2012 Southern Scale Challenge
Having a great time at the 2012 Southern Scale Challenge. Here is a slide show featuring some of the models that have flown thus far. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkfziKZXr4s[/youtube] Enjoy! Chris Gregory
Posted on: 9/14/2012 10:02 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Helicopter General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228992

RE: Let's see your touch and go's
Great videos guys! I love me some touch and go's!!!!
Posted on: 9/13/2012 9:34 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11227963

RE: Great Planes Cherokee
Really can't go wrong with a Great Planes Big Stik. I prefer the .60 size, but the .40 sized ARF would be a great match for your OS .46. It's a light plane and has a big wing. Fully aerobatic, but a real kitty cat to land. The Pulse is a great looking airplane and flies well, but I much prefer the flight characteristics of the Big Stik. So many good planes out there.
Posted on: 9/10/2012 8:02 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11224511

RE: Let's see your touch and go's
Bill, I didn't build the plane (nor have I been the owner of it yet), but I sure have a good number of flights on her! The conversion was a little more complicated than you might think. As for building it as a low wing instead of a high wing, it's pretty easy. You just fabricate some balsa wing saddle pieces from 1/4 inch stock. Use a wing rib to trace the top of the airfoil on the balsa wing saddle and glue the wing saddle pieces in on the bottom instead of the normal square longerons. Figure out how to secure the wing on the leading and trailing edges (tried and true method is simply installing one or more wood dowels that mates in an aligning hole in the bulkhead and 2 nylong bolts for the trailing edge). On this particular model, I think the builder actually lengthened the fuselage just a bit to give it a slightly longer tail moment. Doing this would have been fairly easy and allowed him to get a some very nice looking lines on the model. The fuselage looks almost like a "Cherokee" instead of a Kadet Senior. I'm not positive that he lengthened the fuselage, but I think I recall it being mentioned by it's second owner. The other notable deviation from the stock Kadet Senior is that he moved the entire vertical fin back so that the trailing edge of the fin was in line with the trailing edge of the horizontal stabilizer. He then made a full length rudder that goes from the top of the vertical fin to the bottom of the fuselage. The Kadet Senior's rudder stops at the horizontal stabilizer. The builder originally left the design as a 3 channel model, but the flight results pointed out that it needed ailerons to make the model enjoyable to fly. The second owner purchased the model and added ailerons. The addition of ailerons made the model a joy to fly. She is very light for her size, and the .52 four stroke is plenty. At full throttle she can do all the basic aerobatics, including inverted flight. She doesn't really like being inverted, but she'll do it if you want to. At slow speed, she really lack rudder authority, and the ailerons (at slow speed) exhibit a slight amount of adverse yaw. In other words, at slow speed, when you apply right aileron, the nose of the aircraft tends to go to the left. For this reason, at her extreme slow end of the flight envelope, she is much happier if the pilot utilizes rudder inputs along with the aileron. It's quite amusing to see this big ole thing lumbering around at slow speeds. She can fly so slowly that she looks like she ought to be falling out of the sky, but she doesn't. She also handles wind quite nicely. Just a very relaxing model to cruise around with.
Posted on: 9/10/2012 7:53 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11224498

RE: suggestion for a club
Aerorich73 - no problem :) The Hooker is such an enjoyable airplane. I'm really having a blast flying her! She's a very very comfortable stunter (not a 3D airplane nor a pattern aircraft).
Posted on: 9/8/2012 7:59 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222332

RE: Let's see your touch and go's
Dalton RC Fliers Field in Dalton Ga. I sent a short e-mail to you :)
Posted on: 9/8/2012 7:23 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222295

