RE: More Power
Ooooh. Those are both great suggestions. I'm currently watching an auction for a Norvel .061, but if that falls through, the head you mentioned 09Flyer is definately of interest. It's not like it needs a heap more power, it flies, straight forward in a gracefull slowly descending glide. I can tell she will be a great flyer....she just won't climb. My first leaning was towards Combatpigs mind frame, that being...if alittle more power is good, even more is better....lol. But then I am still trying to get the transplant under the same hood as the surestart, so clearance is tight. The .061 seemed like it might be a good compromise of size to power boost offered. ZZ.
Posted on: 5/19/2013 5:31 PM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516480

RE: More Power
Well, I don't necessarily need the same mount, I guess I could make a stock TD or Norvel fit. What size of each of these are you recommending? .061 Norvel or TD? Really I'm just looking to fit it into the same space without an engine head sticking up any higher. Thx, ZZ.
Posted on: 5/18/2013 6:11 PM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11515535

More Power
For the 1/2-A experts. I'm looking for an engine with the same footprint as a regular Surestart, but with more power. Any suggestions? I've seen .049 variants, but can't tell how they really stack up against a stock SureStart power increase wise. Any advice is much appreciated. I've also seen .050's mentioned, but where to find one....hmmmm. Tougher still. TIA. ZZ.
Posted on: 5/18/2013 5:30 PM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11515502

RE: H-9 RV8 wing failure
A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. I found this out the hard way in one of my own designs. The wing was minimalistic, but plenty strong, the struts leading to the wing added plenty of support, the whole schema was very finely built to be light, yet very well designed and strong for that lightness. The only thing I failed to calculate well was the glue joints where the supporting struts met the wing. All of the pressure on all of those surfaces was equally distibuted through all of these elements....only those tiny little glue joints were the weakest link, with no mechanical advantage holding them fast.....only the glue itself. Result? After about 10 flights....pulling up from a shallow dive, one wing broke free from its supporting struts, folded back over the fuselage, and the whole shebang augured in quite fantastically. Ever since then, I learned to think of these connections more critically when designing, and use not just the glue, but mechanical advantage in the designs to keep this from ever ocurring again. ZZ. PS. Was pretty spectacular though![;)]
Posted on: 4/16/2012 7:32 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11044033

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
"[i]Yes most rc planes are toys but any rc vehicle carring a payload for destruction is no longer a toy.[/i]" Sure it's a toy, it's just a lethal one![:D] And that is exactly why this will always be a "to each his own" ultimate conclusion discussion. It's far too subjective to definitively classify. Still interesting to try though. ZZ. PS. Really though, and not playing the devils advocate, my personal take on the drone topic is that it is a fusion, and could totally be percieved as either, or even both at the same time....much like the Cri-cri as well.
Posted on: 3/13/2012 10:30 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10998519

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
[i]Toy and model is about ego. Model or tool is defining purpose. [/i] Well this is clearly your breakdown...but is by no means universal. Some folks have no "ego in the fight". [i]For us, the Connie was a landmark:-) [/i] Now see this is where it becomes interesting again. The plane....has now become something else....a landmark. Now is this because it can no longer fly and is therefore no longer really a "real plane" just the vestige of one? It's also interesting to see the "word associations" that people have, even subconcsiously with certain words. For instance, a "toy poodle". Ok, it's a real animal, it's only called "toy" because of it's diminutive stature, and cuteness. Very much perception based, but not reality in fact. Strange... [:D] ZZ.
Posted on: 3/13/2012 8:25 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10998370

