RE: Airtronics Aquila 99
The sheeting is added to the bottom of the airfoil... in stock form, the top of the wing is already sheeted from LE to spar. As mentioned above, addition of the lower sheeting is called the "Miller mod", after Skip Miller, who won the 1977 world championships with an Aquila. But you need to do a little research before you do the mod, IMO: from a performance standpoint, you might screw up a good flying airplane if this is not done correctly. The mod also included a reshape of the leading edge, creating a "Phillips entry" airfoil. Google is your friend...
Posted on: 5/15/2013 2:18 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11512000

RE: 157
Interesting... are you telling us the Chinese were ripped off by the Chinese???!!! Seriously, what were the big differences between the "real" 157 inch Discus and the "711" in the link?
Posted on: 11/5/2011 4:27 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10797747

RE: Gliding In The Rain?
Aside from the fact it's typically going to be really poor soaring conditions (usually not much lift about while it's raining!), the bird is typically going to fly like crap. Relatively speaking, a lot of extra weight in the form of raindrops will be present on the plane. And those same drops tend to mess up aerodynamics to boot... again, they're relatively large in comparison to the airfoil, and with a glider you're typically not flying fast enough to keep them from just sitting there and disrupting airflow.
Posted on: 2/26/2011 6:01 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10364760

RE: What is My Plane Worth?
You could watch this auction and get some idea of what one is worth... http://cgi.ebay.com/72-AEROBATIC-SAILPLANE-BOB-MARTIN-RC-MODELS-COYOTE-/250762546882?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a629ccec2
Posted on: 1/25/2011 5:24 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10286687

RE: Ditigal elevator trim lament
[quote]ORIGINAL: aeajr 8103 is a very good sailplane radio. why would you want to give it up? [/quote] I don't... that was the point I was trying to make. BMatthews said he didn't like digital trims, I was simply agreeing - emphatically!
Posted on: 10/19/2010 11:04 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10078618

RE: Ditigal elevator trim lament
[quote]ORIGINAL: BMatthews But none of this changes the fact that I still hate digital trim levers.... :D [/quote] Precisely why they'll have to pry my early XP8103 (analog trims, sailplane capable, and 2.4 upgradable) from my cold, dead fingers!
Posted on: 10/19/2010 7:23 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10078306

RE: 157
WRT that ASH-26 high start launch on YouTube, gotta say... NICE recovery! I'm thinkin' the throws (launches) were ummm.... less than perfect. [:D] Meanwhile, do you know what your 4M ended up weighing, exactly? Also, what did you use for servos?
Posted on: 5/15/2010 8:09 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9735088

RE: 157
On a high start, you say? Details man, we need details... rubber ID/OD, rubber and twine lengths, wind conditions, etc. I have one of these planes in the mail, and I am very interested in launching with a high start myself.
Posted on: 5/10/2010 11:23 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9725150

RE: High Start Question
I would stick with the 5/16"... it's just a matter of not over-doing it on the stretch. And actually, you'll probably find yourself using all the power available, once you get enough launches behind you and the conditions are right (little or no wind).
Posted on: 4/1/2010 5:41 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9630340

RE: High Start Question
[quote]ORIGINAL: wholds Thanks for the input. Iv'e gone ahead an ordered a 50' spool of 1/4'' OD. The way I see it there is no ''exact science'' to this launch system, only general guidelines to get you moving in the right direction. [/quote] Actually, there is a fair amount of science here with a little "art' thrown in as well, but still... physics is physics. [;)]I think you'll find the 1/4" (assuming 1/16th wall) is a little weak for your plane, unless you have a bit of a breeze in your face. I can't upload an .XLS or .DOC file here, or I would post a page of high start data that you will probably find useful. Go here: [link=http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1185805&page=3#post14285344]High Start Rubber Specs[/link]
Posted on: 4/1/2010 3:21 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9630063