RE: suggestion for a club
RCM Hooker. Designed by Chuck Cunningham This plane was featured in the 10/1981 edition of RCMagzine. A real sweetheart to fly. This plane would appeal to a wide diversity of pilots (from expert to those needing a great aileron trainer). Plans available through RCM Plans. http://www.rcmplans.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=1665 The only downside of this model as a one design subject is when tell your wife that you need to be at the flying field at such and such time because all the guys will be bringing their Hookers to the field. [image]http://images.rcuniverse.com/gallery/photos/113109/lg-232574.jpg[/image]
Posted on: 9/6/2012 6:30 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220147

Let's see your touch and go's
Low winged Sig Kadet Senior with a .52 four stroke. Not my plane, but I sure love flying her whenever she is brought to the field. This plane has been passed around some, and everyone in our club enjoys flying her when she shows up. Let's see some videos of your touch and go sessions!!!! [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z3OvJkAtNA&feature=player_embedded[/youtube] Cheers, Chris G
Posted on: 9/6/2012 4:41 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219280

RE: Anhedral Stab back in the Day?
The Curare was the plane that set off the whole anhedral craze. When Dave Brown dominated the field with the Curare, folks were obviously drawn to the bent tail and started asking questions. Yes, Dave always said it was there for a reason, but many folks throughout the years spent way too many hours disproving the reasoning behind the bent tail. I finally gave up trying to understand the aerodynamics of it and decided that if it worked for him on that one model, then great. Was it the anhedral tail that made the Curare so great? Smarter folks than me can continue to hammer on that, but having flown enough pattern "back in the day" as well as some SPA, I am of the opinion that the tail was much ado about nothing, and not enough credit is ever given to the pilot. Other designs had (or offered) anhedral tails. The Bootlegger could be built either way. many built it straight, many built it bent. Both swear by their personal decisions, but many who tried the Bootlegger each way decided it flew a little better with a straight tail. So... a bent tail in and of itself isn't really a factor. I never owned a Curare, nor did I ever see one without the bent tail. I don't think Wolfgang Matt, or Hano had bent tail models, and I don't think the Joe Bridy designs ever went down the anhedral road. As was mentioned by somebody earlier, the bent tail came on the scene and spread like crazy, then vanished nearly as quickly. As "turnaround" came on the scene (effectively killing most of the joy for the majority of pattern fliers) the planes started evolving into completely different machines bearing little (if any) resemblance to the models that established "the hey day" of AMA pattern flying. Bah... really didn't mean to enter into a rant. Sorry guys. My memory may fail me here, but I think the Curare, Tipo, Illusion, Bootlegger, Sky Knight represent the bulk of the bent tail models, with the Bootlegger having it as an option. I don't recall the Atlanta or the Aurora having anhedral either.
Posted on: 8/31/2012 5:16 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11213011

RE: RCM Hooker
Bluelt, We're planning on having a fly in on September 29th. Nothing fancy, just hoping to get a field full of pilots and airplanes. I'd love to see you at our fly in with your Hooker! Our field is a bit tight on the east end of the runway, but the west end is wide open. Those of us who fly in Dalton are pretty comfortable with downwind landings, but with the Hooker, you'd have no problem doing a left hand pattern, short field approach. All you need to do is make sure you turn within the field and not let the airplane drift out into the hungry treeline just off the east end of the runway :) I'm originally from Chattanooga, and my RC life prior to 1996 was spent as a member of the CRCC. I was asked to judge in your clubs recent SPA contest, and man did I have a blast at the event! Hope to be able to meet you soon. It would be cool to have 2 Hookers in the air!!!
Posted on: 8/27/2012 6:08 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11208339

RE: Great Time at the Chattanooga SPA contest
RFOL.. you'd think a bunch of pattern fliers would be able to keep a few little foamies out of the dirt wouldn't you? Not the case! There was mayhem and carnage strewn all about the place. Pylon flagmen were ducking and running for their lives and those of us int he peanut gallery who were watching were kept in stitches as the pilots tried to navigate their way around a simple 2 pylon course. I think that if the Gee Bee racing continues, the rules will have to be changed so that the pilots can pull up into a 1/2 reverse cuban eight at each end, rather than have to fly around a pylon. The entire day was just so much fun! Jamie, good to hear from you my friend. I hope your aches, pains and sinus issues go away soon. Hopefully I'll see you at the Masters in Chattanooga. I'm not even flying and I can't wait for it to get here.
Posted on: 8/26/2012 5:54 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11206320

