-Charlie to put it on the slow boat from china while you have to decide if you're going to shelf the build while you wait or live with it scattered on across your work bench for a month and hope you still have all the other bits and pieces after they've been shuffled around 4 or 5 times between now and then... and don't even think of taking the 100 mile drive to the nearest LHS because all you get is a blank look and a, "you mean this?" As he hands you a servo extension... even radio shack has been reduced to nothing more than a glorified cell phone store so you go ahead and find what you need on amazon prime and pay 5x the price so you only have to contemplate where you went so wrong in your life for a couple days instead of a couple weeks...
Ahmen
 
#22
?

This reminds me of a completely off topic story of when I stapled my two fingers together. I was zoning out while listening to someone give a class, and I completely went mind-numb and stapled my index and middle finger together! Man that hurt when I took it out.

CA glue

hahahhahha OK so anyone been thru this? or am just a dolt

I was scratch building with balsa sticks, got up to pee, the bathroom was only 5 ft away in the hobby room, enjoying the bladder emptying and the wife walks in says something really funny , as I began to laugh I start peeing everywhere, shes now yelling at me, I'm breaking up laughing pissin on her feet, she screams what the hell is wrong with you, I was laughing so hard I had difficulty trying to tell her my fingers were crazy/CA glued to my pisser :LOL:
 
Last edited:

Bricks

Well-known member
#24
My rant is ongoing, people flying 10-15 miles out away from where they started, anyone flying where they should not especially around parks where there are other people. Nothing more annoying having a quad come wizzing around while people are out trying to enjoy being outside. This seems to be FPV pilots are the most annoying, as flying line of sight keeps things closer and more in a specific area.
 

Piotrsko

Well-known member
#25
Not having any interest in this, BUT, wouldn't it be hard to find the remains on a remote fpv if it attacks a tree or gets interrupted by a load of birdshot?
 
#26
well in the spirit of angry rants!

Just how many people are you REALLY bothering in an area where you can legally shoot a round of birdshot thru a shot gun, clearly your out in the country to be popping off rounds..so how many people are you really bothering........and it IS illegal to shoot down the model anywhere and you maybe video recorded doing it how are going to prove he wasnt flying LOS or had a spotter and flying legal, and if your flying 15 miles away, your NOT flying low enough to bother people the farther you go the more altitude you need to maintain a signal or you drop out of the sky and loose $600 in long range FPV gear, with such an investment the majority of "long range" pilots are not that reckless too expensive
seriously how many news articles are there in a day of planes dropping out of the sky hurting people....there is more domestic violence perpetrated against children daily!........... but lets look for a toy plane hes not flying how I want him too.

sure there are a few idiots that do dumb things and dumb KIDS with CHEAP fpv quads, yeah there is a bit more of an issue, I am more inclined to agree...kids do stupid things....stupid is as stupid does


having haters on our own team is not going to be good for the hobby any way you look at it
not getting into arguments here because there is an ass making trouble in each and EVERY endeavor in life, including LINE OF SIGHT FLYING
or any thing you can think of for that matter!......and I dare say RC models are not the scourge of the world, I think there is a heck of alot more dangerous things in society to worry about than toys.

but I digress we can each get pissed about whatever we choose.......... right or wrong
twocents.gif
 
Last edited:

cranialrectosis

Well-Known Member
Mentor
#27
This seems to be FPV pilots are the most annoying, as flying line of sight keeps things closer and more in a specific area.
Please no. I fly FPV and I never fly over people regardless of what I am flying.

A pilot who flies carelessly is the issue.

This is not just FPV or glider or kite or foamie or balsa or fixed wing or Chinese quad or even red haired pilots.

Anyone can fly anything and be a twit or not. It's a personal choice, not a group decision and IMO should be personally dealt with, IMO with a blanket, a pillow, and few bars of soap or the financial equivalent.
 