RE: High Start Question
I'm going to disagree a little with the previous post... I don't think you're [i]that[/i] far off on your rubber size. While your current stuff may be a wee bit oversize for the Fling, that's far better than too small; you can always adjust the stretch to match the model weight. At a "full" 300% stretch (25 + 75 = 100 ft stretched length), you should be seeing about 9 lbs load. That might be a bit much for a 22 oz plane, but stretching somewhere around 200-250% should put you in the ballpark, e.g. 6-7 lb pull for your 1.4 lb Fling.
Posted on: 4/1/2010 10:35 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9629475

RE: Spirit Elite Kit discontinued?
You're right... on the GP website, the specs show an 8 oz difference between the ARF and the kit... that's quite a lot. There would be a difference in the fuselage weights (fiberglass vs wood) and certainly in the weight of the wing joiners (steel rod vs aluminum/wood sandwich). Also, the ARF is equipped with steel elev/rud pushrods, and the kit uses plastic. I don't see any other differences, so I'm not sure I buy an 8 ounce lighter airframe with the kit; particulary given the somewhat optimistic (IMHO) 41-43 oz advertised flyiing weight for the ARF. I built one of these and [u]just[/u] came in at the top end of that range, by using fairly light (0.32 oz) servos in all 6 positions, and substituting plastic elev/rud pushrods. Just to confuse the issue further, I notice the manual for the ARF shows a somewhat more realistic (using recommended servos and stock pushrods) flying weight of 46-48 oz, as does the box it came in. And to top it off, the kit instruction manual doesn't even show an advertised flying weight.
Posted on: 2/22/2010 8:28 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9525403

RE: Oldies You Still Fly
Make it 73... but I'm afraid it's yet another Aquila. [:)] Maiden flight was in March of 1981, and I've flown it as recently as this past November.
Posted on: 2/14/2010 10:27 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9503087

RE: Airtronics Aquila 99
In my experience, if the Aquila wing is built as designed, there are absolutely no problems using a high start. The 1970's Olympic II had the exact same wing box design; while flying in too much wind with a lot of ballast, I once bent the wing rod in my Oly II approximately 30 degrees on an overly zealous launch. The wing itself was undamaged. Sure looked weird on the way back down (and boy... was it coming DOWN!) with the outer wing sections literally closer to vertical than horizontal. [X(] I currently own an Aquila I built in 1981 that has over 1200 high start launches behind it. I have flown it very recently in more wind than I should have (15 mph gusting to 25)... that 28-year-old stock wing will still shrug off a stout high start launch.
Posted on: 11/23/2009 8:29 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9274084

RE: World Models Patty Wagstaff 300 engine question?
Hooker, You've got the idea on the rudder servo trap door... it really doesn't take long to set it up as shown. I used the stock pull-pull hardware on the rudder (possibly in the running for the world's shortest pull-pull setup!), and it has worked perfectly fine with only occasional re-tensioning. As for engine mount bolts, I did not use the kit hardware. I believe they are 6 mm allen head bolts; I may have had to drill out the engine backplate holes to use these, can't remember. I also have a strip of aluminum stock (maybe .200" thick?) running across the top two bolt hole locations to reinforce the firewall in that area. 10 mm hex nuts on the top two bolts, captive nuts in the lower two. Later, Gary
Posted on: 2/8/2005 12:12 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2634664

RE: World Models Patty Wagstaff 300 engine question?
Hooker53, Here are some engine cowling pics, should give you an idea of where to start cutting. A couple of "please-note's": - 2 extra screws at the bottom of the cowling to keep that portion of it from flapping in the breeze. Also, I epoxied short pieces of 1/4" wooden dowel into the fuselage at the 6 stock screw locations. - The extra long slot behind the muffler facilitates cowling installation and removal. To remove the cowling, it must be slid forward and tilted down to port. A little tricky, but not a complete Chinese Puzzle. BTW, obviously the plug wire must also be removed. - Choke control can be seen on the outside of the cowling in the head-on shot. Outer end of the rod is threaded, onto which a short piece of nyrod is screwed, after cowl installation. Pull out to choke, pop back in to run. Speaking of running, I strongly recommend you stick with the manufacturer's suggestion on oil for the FPE 52... Bel-Ray MC1. Use of other oils (Stihl chainsaw oil, for instance) can result in a broken crankshaft after prolonged use (about 250 flights or so). Don't ask me how I know all this neat info, but I can give you the failure mode... the top of the piston becomes carboned up and eventually begins hitting the squish area of the combustion chamber. [:o]
Posted on: 2/7/2005 12:29 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2630762