Great Time at the Chattanooga SPA contest
Spent the day at the SPA contest in Chattanooga TN. today, and had a blast. Got to meet some old friends, and make some new ones. I saw some great flying and enjoyed a wonderful meal with all the SPA folks that gathered at one of the local restaurants after the contest. This was a very well run day of competition attended by approx 25 SPA pilots. Hats off to the Chattanooga rc club, as well as to all of the SPA folks. Thanks for the great time today!
Posted on: 8/25/2012 8:13 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11206059

RE: 60 size ARF
Great Planes Big Stik .60 ARF - OS 61AX or 65AX. You just can't go wrong with this airplane. You may get it as your second airplane, but it will quickly become your #1. $199.99 from Tower Hobbies, minus the discount puts it at $175. If you are a super saver member, then shipping will be free. The hardware in the kit is not premium quality, but it's plenty good enough for many years of hard flying! I built one in 2006 completely stock using the supplied hardware and never had a moments problem with any of it. She's NOT a 3D machine, but she's very capable of doing all the basic aerobatic stuff. She flies well enough to take you through advanced aerobatics and is still very capable of winning novice class pattern contests. You can use this plane to learn the finer points of things like flying through a roll rather than simply pushing the stick over and waiting for her to come around (although she's happy doing that as well if you want). What I'm trying to say is that she's a perfect all around airplane that has an extremely wide performance envelope. From solid aerobatics, to extremely slow and gentle touch and goes, the Big Stik .60 is a very clear winner. The fact that the model remains in production should speak volumes.
Posted on: 7/28/2012 10:54 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11172274

RE: Why is anything in RC controversial?
imho - the hobby itself has changed a lot in a relatively short amount of time. The whole question about "how to get started" used to be a fairly narrow answer. Today, that answer is much less cut and dried. The whole foamie vs conventional built up wood model is in itself liable to ignite much debate. It's completely possible for somebody to spend less than $200 and get a decent foam set up that flies well enough and is durable enough for a pilot to learn on his own. This is a huge deviation from days past where you had to build a trainer, find an instructor, and spend days/weeks/months learning to fly the thing. Some would argue that the inexpensive foam planes are not what "REAL" rc flying is all about. I understand their point of view, and agree that the person that takes the foamie route may not be as passionate about the hobby as someone else who does things more along the "old school" way. On the other hand, I have to completely disagree with those who take that stance because the point of the hobby is to enjoy a radio controlled flying machine. IF somebody is completely satisfied with the foamie experience, then the hobby is just as rewarding to him as the other folks who want the satisfaction of building/assembling/flying a more conventional built up model. It use to be that those who dabbled in RC always walked away unfulfilled, and never owned any decent equipment. Today, it's completely possible for somebody to dabble in the hobby and walk away with the level of satisfaction that was desired. That's a great thing, and a bad thing all at the same time, but at the end of the day, the more folks participate in the hobby at any level, the better off we all are! From department store RTF's , to multi-turbine monsters and everything in between, it's a great hobby! It's a great thing that folks can be successful within the hobby at what ever level they desire, and at pretty much whatever price they feel like paying. Didn't we all start with something like "paper airplanes" or a toy store glider of some type?
Posted on: 7/5/2012 2:59 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11144396

RE: Engine choice?
OS .55AX - awesome power plant. More than you need on the Something Extra, but no cons to using it over a .46 other than slight increase in fuel consumption. You'll never wish for more power in the Something Extra with a .55. The nice thing about the .55 is that it's a decent choice for many of the .61 sized sport planes available should you decided you want a larger aircraft in the future.
Posted on: 6/25/2012 6:27 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11131811