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
"[i]As for the child lets go back to the giant. OK we'll take a child the size of a sky scraper. Also will have two 747's. [/i][i]One will be a "real" 747. The other will be the same size but it will be a toy. The "real" one would be more like a model to our child giant. He can look at it and very gently push it around. However if he grabbed onto the nose with one hand and lifted the 747 up the force needed to keep the plane from rotating and falling out of the hands grip would buckle the bulkheads. The rear portion would shear off and fall to the ground because the 747 has not designed to support all it's 833,000 pounds by the nose. Now the one next to it is a toy. It was purposely designed for the giant child. It has 12" thick steel walls and reinforced steel frame. It was designed to support it's weight no mater how it's lifted and to resist the force of the giant child's grasp. It's also utterly incapable of flight just as a normals child's toy plane is incapable of flight.[/i]" This bit was very well reasoned AW. You fleshed out the principles involved very thoroughly, and your conclusion is insightful based upon the proof you worked out. I actually would have to agree with your conclusion. It all comes back to the "[b]economies of scale[/b]" after all. I think you become more familiar with them when you've actually done some designing yourself and have had to deal first hand with these issues. Most people just go to the store and buy their plane of the shelf (or catalog) and other than maybe even remedially assembling it, have no idea how or why the design works...hence the immediate "Toy" conceptualization. They have no idea why the wings have to be a certain thickness, or shaped the way they are, why pressure points, contact points, and spars are all just the way they are, and for what reason, and mainly because when things get really small, coupled with our modern lightweight materials, you can slap a foam wing on a plank and it'll fly. However, each of these elements is designed to do its job, from the full scale bird, to the smallest, (and I'm talking real flyable plane) and if done wrong, can produce the same results as when your giant skyscraper childe grabbed onto the nose of the real flyable 747. So the economies of scale fool us into thinking that because once I get into 1/4 scale aircraft as opposed to smaller, and it actually needs a wooden spar, internal structures to support the ribs and wing mounts, longerons and fuselage formers, and all of this instead of just a hollow foam skin of a smaller scale machine, that this is somehow less a toy....and the other is more, when they are simply different materials performng the same work. Deceptively different, but the same. Now you can still call it a toy if you like....I don't think anyone really has an ego issue about this....if so thats puzzling really....who cares!? But if you are philosophically objective, I think a flying machine is a flying machine....no matter what scale it's in. Of course others could have a cut-off determination that unless a human can ride in it, it's not real either. Well....ok, so where does that leave military drones? I have heard folks say "isn't it funny and degrading that some terrorist elements were killed by our flying "toys". Yeah, I guess if thats your definition parameter....it is pretty strange. Ah well....potato...potawto. It is a fascinating discussion though...with no definite answer.[;)] ZZ. More fun food for thought, so is [b]this[/b] a toy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDmnjwbJrVM Some may say yes....lol.
Posted on: 3/13/2012 7:01 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10998268

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
[i]In both scenarios you use the word "real". [/i] [i]You qualify a plane being real by the capacity to carry a life form.[/i] My apologies, was using it in a generic fashion, perhaps nopt the best use. But was attempting to capture whatever a person conceptualizes as "not a toy". Perhaps there is a better term. Also, it seems the mental association with Toy or not, does lie partly, perhaps subconsciously with the ability to carry a living being, so that's why I chose these scenarios for thought. [i]This is why a model is not a toy. A small child is incapable of handling an intricate model with out damaging it. [/i] This is an interesting argument in the pro column....ie they are not toys.[:D] Or is that the No column? and lastly.... [i]Toys or not toys, who cares, as long as you enjoy it. [/i] Cause sometimes it's fun to pick nits.[;)] ZZ.
Posted on: 3/12/2012 11:29 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10997142

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
[i]DrZoom[/i] I think I'm gonna start going by this title........lol.[;)] ZZ. PS...Amish Warlord.....good thumbnail break down of the score so far! PsPS.....: Ok, so a giant walks up to one of our full size aircraft....you know, the kind we-all can actually get into and fly around, picks it up and starts playing with it. So now is it real.....or a toy? Second scenario. I stick a hamster in a little flight suit, make a nice comfy cockpit, stick him into my 1/4 scale gasser and fly him around a bit. Other than PETA showing up screaming through a bull horn to "land that hamster bearing machine this instant young man!!"...to that hamster, is it a real airplane? hmmmmm, perspective perspective perspective.[:D]
Posted on: 3/12/2012 8:47 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10996669

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
Yup.[:D] dae·dal (ddl) adj. 1. Ingenious and complex in design or function; intricate. 2. Finely or skillfully made or employed; artistic. ZZ.
Posted on: 3/9/2012 10:16 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10993054