RE: World Models Patty Wagstaff 300 engine question?
Hooker53, No problem, I'll take the cowl picture today. BTW, I should have mentioned one other modification that I (and many other builders) made to the kit. I epoxied the horizontal stab halves to the fuse. Transportation with the stabs in place was not an issue in my case, so they were installed permanently. Gary
Posted on: 2/7/2005 5:49 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2629756

RE: World Models Patty Wagstaff 300 engine question?
Hooker53, I have a photo of the installation, but I'm having a problem imbedding the image in this post. In any case, it's essentially a piece of lite ply epoxied to a couple of rails that were installed across the fuselage. No problems after about 350 flights. Due to the fact that the firewall has 3 degrees of right thrust, the front of the cowl is noticebly "crooked" by design. If the engine is mounted correctly, the engine shaft hole in the front of the cowl will end up pretty much on the centerline of the plane as viewed from above; but the spinner interface "flat" will NOT be perpendicular to same. No problems with ground clearance... the only props I've broken were the result of stupid mistakes on my part that would most llikely have produced the same result with an 18" or 20 prop. FWIW - I'm doing this from memory, but if I recall correctly, the following items that came with the kit were deemed inadequate and were replaced either during buildup or immediately thereafter, in order of importance: Aileron and elevator pushrods - too small (use 4-40) Main gear tires - worn out in a couple dozen flights Tailwheel assembly - too small/flimsey Ail/Elev/Rud hinges - very strong, but they are metal on metal and will eventually wear out the pins Fuel Tank - too big (I average 0.7 oz per flying minute - I use a 12 oz tank) Later, Gary
Posted on: 2/6/2005 3:10 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2627804

RE: Frequency scanner experience???
Yes - If there are two transmitters on the same channel at the same time, on the 7200, you see the Error Count rapidly incrementing.
Posted on: 10/7/2004 8:41 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2235106

RE: When did Jr 955 reciever come out?
Smokey, The R955 and R945 receivers were introduced at least a couple of years ago, if memory serves. Also, if the R950 (and/or R940) being sold are marked "Hi band" or "Low band", they're even older... probably several years older. JR started center-tuning receivers (doing away with the hi/lo band markings) some time back. Gary L.
Posted on: 4/20/2004 9:34 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1740992

RE: FM or PCM??
Rob, I'll repeat (in fact, I'll quote!) what I said early in this thread... post #6 to be exact... I still think this sums it up: [quote]Tony, Admittedly ad copy, I think the following quote from a well known distributor of RC equipment says it best: "And as far as the tired old PCM vs. FM debate goes, do any of us really believe every TOC competitor in recent memory flew with PCM just to be fashionable?" Despite the naysayers, the best fliers in the world seem to think there are advantages to flying PCM. In your specific case (the 6102 system and R700 PPM vs R770 PCM), there is exactly 20 bucks difference. IMHO, it's a no-brainer... buy the PCM receiver. [/quote] Gary L.
Posted on: 3/18/2004 7:55 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1638409