RE: RCM Hooker
Located north of Calhoun, Ga. and south of Dalton Ga. I'm a member of the Dalton RC Fliers club and our field is located in Dalton. The name of the model has made for some rather humorous comments and more than a few jeers from less informed members of the church :) Thanks for the compliments about the color scheme. I've really developed a love/hate relationship with Monokote and it's inconsistency from one roll to another. The covering job looks much better from 10 feet away than it does from 2 feet away [8|]
Posted on: 6/24/2012 8:23 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11130488

RCM Hooker
About a year and a half ago, I received a phone call from a flying buddy asking if I would be interested in having a "RCM Hooker" built for $180. What a bargain was my response. We had a mutual flying friend who offered to build us one each. Approximately 6 months later, I had my framed up Hooker. I promptly placed the Hooker in the man cave where she gathered dust for another 9-10 months. An unfortunate set of conditions lead to a fatal crash of my Great Planes Big Stik 60, and I found myself with only a Pantera helicopter to fly (the Pantera is a great .50 class helicopter by the way!!). The reality is that most of my flying time has been devoted to helicopters for the past 3 years and even my Big Stik had only received limited flight time. For whatever reason, the fact that I didn't have a .61 sized plank available to fly started getting on my last nerve, so I decided to get the Hooker finished up and into the air. I was able to maiden the Hooker Saturday morning 6/23/12, and quickly fell in love with her! She's an awesome flying airplane and quite the aerobat! I couldn't find a lot of information about the hooker other than it's specs. I did find one flight report that had a fairly decent flight review, but noticed something that made me scratch my head a bit. I have seen the RCM Hooker being flown by other pilots at other fileds back int he 80's and I recalled that there wasn't much the Hooker couldn't do. The flight report mentioned that the Hooker didn't snap or spin well. That simply did not match up with what I had witnessed of the aircraft "back in the day". I was very pleased to find that not only does the Hooker snap and spin, she does both very well. Entry into either is instant and recovery is just as quick. She's got an extremely thick airfoil, thus lots of drag so this is an airplane that will easily allow you to take off, perform a 1/2 reverse cuban eight to turn around and land gently on the runway from which she just departed. Rolling maneuvers are a breeze, Stall turns are effortless, she feels nice and comfortable at all times. You can drag her in from the boonies on a long low nose high approach by keeping the engine rpm up. You can also set up a high, nose down approach and set her down at a relatively slow speed due to her ability to slow down so well. The Hooker has extremely docile flight characteristics and requires substantial surface throws to make her feel at home in aerobatic situations. She has absolutely no tendency to be twitchy or unsettled. She's graceful in all that she does, but the snap rolls can be rather violent if that's how you prefer to do them. The Hooker is a more capable aerobat than the Big Stik .60, but at a price of being a little heavier wing loaded model. She's still extremely easy to land, but she doesn't have the "float" that the Big Stik does at slow speeds. Being about the same weight as a Big Stik .60, but with 290 less square inches of wing area, she can't stay in the air with the Big Stik in the extreme low speed envelope. She is every bit as easy to land, but does require more rpm during the approach than a Big Stik. In every other respect, I feel that the Hooker is a far more capable aircraft. She's no 3D machine, but a fantastic barnstormer that instills confidence to the pilot and entices the pilot to do maneuvers down low where they can be appreciated! She doesn't gain speed like crazy on down lines which gives the pilot time to complete maneuvers without worrying about smacking the ground. She's a real sweetheart and a joy to fly! [image]http://images.rcuniverse.com/gallery/photos/113109/lg-232574.jpg[/image] [image]http://images.rcuniverse.com/gallery/photos/113109/lg-232575.jpg[/image]
Posted on: 6/24/2012 3:36 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11130154