Hondo76251

Well-known member
#28
Well, @Bricks, @cranialrectosis, @Aireal Anarchist, i agree with both sides of the above to one extent or another. I love my phantom but I really wish there was a way to separate the typical DJI crowd from the hobbiest. That seems to me to be the biggest set of violators. Kids with toy quads in parks can be nuisances, but not a threat. I fly FPV a lot, often pretty long range but I also do it on private ground. I believe a lot of the rules and proposed rules are encroaching on my rights as as a land owner and what I can do with that property, but at the same time, I feel that I own the at least the air in between my trees and above my house and if there were to be a stray drone you'd better believe it would come down with a little lead poisoning. But for a drone to even be at my house, unless it had a range of more than 5 miles, the pilot would have to be trespassing anyway so I'd find him too... for those that live in town it's more of a grey area to me. If I thought it was just someone out flying it wouldnt bother me, if it came in my yard and was snooping around, well, even if i cant shoot it down i can fly my own, much more durable, quad in any manner I see fit. Maybe we have an accidental mid air collision... who knows? As far as state and BLM ground (of which many states are in excess of 90% public lands) I think it should be fair use by all aerial enthusiasts same as it is for hunting, camping, off roading etc... if I can practice shooting targets at a mile I should be able to fly that far...
 

Bricks

Well-known member
#29
I have no problem with people flying over there own property or open areas where there are not any civilians, but way too many U-tube videos in parks, or even in neighborhoods ect where there are people present , . Nothing could be more annoying then a screaming quad flying by or even flying near you.

Flying long distance how do you know there is not a small private plane coming up on your FPV platform that could cause a disaster, to me that is just being reckless and for what a little thrill.

Edited to add I do fly FPV so it is not a knock of responsible fliers but that is a big word that many do not think about and what is causing the regulations that FAA is trying to get. No one to blame but the idiots out there flying and doing things they should not.
 
Last edited:

Hondo76251

Well-known member
#30
Flying long distance how do you know there is not a small private plane coming up on your FPV platform that could cause a disaster, to me that is just being reckless and for what a little thrill.
This is exactly why I am not entirely opposed to the idea of using some kind of transponder or equivalent system, although I think applying it to every model is absolutely asinine and is merely a way to clear the way for commercial progress... but I digress. I've grown up in aviation. My Father and his brother started flying bush planes on the ranch in the 70's doing much the same of things I do with drones now. Many ranchers in that era did. The saying, "There are old pilots, there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots" seems to hold quite true. Many local ranchers still fly. My Father, and about a half dozen other that I knew personally, are not among them. I was a mechanic and crew chief on Huey's in the Marines and did two tours in Iraq. I, more than most, am familiar with the risks involved in aviation.

My rant for today is a complaint about how this hobby is being painted as risky and dangerous, not only to general aviation, but to the public as a whole. This broad accusation is being leveled at all remotely piloted aviation despite a long track record of safety, a far better record than general aviation. Yes, you can watch youtube videos of people being jack @$$'s with drones and models but you can also spend hours watching private planes fail to make the dreaded "Impossible turn" on climb out all while flying dangerously low and slow over an urban area. You can watch hours of footage of private planes stalling on their turn to final and ending in a tragedy. Almost 400 people a year are killed in GA, most of these crashes involve a "loss of control." We don't want to add to that risk, but we also cannot pretend like GA was at zero risk before the invention of drones. Any plane flying under 400' is already engaging in a risk far greater than a drone strike.

I don't really care for any of the rules that have been proposed, at least the way they have been put forth so far but I do think we need to modernize the rules to account for the growing Remotely Piloted industry and, lets face it, an ever shrinking GA community. I just get sick of people acting like you can engage in... well, any activity really, and have it be zero risk. Maybe its all the craziness going on in the world now getting under my skin, but I want to hear people start talking realistically about what the risks are and not pretend like we have to regulate everything based on the upper limits of the statistic because, at the end of the day, if you own and drive a car, have an average american BMI (near 30!!!) and live on an average american diet (I hate to be the bearer of bad news) but you don't need to spend your time worrying about the risks of model aviation...
 