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
toy (toi) n. 1. An object for children to play with. 2. Something of little importance; a trifle. 3. An amusement; a pastime: thought of the business as a toy. 4. A small ornament; a bauble. 5. A diminutive thing or person. 6. A dog of a very small breed or of a variety smaller than the standard variety of its breed. 7. Scots A loose covering for the head, formerly worn by women. 8. Chiefly Southern U.S. A shooter marble. intr.v. toyed, toy·ing, toys 1. To amuse oneself idly; trifle: a cat toying with a mouse. 2. To treat something casually or without seriousness Interestingly enough, according to the definition,many things, including things we wouldn't normally consider, could be considered toys, while others such as RC planes, seem actually less fittingly placed in this category. Specifically item no.2 in both sections, would clearly remove RC planes...depending of course on one's state of mind in regards to them. This element of state of mind is quite important in this area of discussion. Items 1 and 3 could be seen as qualifying an RC plane for this status, but I would make the argument that a 2000 buck 3-d worthy aerobat, is not the same as an air-hogs Toys-r-us, mass manufactured item, so in this case they are quite different. Annnnnd if we are going to use number 3 as a qualifier alone, then quite a few items of life could (erroneously in my opinion) be included as well. ZZ.
Posted on: 3/9/2012 7:20 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10992830

RE: Are Scale RC Models Toys?
[i]I myself would classify the painting of the Mona Lisa as not a tool or a toy but as another object called art.[/i] Much in this vein, I refer to my RC aircraft creations as "[b]3-Dimensional Flying Art[/b][i][/i]!" Beat that.[;)] ZZ.
Posted on: 3/8/2012 7:00 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10991299

RE: Minnie Mambo
Nice lookin machine![;)] I got to thinking while reviewing your build pics that if this bird was built just the same but with fanfold foam, it might be 1/4 to 1/3 lighter still. Hmmmmmm. ZZ.
Posted on: 2/22/2012 11:22 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10970862

RE: A TRIBUTE TO MY SON, CHARLES IV
Enduring gratitude, and sincere prayers are all I have to offer, and they are ever yours. Yet these are no comparison to the much greater gift you and your son have given to all of us. Thank You. ZZ.
Posted on: 2/21/2012 8:15 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10969004

RE: Triplane finished!
Youch! thats a stunner. Gonna look great in the air! ZZ. ummmm, flight video pleeeeeeaaase.
Posted on: 2/16/2012 6:47 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10961463

RE: Thrust or no thrust on your large WWI models?
[i]I have had good success using 0 down and 0 right. A lot of it comes down to how the incidence is set. There is no convienient formula and it varies dependant on the airframe based on moment aspect ratio and about a billion other variables. Down thrust in a sport model seldom is a bad thing, same goes for right thrust. There are ways to work around it however. [/i] Precisely.[:D] ZZ.
Posted on: 2/8/2012 10:20 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10949836

RE: Thrust or no thrust on your large WWI models?
Right thrust[b] is[/b] often a necessary addition engine wise, quite simply because it is counteracting the torque generated by the engine itself. So therefore, an effective way to deal with this engine generated issue, is with the engine of course. Now that being said, on some short nosed (WWI especially) aircraft, the torque is minimal so instead of going to that trouble, its easier to just null it out with rudder. If however your nulling is requiring you to fly with a LOT of rudder all the time, changing the engine thrust can eliminate a great deal of this, while reducing drag and causing your machine to fly better over-all as a result. And because you are remedying an engine based issue with the engine itself, you don't have an issue when the engine quits....ie, both the problem and its remedy are gone then, and you are unaffected elsewhere. ZZ.
Posted on: 2/8/2012 8:54 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10949712

RE: Thrust or no thrust on your large WWI models?
[i]The odd thing it looks like with the pilot dialed in positive incidence the LE of the stab was raised up slightly INTO THE WINDSTREAM.[/i] Correct....that would be positive incidence. Thereby acting the same as down elevator if you will, and causing a nose down moment. ZZ. PS. apologies if that didn't make sense....was that what you were asking? PS-PS. Interesting construction diagram, I noted how the stab actuates on a pivot point, but couldnt quite make out what mechanism moved it from the rear. In the rear it seems it's fitted to a pipe or tube with a "pipe joint" of sorts, so maybe it slides up and down on this? Unusual design. Also a handy feature.[;)] PS-PS-PS...lol. Another item for thought is that when we make adjustments to our machines via flight surfaces, they always remain in effect, but when we make them via engine thrust lines, they only remain in effect when the engine is running, and change variably according to engine rpm. So that being the case, I find it's better to adjust fore-aft pitch trim with stabiliser adjustments as opposed to engine. Ever see a plane balloon and stall as soon as the engine quits? Thats because it was trimmed or "remedied" with a lot of engine downthrust to fix a problem. As opposed to it being fixed with the stab which is completely un-affected by the engine, so if the engine quits, it remains effective, and subject to only your airspeed and attitude, just like the rest of the plane. I think that's better, but sometimes you have no choice and engine thrust can help.
Posted on: 2/8/2012 7:15 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10949535