RE: If you could only have FIVE airplanes, what would they be?
Wow, I can't imagine having 5 planes, But if I could I would go based on my experience since the early 1970's 1) Big Stik 60 - no other plane I've flown comes close to it's versatility. Shame it's so... UGLY 2) Sig Kadet Senior 4ch ARF - Hey, sometimes I don't want to have to think about anything at all. 3) Aeromaster - Yes, there are lots of higher performance bipes, but the Aeromaster is very capable, and always the perfect lady. 4) A mid to late 70's era pattern plane along the lines of a Bootlegger, Dirty Birdie, Atlas, Compensator, or Pheonix 7/8. 5) F4U Corsair or P-40 Kittyhawk - Would be a toss up for me.
Posted on: 6/9/2012 5:45 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11112686

RE: Favourite Scale Models in Flight
Top Flight Cessna 182 ARF. Yes, just an ARF, but what it lacks in scale detail is easily made up for in great flyability! Gotta start somewhere right? This isn't my model, but I have enjoyed being able to get some quality stick time in on it.
Posted on: 6/6/2012 8:53 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11109583

RE: Bootlegger?
I flew a Bootlegger in the early 80's. Flat horizontal stabilizer. Absolutely loved that airplane! I'm pretty sure the wing was a thinner airfoil than the Compensator, and the Compensator was thinner than the Deception. There is an obvious difference in wing planforms between the Compensator and the Bootlegger. The Compensator was a double taper planform, whereas the Bootlegger only swept the leading edge. I flew an OS.61 rear exhaust and rhom-air retracts. The plane had an amazing flight envelope. It would blister across the sky, yet settle right down for slow speed flight. Spin entries were a piece of cake as the Bootlegger transitioned very smoothly from level flight to a relatively high alpha without wanting to balloon a lot. At the end of practice flights, I loved making a low high speed pass downwind, and then follow up with a low, inverted, very slow pass coming back upwind. I was always amazed that an airplane could be perfectly at home at such opposite ends of the speed envelope. For whatever reasons, the Bootlegger just never gained the following of it's contemporary brethren. It wasn't on the scene long before the dreaded "turn around" started dictating major changes in pattern aircraft. A great model!
Posted on: 6/5/2012 8:09 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11108129

RE: Finally got a real plane
T-Max97 - Your profile indicates that you are located in White, Ga. I am a member of the Dalton RC Fliers club in Dalton Ga. If you don't have anyone close by to check out the setup on the model, let me know and I'll get you directions to our field. Paulding County has a great group of folks also. Try to hook up with John Baxter, Mickey Walker, or Dan Dougherty. Any of these fine folks should be able to provide you some help.
Posted on: 5/31/2012 8:52 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11101985

RE: Big Stik .60 w Saito .82 VIDEO
Just found this video. Great job on the story line as well as capturing some great flying. I think there's more than just a little bit of "Ray" in all pilots! Thanks for posting!
Posted on: 5/31/2012 3:36 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11101648

RE: A different kind of RC Combat
That was a fun watch!
Posted on: 5/28/2012 6:31 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Combat"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11097943

RE: Allied Planes vs Others
You are correct BeePee.
Posted on: 5/20/2012 10:17 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11087708