#31
this
yeahthat.gif


frankly all the crap is about the almighty buck and nothing else....... its selling out the airspace to commercial use and nothing else but we are in the way, but as usual its the fear mongering approach always used to manipulate the masses...DIVIDE AND CONQUER WITH FEAR MONGERING...masses are sheeple and easily manipulated in the name of fear

dont wear masks during the most contagious pandemic in modern times! this from your CDC govt experts....
we were all being manipulated
PEOPLE GOT MAD AT ME ....I had people arguing with me they had it from reliable sources CDC govt epidemiologists and numbers to back up their facts that N95 masks are only needed for the people with the virus....when I asked why do you have particle masks in your garage, so you dont breath your germs all over the sawdust? just made them mad that I just kinda pointed out they stopped thinking for them selves and buy whatever the fake media is selling today
SHEEPLE
and why did the govt experts lie?......masks for me but not for thee, WELL air space for me not for thee......when ever there is personal gain behind new rules and regulations .....we will get the short end.....big bucks win in a corrupt society

forget the almighty sitting in judgement of the members of their own hobby, shoot yourselves in the foot, it wont matter, solidarity may not even help

they already are using the few bad examples in the hobby trying to make themselves famous for the almighty buck that sell out the hobby like Trappy, they will use people like him as the proof of impending DEATH by DRONE and this hobby needs serious COMMON SENSE CONTROLS, a couple bad apple attention seekers will be the examples that sink us ....

its risky, its dangerous, its fear mongering with the billions at stake here, it will all be lies, people may deliberately give reason for our hobby to be attacked, maybe they were paid to create fear .....maybe we will be framed? it WILL get much worse for our hobby
dont think our politicians will sell us out to big business even frame us?........3 words.......russia, russia, russia.

WAKEUP STOP BUYING INTO THE DIVIDE AND CONQUER FEAR MONGERING THEY ARE TOYS.....NOT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
 

JennyC6

Well-known member
#32
The near crippling lack of engines on the market would be a big one for me. I fly wet fuel p.much exclusively. The engines are half the reason I'm even in the hobby at all so you can bet your bottom dollar I'm flying one whenever I'm in the air, and increasingly, I'm having to look on eBay, on RCGroups, on Glow Nation for additions to my collection. There's very little new production for me. I like my 4-cycles and the only game in town for anything that isn't a 56, 62, 92, and IIRC 120 or 150, is Saito. And even the few OS 4-cycles we still get are distributed by Horizon right alongside the Saitos, so holy expensive.

I recently got my grubby little paws on an absolute gem of a Saito boxer and spent less on it than I would have on a brand new Saito twin that's nowhere near as smooth running. My Magnum 4-cycles, all excellent runners, acquired secondhand. My OS thumpers, second-hand. All of my two cycles have been secondhand purchases.

Matter of fact the last engine I purchased truly brand new was my OS 18 CV-RX way back in 2008-2009. Honorable mentions go to my RC Ranger Cox 049s and my Fox 049 FAI, but I don't quite consider them brand new because they used NOS parts and weren't sold to me by the original manufacturers.

C'mon, Hobby Industry. There's still plenty of us piston pounders out there. Throw us a bone!

Also, while I'm at it, I'ma rant a bit about flying fields banning glow aircraft on the basis of noise while allowing 100+MPH race wings that make my nitros seem library quiet in comparison. C'mon, use some logic here. If you're telling me I can't fly there because my 75dBA two stroke is too loud you shouldn't be allowing that Alatus with its 6s quad motor to zip along at 85+ dBA.

There's four fields within an hour's drive of me and only one I can actually fly at because of this ridiculousness. They allow electrics of all types, even loud EDFs and race wings, but ban Glow birds on noise reasons. iethjiethjitgjh. C'mon m8. My 4-cycles are quieter than every EDF in the skies! Even my 2-cycles aren't htat loud!...mostly...ok my Cox engines are a bit loud and my Fox 049 FAI is so loud you need earpro to bench run it but they're exceptions to the rule...

Fun fact: This issue is why I will likely never attend Flite Fest until they start hosting it at Edgewater. I'm not driving several hundred miles to fly one foam biplane 3 or 4 times in the day and then watch a bunch of other people have fun while I have 3 cars and 12 other planes on display around me that won't turn a prop in anger because they're not electric even though they're quieter than some of the electrics in the air. I would LOVE to attend a Flite Fest but it just isn't worth my time if I can't fly my planes there.