RE: Thrust or no thrust on your large WWI models?
[i]The best thing is to build adaptability into the plane so you can make minor changes to help out.[/i] Very truly stated. I usually scratch build my own designs so there are no "plans" to refer to, and sometimes it's a challenge to balance via thrust and weight a tricky design for flight worthiness. Most times I'm dead-on and she flies off the board with little or no need of improvement, but once and a while you have to re-work items. Items that when you buy a kit or build from a plan have already been re-worked through two or three generations of the design to get right. Sometimes this means changing wing incidences, weight distributions, and ocassionaly re-seating the horizontal stab...(very no fun!!!), all to get things in synch and "on the bubble" if you will. The trickiest ones are where there are certain elements you simply can't change....like not being able to change thrustlines of the engine for instance....then you have to correct things in other ways. All in all though it's a challenging lot of fun. Ocassionally discouraging...([i]like the last plane I lost which was one of the wierd few that never survived the tweaking process[/i])....but overall quite rewarding. The greater the obstacles, the bigger the grin when she finally flies true.[;)] ZZ.
Posted on: 2/8/2012 5:47 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10949477

RE: Thrust or no thrust on your large WWI models?
If it's a fixed nose, ([i]at least thats what I call it[/i]) for instance albatros type where the shaped nose and precision spinner make it almost impossible, no, I just build straight and try to vector out the issues in other ways. So far, I've had no issues really. If its cowled, then a little down and right depending on nose length is helpful at times. ZZ. [i]Some planes have down thrust through the incidence settings or the wings and tail plane. The SE5 is like that. [/i] This is true, you can reproduce the same effect as engine downthrust by adding positive incidence to the horizontal stab for one thing.
Posted on: 2/7/2012 10:39 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10948211

RE: Build log: The Ryleigh Roooo
A little downthrust to the motor might help as well, but do one thing at a time so you will know what is causing what. If you do add any downthrust, make it veeeeeeery small, as with a machine as long nosed as yours is, the influence is much more profound. You say she is nose high, is she stable laterally as well? ZZ.
Posted on: 2/7/2012 5:17 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10947773

RE: Albatros D.III Build along
Nice build! I always look forward to seeing another Albitri in the air. An item of note: [i]This is the skin I'm going to do since I'm a big Jacobs and Jasta 7 fan, and I'll be covering it in Solartex. It will look nice next to my Jacobs Dr1. [/i] The color plate you showed is of an Albatros DVa, not a DIII. You can tell by the little strut portruding from the main V-strut and out to the LE of the bottom wing. Of course you can do a DIII in these colors, but if accuracy is your aim, I thought I'd bring it to your attention.[;)] But it might not be.....and thats cool too. Anyway, all the best and keep up the good work! ZZ.
Posted on: 2/6/2012 8:30 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10946351

RE: Build log: The Ryleigh Roooo
Beautiful, kinda has the flavor of a P-51 Mustang fused with the longer lines of a sailplane. ZZ.
Posted on: 2/1/2012 7:12 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10938285

RE: Siemens-Schuckert D.III 1/3 Scale
Wow, you are at the stage now when it's all really starting to come together. That's one of my favorite parts of the build process....enjoy it!! She's lookin great. ZZ. PS. These are the points when I find myself standing back and staring a lot......as the various pieces begin to mesh into a whole......lol. fun
Posted on: 2/1/2012 6:41 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10938254

RE: Build log: The Ryleigh Roooo
Well keep up the good work phatboy, it's lookin real nice. [i]The flivver build is cool zoomzoom do you have a build thread?[/i] I have not yet begun a build thread on RCU, and am contemplating doing so. Until then, I have something kinda like one here: http://cartoonplanes.wordpress.com/ It's where I post stuff preliminarily (aka before I've really figured out how to proceed
Posted on: 2/1/2012 6:23 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10938231