RE: JR CRYSTAL
The dots on JR receiver crystals, in simplest terms, tell you where the crystal is "tuned", based on factory test, relative to the marked frequency. I don't know about other (outside USA) distributors, but I believe that Horizon has a shipment policy [u]for complete systems[/u] that keeps the transmitter and receiver crystals within one "dot" of each other. In other words, if the Tx crystal is left-dot, they do not ship it with a receiver that is right-dot. If the Tx crystal is center-dot, it can be shipped with any Rx crystal. etc. As I understand it, this is all simply an effort to maximize range and interference rejection. In your case, if there are no dots on the Tx crystal, I suppose you could consider it a center-dot crystal, but that's a guess... not a statement of fact. I've personally never seen a modern JR Tx crystal without dots... where was this purchased, and how long ago? Gary L.
Posted on: 3/18/2004 10:51 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1636906

RE: TX freq change
Yes... no retune of the transmitter itself is required, since all the RF goodies are in the module. I haven't seen them any cheaper than at Chief. Gary L.
Posted on: 3/14/2004 8:56 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1622779

RE: TX freq change
To my knowledge, there is no "highband/lowband" with respect to transmitters, and certainly not in the case of the JR XP783. Certain receivers (current Futaba models and some older JR models come to mind) are "banded", but no transmitters that I know of. Legally, morally, and otherwise, you have two choices: 1 - Buy the new module, complete with crystal 2 - Have the current module re-tuned after the crystal is replaced There are those in these forums that will argue, until the cows come home, that the re-tune is not necessary. They are, in my opinion, individuals of a type that tend to end up as participants on "Fear Factor". [:D] Gary L.
Posted on: 3/14/2004 5:06 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1622566

RE: Crow on 6 channels? (JR XP662)
Frank, I would suggest you go to the [i][b]Radio Manufacturer Support Subforum / JR Radios - Ask Danny at JR[/b][/i] and ask the question. I could have sworn at one time there was a programming guide on the Horizon website that addressed, quite thoroughly, setting up an UltraStik with the XP662. It seems to have disappeared, but that's not too unusual for the Horizon site. I see one for the XF631 and the new XP6102, but not the XP662. It runs in my mind that with the 662, you can have all of the UltraStik "crow" features normally available with the 7 and 8 channel radios, except one... I [i]think[/i] it was the coupled flaps and ailerons feature (super-duper killer roll rate), but I'm not sure. In any case, Danny will be able to help you, as he [u][b]writes[/b][/u] the programming guides! Gary L.
Posted on: 3/13/2004 10:38 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1620385

RE: 36MHZ Crystal useability in RX from USA?
xphasor, Absotively, posilutely... NO. You can't expect a receiver that is tuned to 72 MHz to successfully receive and interpret a transmitted signal on 36 MHz, no matter what crystal you put in it. Gary L.
Posted on: 3/13/2004 10:19 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1620337

RE: JR D/C crystals
If you have a JR DC rx crystal but want to change channels, you might try the crystal exchange program at radicalrc.com. Otherwise, you're probably stuck with Horizon. And even then, I don't think they have all channels in stock... there just aren't that many R940/R945 receivers out there. Incidentally, the Horizon p/n for a DC rx crystal is JRPXDR**, where ** is the channel number. Gary L.
Posted on: 3/12/2004 9:34 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1617097

RE: AMA rule on changing radio crystals
[quote]FHHuber when you purchase a JR TX only (10X) it is shipped with out a TX module so you can not trace the TX through the S/N in reference to what frequency or channel it was manufactured with. [/quote] No, but you can trace the RF module S/N, which is all that really counts in the case of a modular Transmitter. The RF module [b]IS[/b] the transmitter for the purposes of this... urrrr, uhhh... discussion. [;)] Gary L.
Posted on: 3/10/2004 5:49 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1611448

RE: R700 CH 36 ???
Bill, Short answer... No. Long answer... It won't work. [;)] Gary L.
Posted on: 3/7/2004 8:19 AM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1598924

RE: RE: RE: RE: AMA rule on changing radio crystals
It has been proven time and time again... there is no connection between helicopters and men in black suits. [:D]
Posted on: 2/29/2004 2:11 PM by Author "AMA-69405" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1576539