Happily FPVFest is hosted at Edgewater and does allow fuel aircraft, so I'll just go to that instead.
I have much to rant about but will confine my outburst to the very poor quality of radio equipment used for radio control.
All systems have serious issues including how easy they are to hack on air.
It reminds me of the early days of wireless LAN technologies which was only truly settled when the WiFi consortimum was formed and now WiFi is almost a necessity and is extremely stable.

A loss of network connection cannot kill someone but a model flying off out of control can!

As a communications and WiFi engineer I find it ridiculous that one pile of :poop: can be seen or adjudged to be better than some other pile of :poop: simply because of its name or its aesthetics is so lame!

Using the development of WiFi as an example by now we should have radio systems that not only provide telemetry as standard but our radios should have multiple antenna arrays with software controlled transmitter beem steering, full encryption security, and ranges of around 10 Klm at the low data rate we use. All of this at a price of less than $100. Instead we are to accept a plethora of radio equipment which is not always compatible or interoperative, (often when even supplied by the same manufacturer).

Unfortunately we are provided with :poop: systems, (all manufacturers), that are very short range, subject to poor antenna design and, installations and programming methods that would not be out of place on the Apollo Space program. There are radio systems that suffer from blocking and can even suffer from interference in some extreme circumstances.

Binding errors and problems, (including shared secret setting and any future implementation of encryption key), could be exchanged if the binding was done by cable connection and not by an open Tx signal mode, (which can be easily interfered with at this time). Setup issues could become a thing of the past with a setup checklist driven by the Tx software.

Some people will point to the cost but I remember the early days of Wireless LAn technology where an ISA card cost $1000 at the time and an accesspoint cost $4000 and now an access point can be obtained for around $200 and a WiFi card effectively zero as they are embedded in almost everything we buy, (except radio control equipment).

Sadly most will still fight over the brand of crap they use and there will be no push to have a truly modern control platform!

Just venting at the lack of technology in the :poop: we are forced to use and accept. To misquote Ralph Nader, Unsafe at any distance!

Have fun!
Counter-rant: Technology being slammed down our throats at every turn for sake of having it.


I'm perfectly happy with where we are on our radios except for one thing: Interoperability. If there's one aspect of the AM/FM heyday I want back, it's that you could buy any brand Rx and it would work with any brand of Tx, even to the point of soldering your own together on a PCB you etched in your basement.

I don't want fancy tech in my car(aircon is about as state-of-the-art as I'm comfortable with for point of reference, don't even want fuel injection), so why would I want it in my RC system? I'm happy with 2.4ghz digital systems being basically shootdown proof and I never have any problem with brownouts on my S-FHSS and T-FHSS gear fed off LiFE packs.

If we were gonna tech up RC, I'd focus it on engines instead of bringing the Internet of :poop: into our transmitters. A lot of the reason people moan and cry about wet fuel models is they're too damn lazy to learn how to take care of it, too damn lazy to learn how to adjust a carb. So why not pull the EFI system off their car and slap it on their model? OS actually tried it a decade or so ago and it worked a treat except for cost...
People with no self preservation instinct. My local club is on a state college campus. There are walking, hiking, and mountain biking trails all around. But people feel the need to park, walk, sit. ect...... on the runway, near the runway, or will just walk out in the path of planes, quads, or what ever is flying at the time. We have had to move people out of the way of giant scale 150cc 3d planes. They are so oblivious they will just try to walk out into the path of them. Meanwhile anyone with any sense is back behind the flight line, ready to move out of the way if something goes wrong. Because what could possibly go wrong with a flying lawnmower going 65mph upside down 3’ off the ground.
It's not as much a case of being oblivious(though a lot of people do have a 4GLTE set of blinders on most days), but more a case of having been brought up in a suburb. Suburban life breeds self-centered attitudes in all residents. As a Fed-Ex driver I see it every single day, buncha selfish -beep-s playing in the street like they're the only ones that ever have to use it, parking their cars END ON to the curb in their cul-de-sacs, leaving their basketball goals in the street, all manners of proof that they don't care about anyone else but themselves.

And no, I'm not being facetious about the parking.

db.jpg


It happens constantly. I see 4, 5, 6 people parked like this every workday.