RE: Build log: The Ryleigh Roooo
Wait, I thought that was the OS.10 I lent you Flyinagin. Your memory.....dear me.[;)] All kidding aside though, I like seeing the old school foam-shaping you are doing phatboy. I used to do many designs this way, and it's very satisfying shaping the soft stuff, kinda like how you wish carving wood would be. I've transitioned to using card-model type bases for designs, and then translating them into fanfold. Here is a quick side shot of the Flivver fuselage.....this will be the only one I post here as I don't intend a hijack of your fine thread.[:D] Please forgive if it appears 2wice, I couldn't tell if it uploaded or not. An item of note, the way this is designed there is only one glue seam on the entire fuselage. All of the other angles are simply 'scored' on the inside, and bent to shape. ZZ.
Posted on: 1/31/2012 9:46 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10936891

RE: Build log: The Ryleigh Roooo
[:D]Keep up the good-work phatboy. Don't let the nay-sayin trolls drag you down. I'm doin a scale Ford Flivver in fanfold I might throw out soon with a hornet .09 in the nose.....but don't you daaaaaaare imagine it as an electric you so-in-so! [;)] ZZ.
Posted on: 1/30/2012 10:09 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10935199

RE: Psychology of RC flying
In this vein, I would also mention pre-flight mentality as being a big source of assistance in achieving the proper "mind frame" for flying. I often find myself becoming distracted by other life issues (or just trivial things) before flying, and those are the times when I seem to be the most out of touch, and have the worst performances. In addition, when I have thought about the machine I'm going to be flying a bit, [b]before[/b] I take her up, (wrap my brain around it in essence), I find the outcomes are always much better. Almost like a proper pre flight check if you will. You re-aquaint yourself with that particular plane and truly mentally put youself in that particular pilot seat. [i]I definitely felt that in a bad turn! I don't know how my brain creates this sensation but I feel physically weird. [/i] You mentioned this Abu, as well as feeling stick pressure at one point, and it reminded me of one occasion when I was flying a smallish Focke Wulf 190 A8, and having a good bit of fun wringing it out. It was one of those days when I was "in the groove", and your mentality is wrapped well around the plane....an almost out of body state. So I'm coming down hard from a very high loop, augur a few times and then straighten out while still diving nose earthward, when I hear it......a buzzing sound. Now I don't know where it came from, cause in the moment I really don't feel I could've connected the dots that quickly as this had never happened to me before, but instantly the words flashed across my mind....[b]"high speed flutter!"[/b] I quickly chopped all throttle and eased back on the elevator a touch, ( It really felt as though it were lead....perhaps it felt that way due to the lack of results from inputs)....but nothing....still plummeting. The ground is rushing up.....more severe elevator added....slowly.....the buzzing ceases....the nose comes up ever so slightly. More altitude gone and not much left.......almost full up elevator now, but not too much as there could be a snap! She starts to level as if in slow motion....but the ground is in high speed......she levels off at inches above the ground skimming the grass, and I ease her back out into the sky. All I can say is that it was a good thing I was in [b][b]the z[/b]one [/b]that day, otherwise I would have been digging that particular 190 out of the ground to take what was left home. It truly did remind me of all the bomber movies you see where the pilots are in a dive for some reason, and trying frantically with all their might to pull her out..... although we all know there is no force feedback present. Truly an odd sensation. ZZ.
Posted on: 12/7/2011 5:42 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10847639

RE: Psychology of RC flying
Too tame eh? "When the living beings moved, the wheels moved with them. When they flew upward, the wheels went up too. [b]The spirit of the living beings was in the wheels[/b]. So wherever the spirit went, the wheels and the living beings also went. When the beings moved the wheels moved. When the beings stopped, the wheels stopped. When the beings flew upward, the wheels rose up, for the spirit of the living beings was in the wheels" In my opinion, one of the earliest descriptions of remote control flying in History. Ezekiel 1: 19-21 ZZ.[:D][;)] PS: After all, isn't this an apt description of how we fly. Isn't [b]our spirit[/b] in these small machines, (via modern technology after all) causing them to do our will. Ahem....hopefully, once we put dumb thumbs aside.
Posted on: 12/6/2011 5:23 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10845710

RE: Psychology of RC flying
[i]I also wonder what it is that gives me the sense that a model is "heavy" or "light" in the air. I swear sometimes I can "feel" the G-forces through the sticks![/i] You are using "The Force" young Jedi.[:D] ZZ.
Posted on: 12/5/2011 7:26 AM by Author "ZoomZoom-RCU" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10844107