And you're seeing that at your field. These kids don't care about anyone but themselves. They're raised in an environment where parking like in that picture is considered acceptable, where self-centered behavior is the norm. They want to sit on the runway so that's bloody well where they will park their arses. Ask 'em to move and they read you the riot act like you're trying to put them in a cell or sommat. They don't care that it's not safe, they don't care that you might need to use that runway. They've been raised around everyone and everything else having to give way to them, it's all they know.
 
Last edited:

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#33
The near crippling lack of engines on the market would be a big one for me. I fly wet fuel p.much exclusively. The engines are half the reason I'm even in the hobby at all so you can bet your bottom dollar I'm flying one whenever I'm in the air, and increasingly, I'm having to look on eBay, on RCGroups, on Glow Nation for additions to my collection. There's very little new production for me. I like my 4-cycles and the only game in town for anything that isn't a 56, 62, 92, and IIRC 120 or 150, is Saito. And even the few OS 4-cycles we still get are distributed by Horizon right alongside the Saitos, so holy expensive.

I recently got my grubby little paws on an absolute gem of a Saito boxer and spent less on it than I would have on a brand new Saito twin that's nowhere near as smooth running. My Magnum 4-cycles, all excellent runners, acquired secondhand. My OS thumpers, second-hand. All of my two cycles have been secondhand purchases.

Matter of fact the last engine I purchased truly brand new was my OS 18 CV-RX way back in 2008-2009. Honorable mentions go to my RC Ranger Cox 049s and my Fox 049 FAI, but I don't quite consider them brand new because they used NOS parts and weren't sold to me by the original manufacturers.

C'mon, Hobby Industry. There's still plenty of us piston pounders out there. Throw us a bone!

Also, while I'm at it, I'ma rant a bit about flying fields banning glow aircraft on the basis of noise while allowing 100+MPH race wings that make my nitros seem library quiet in comparison. C'mon, use some logic here. If you're telling me I can't fly there because my 75dBA two stroke is too loud you shouldn't be allowing that Alatus with its 6s quad motor to zip along at 85+ dBA.

There's four fields within an hour's drive of me and only one I can actually fly at because of this ridiculousness. They allow electrics of all types, even loud EDFs and race wings, but ban Glow birds on noise reasons. iethjiethjitgjh. C'mon m8. My 4-cycles are quieter than every EDF in the skies! Even my 2-cycles aren't htat loud!...mostly...ok my Cox engines are a bit loud and my Fox 049 FAI is so loud you need earpro to bench run it but they're exceptions to the rule...

Fun fact: This issue is why I will likely never attend Flite Fest until they start hosting it at Edgewater. I'm not driving several hundred miles to fly one foam biplane 3 or 4 times in the day and then watch a bunch of other people have fun while I have 3 cars and 12 other planes on display around me that won't turn a prop in anger because they're not electric even though they're quieter than some of the electrics in the air. I would LOVE to attend a Flite Fest but it just isn't worth my time if I can't fly my planes there.

Happily FPVFest is hosted at Edgewater and does allow fuel aircraft, so I'll just go to that instead.


Counter-rant: Technology being slammed down our throats at every turn for sake of having it.


I'm perfectly happy with where we are on our radios except for one thing: Interoperability. If there's one aspect of the AM/FM heyday I want back, it's that you could buy any brand Rx and it would work with any brand of Tx, even to the point of soldering your own together on a PCB you etched in your basement.

I don't want fancy tech in my car(aircon is about as state-of-the-art as I'm comfortable with for point of reference, don't even want fuel injection), so why would I want it in my RC system? I'm happy with 2.4ghz digital systems being basically shootdown proof and I never have any problem with brownouts on my S-FHSS and T-FHSS gear fed off LiFE packs.

If we were gonna tech up RC, I'd focus it on engines instead of bringing the Internet of :poop: into our transmitters. A lot of the reason people moan and cry about wet fuel models is they're too damn lazy to learn how to take care of it, too damn lazy to learn how to adjust a carb. So why not pull the EFI system off their car and slap it on their model? OS actually tried it a decade or so ago and it worked a treat except for cost...

It's not as much a case of being oblivious(though a lot of people do have a 4GLTE set of blinders on most days), but more a case of having been brought up in a suburb. Suburban life breeds self-centered attitudes in all residents. As a Fed-Ex driver I see it every single day, buncha selfish -beep-s playing in the street like they're the only ones that ever have to use it, parking their cars END ON to the curb in their cul-de-sacs, leaving their basketball goals in the street, all manners of proof that they don't care about anyone else but themselves.

And no, I'm not being facetious about the parking.

View attachment 170007

It happens constantly. I see 4, 5, 6 people parked like this every workday.

And you're seeing that at your field. These kids don't care about anyone but themselves. They're raised in an environment where parking like in that picture is considered acceptable, where self-centered behavior is the norm. They want to sit on the runway so that's bloody well where they will park their arses. Ask 'em to move and they read you the riot act like you're trying to put them in a cell or sommat. They don't care that it's not safe, they don't care that you might need to use that runway. They've been raised around everyone and everything else having to give way to them, it's all they know.
A nice rant with a few valid points!
My first planes were gas but I went electric this time around as the ignorant see a flammable fuel as a serious issue and the power/weight of the motors posing serious risk of injury in the case of a crash, (Oh and the perceived higher speed).
The truth is that a large electric motor can weigh more than a gas engine, ESCs can catch fire when they fail, (even in flight), and a damaged Battery or one caught in a fire can explode! Sadly because electric is quieter it is deemed safer. Not a rant on my part , just the truth!
 

JennyC6

Well-known member
#34
A nice rant with a few valid points!
My first planes were gas but I went electric this time around as the ignorant see a flammable fuel as a serious issue and the power/weight of the motors posing serious risk of injury in the case of a crash, (Oh and the perceived higher speed).
The truth is that a large electric motor can weigh more than a gas engine, ESCs can catch fire when they fail, (even in flight), and a damaged Battery or one caught in a fire can explode! Sadly because electric is quieter it is deemed safer. Not a rant on my part , just the truth!
yaeh I've heard the same arguments...and then I hear tell some flying fields in California have banned lithium powered models due to a couple of them eating :poop: and starting brush fires as a result, something you just do not get with glow, get exceedingly rarely with gasoline piston aircraft.

The only models that pose a significant and tangible fire risk are high-speed brushless ones and turbines.

I'm putting this beaut on a SIG 4*64, with a 14-6 prop on it. You run the numbers on that combo, tell me what speed it's typically gonna be flying at, and then tell me with a straight face it poses more of a risk to a bystander than a brushless model of the same size...


Sadly, it seems even Josh Bixler falls afoul of some of these myths. When I was at FPVFest 2019 I flew my NexSTAR 46 off Read-I-Board Runway right in the front lawn of Edgewater. Apparently he thought it was a bit too risky and politely nudged me over towards the 7th hole fairway. I 'spose a 7lb plane bonking someone on the head might not be ideal but it isn't because it's glow.

This year I'll have some stuff FT sized(Including a 4-cycle Simple Scout if I get it built in time...or maybe I'll build it in the clubhouse? Might be amusing, bring all the stuff I'll need and build a nitro Simple Scout right there at Edgewater haha) as well, so I should be able to fly just fine over the front lawn. I don't buy a speed argument; the race wings zipping around in that area were easily going 70+ and I don't think I'll have anything that fast(If I do, itt'l be the 1/2a Kaos kit I got off eBay yesterday which'll be powered by a Fox 049 FAI swinging a 6-4 prop)
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#35
yaeh I've heard the same arguments...and then I hear tell some flying fields in California have banned lithium powered models due to a couple of them eating :poop: and starting brush fires as a result, something you just do not get with glow, get exceedingly rarely with gasoline piston aircraft.

The only models that pose a significant and tangible fire risk are high-speed brushless ones and turbines.

I'm putting this beaut on a SIG 4*64, with a 14-6 prop on it. You run the numbers on that combo, tell me what speed it's typically gonna be flying at, and then tell me with a straight face it poses more of a risk to a bystander than a brushless model of the same size...


Sadly, it seems even Josh Bixler falls afoul of some of these myths. When I was at FPVFest 2019 I flew my NexSTAR 46 off Read-I-Board Runway right in the front lawn of Edgewater. Apparently he thought it was a bit too risky and politely nudged me over towards the 7th hole fairway. I 'spose a 7lb plane bonking someone on the head might not be ideal but it isn't because it's glow.

This year I'll have some stuff FT sized(Including a 4-cycle Simple Scout if I get it built in time...or maybe I'll build it in the clubhouse? Might be amusing, bring all the stuff I'll need and build a nitro Simple Scout right there at Edgewater haha) as well, so I should be able to fly just fine over the front lawn. I don't buy a speed argument; the race wings zipping around in that area were easily going 70+ and I don't think I'll have anything that fast(If I do, itt'l be the 1/2a Kaos kit I got off eBay yesterday which'll be powered by a Fox 049 FAI swinging a 6-4 prop)
Again nice rant!

Try this as an example of the strong bias against gas! I had a number of older GAS kits that I just did not have time ot build so I gave one to a young club member as his first kilt build. It was a "Bugs Ear" designed for a 0.020cuin Gas engine. It now sports a 200+ Wattes 2200 Kv electric motor running on 3S. Whereas the original design was for a nimble and quite slow park flier the current version is so fast that it is almost impossible to fly it straight without it leaving the flying area. I waited for it to pass the runway before I started the take off run on my warbird and yet it passed me again, (after flying the perimeter of the field) before I even had the gear retracted on my climb out.

If it hits someone fatality is almost assured but it is still regarded as being safer than the old 0.020 cuin model! My estimate is that it has a maximum speed well in excess of 100MPH. I have been offered to fly it but I decline as it is too fast for me, (WAY TOO FAST)!
 

JennyC6

Well-known member
#36
Again nice rant!

Try this as an example of the strong bias against gas! I had a number of older GAS kits that I just did not have time ot build so I gave one to a young club member as his first kilt build. It was a "Bugs Ear" designed for a 0.020cuin Gas engine. It now sports a 200+ Wattes 2200 Kv electric motor running on 3S. Whereas the original design was for a nimble and quite slow park flier the current version is so fast that it is almost impossible to fly it straight without it leaving the flying area. I waited for it to pass the runway before I started the take off run on my warbird and yet it passed me again, (after flying the perimeter of the field) before I even had the gear retracted on my climb out.

If it hits someone fatality is almost assured but it is still regarded as being safer than the old 0.020 cuin model! My estimate is that it has a maximum speed well in excess of 100MPH. I have been offered to fly it but I decline as it is too fast for me, (WAY TOO FAST)!
Yeah it's a bit silly. I bet that little plane is louder than it would have been with the Cox 020 on it as well!

I see a lot of posts on the FT FAns FB page about people getting an old fuel bird and asking how to convert it. I always say 'fly it ICE like it was designed'. This is part of why. They're not designed around electric power and converting them never produces the desired results.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#37
Yeah it's a bit silly. I bet that little plane is louder than it would have been with the Cox 020 on it as well!

I see a lot of posts on the FT FAns FB page about people getting an old fuel bird and asking how to convert it. I always say 'fly it ICE like it was designed'. This is part of why. They're not designed around electric power and converting them never produces the desired results.
The formula for conversion is simply the motor displacement in cuin multiplied by 2000 and the result in watts.
Sadly when you do the maths planes like the old Bugs Ear only use around 40 watts but the electric version uses 5 times the design power and it carries a heavy battery as well.

But then we must remember that the days of model construction and flight has been forever been altered by technology. There is no answer that finesse can provide to overcome the appeal of brute force!

The one consolation is that often such conversions are brief affairs as the higher weight, higher flying speeds, and flying a design way above its VNE result is almost total write-offs on the first heavy landing, combined with a number of spectacular mid-air disintegrations!

Always a good show!
 

JennyC6

Well-known member
#38
The formula for conversion is simply the motor displacement in cuin multiplied by 2000 and the result in watts.
Sadly when you do the maths planes like the old Bugs Ear only use around 40 watts but the electric version uses 5 times the design power and it carries a heavy battery as well.

But then we must remember that the days of model construction and flight has been forever been altered by technology. There is no answer that finesse can provide to overcome the appeal of brute force!

The one consolation is that often such conversions are brief affairs as the higher weight, higher flying speeds, and flying a design way above its VNE result is almost total write-offs on the first heavy landing, combined with a number of spectacular mid-air disintegrations!

Always a good show!
40 watts is still stronger than it was intended for. IIRC the 020s were only good for 30 and 40w was in the wheelhouse of the basic reedie 049s(With the TD049 being near 100). Then again the TD 020 could have been pushing 40w as well; I know they made a reedie and FRV version of that as well as the 049.

Another part of why I suggest people not try to e-convert old glow birds is because of how construction has changed over the years. Those old birds are built tail-heavy to balance out the weight of the engine on the front. Outrunners don't weigh much. You end up with a lot of nose lead and/or a way heavier battery than you'd otherwise need and a plane that's actually heavier than it would have been ICE.

I recently won an auction for a very old 1/2a Kaos kit. The listing had mentioned the possibility of E-converting it. I....am going to use a Fox 049 FAI I gave a carb to instead. It's intended for a TD049 which is roundabouts the same as the engine I'm going to be using and either mill is a mere fraction of what a brushless model would have. I almost feel like I saved it from a fate similar to that kit you gave away...

Kinda brings me to another rant as well...one which applies regardless of fuel source.

A lot of guys say you need way WAY more power than you really do!

One of the planes I'm planning on building...once Tower restocks them...is the Kaos 60 ARF. I have an absolute dreamboat of an FS70 Surpass that would have no problem whatsoever hauling the mail in that thing! It's so light you can fly them on a 40 2c fer cryin' out loud! Yet when I float this plan I often get some smart-aleck going 'hey you need at least a 90 4c for that plane' or 'c'mon it's gonna be underpowered use an OS 61FSR with a pipe and blablabla prop blablafuel blablablablabla'. BLAH I SAY! It's my plane it's my choice and if the FS-70 I have in my hand right this instant will give a Tower Kaos 60 ARF a thrust/weight ratio > 1 why would I want a bigger engine? I'm already gonna be pottering along at less than half power most of the flight anyway, what gain do I have by putting a 90 4c or a piped 60 2c on the thing?
 
Last edited:

JasonK

Well-known member
#39
There are a few people with gassers at the field I found to fly at. They are louder then some of the planes, but the race wing and the EDFs are close to the same amount of noise. Now, I flinch/look away every time they start them... they don't use a stick or a starter... but use their fingers/hands to start them....

That is one thing that I do like with electrics over gas, and something to consider in terms of safety. From what I can see, there is more bits that can mechanically break, they have a minimum RPM (no cutting the engine to zero), and starting them takes some extra caution to do safely (in no way to I think that they can't be flown safely/etc, just that there are more things to be sure of).
 

JennyC6

Well-known member
#40
There are a few people with gassers at the field I found to fly at. They are louder then some of the planes, but the race wing and the EDFs are close to the same amount of noise. Now, I flinch/look away every time they start them... they don't use a stick or a starter... but use their fingers/hands to start them....
That's fine for the really small ones...I'm talking 049s and such...because they're too weak to do any damage if they bite. And that's ok to do with the super big ones, shockingly enough, because they idle so slowly that you'll have your hand out of the prop disc before the thing picks up enough speed to bite you.

Still, if you're hand-starting an engine, use a chicken stick(My poor-man's chicken stick is just a screwdriver held by the shank) or put on a welding glove. If you're wearing the glove and it bites you, it's gonna hurt like hell, but it won't do any actual damage.


....personally I just use an electric starter and be done with it. Just a kiss and the engine's running, my fingers are never in the prop, all's good in the world.
That is one thing that I do like with electrics over gas, and something to consider in terms of safety. From what I can see, there is more bits that can mechanically break, they have a minimum RPM (no cutting the engine to zero), and starting them takes some extra caution to do safely (in no way to I think that they can't be flown safely/etc, just that there are more things to be sure of).
I find myself more skeezed out working on electrics tbh. I shouldn't have to remove the prop every time I want to check/adjust the servos but that's the safe way to do it with an electric. A fuel plane can't just randomly bite you during a servo check/adjust because the Tx got bumped. There's only one time it can bite you and it will never be a surprise when it does that. Not with electric. Electric is just as inert appearing when it's live and ready to fly as when there's no battery installed at all.