RE: Allied Planes vs Others
No need to shy away from any nationality with regard to airframe. Remember, machines didn't fight the war... People did. A Stuka never damaged anything. Their pilots however, used the aircraft to strike fear into those on the ground. The Me-109 never shot down a single allied aircaft. The Me-109 pilots however, used the machine to shoot down as many allied planes as possible. Seriously, an airframe is an airframe. It would be wrong to hide our heads in the sand and not acknowledge that there have been superb aircraft from all nations. Somebody else has posted that there is a need for "balance" of airframes from varying designs. This is a very valid statement. For those who partake in using their models to pay tribute to those who strapped on the real machines in times of war, it is important that people understand that the "enemy" also had very capable (and at times better) aircraft that they had to go up against. Being able to demonstrate this fact helps an audience to better understand the true bravery and level of dedication that was required by the pilots. Build the Axis/Soviet/Euro/Chinese replicas! Heck, the computer you used to post your concern was most likely manufacture in, or by parts that came from China. The car you drive most likely has Japanese or German parts (if not brand). The more you study those Axis designed subjects, the more you may come to appreciate your beloved Allied. The Navy Hellcat was outclassed in nearly every respect by the Zero, yet the Hellcat's kill/loss ratio against the Zero would have you think otherwise. Being able to demonstrate this imbalance of machines can quickly help an audience appreciate the discipline and teamwork required of the American pilots to achieve victory against what would be considered an obviously superior foe. The flip side of the coin - making an audience aware of the nearly impossible situation the Luftwaffe faced against overwhelmingly superior numbers of Allied forces planes will help them to understand the personal bravery that those Axis pilot faced every day. History has already been determined. There is no need to refrain from modeling subjects from either side of a conflict. You will not change the outcome of what has already past. Enjoy the hobby and the subjects of your liking as you please.
Posted on: 5/19/2012 2:13 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11086980

Top Flight Cessna 182 81
An awesome flying model. I don't own one (yet), but have had the pleasure of getting to fly one at our field in Dalton Georgia a few times. Such a sweetheart! [image]http://images.rcuniverse.com/gallery/photos/113109/lg-231140.jpg[/image]
Posted on: 5/19/2012 1:17 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11086949

RE: Learning to turn a Helicopter is tricky
sorry to see this thread so late. 1) you cannot bank and yank like you can an airplane. 2) lead with aileron, then apply rudder in the same direction. If the tail is lower than the nose then you are not using enough rudder. If the tail is riding higher than the nose, you have more rudder than you need. To begin with, it's much much better to have the tail higher than the nose (using too much rudder) than letting the tail drag below the nose (not enough rudder). If you keep the tail higher than the nose through the turn, you will notice that the helicopter will look like it's skidding through the turn (much like a dirt track sprint car goes through a turn). The goal is to fly through a turn with the boom and tail level with the nose. This is a properly coordinated forward flight turn. You will also learn to use the collective stick to control your altitude instead of the elevator, but some slight elevator input may be used to help pull the nose through the turn. Too much elevator though and you'll find the tail low and get into trouble quickly. 3) when learning forward flight, you will quickly have to figure out how to turn the helicopter! A shallow stall turn may be an easy way to make the helicopter turn around. Once in forward flight, simply apply a little aft cyclic (up elevator if you want to use airplane terms). You will notice the helicopter slow in it's forward progress. As it approaches it's "stall" simply kick the helicopter around 180 degrees with the rudder and the helicopter will be turned around and heading back. The nose will be pointed down so once it gets going again, you will need to level it out by applying some aft cyclic (up elevator). Rinse and repeat. Again.. the stall turns do not need to be steep, a shallow climb will bring the helicopter to a stand still at some point. Use the rudder to flip the tail around and get the nose pointed back down the flight line. As you get comfortable with this, you can start using a small amount of aileron to do a mild climbing turn. Just be sure to kick that tail around once the helicopter reaches the apex of the stall turn. There may be other (better) methods of learning forward flight, but this is the method I used and it worked for me. Unlike flying planks, you must use rudder to fly a helicopter. The nice thing is that your plank flying will automatically become better as you learn to use the left stick on a helicopter. Once the rudder becomes second nature to you on the helicopter, you will find that you also use instinctively use rudder while flying planks as well, and your flying will look so much better because of it! Stall turn = slight pull on the aft cyclic (up elevator). Once the helicopter nears the stall, apply rudder (either direction) to kick the tail around so that the helicopter is pointing back toward where it came from. As the helicopter starts coming back, it should be in a shallow dive. Level the helicopter with elevator and perhaps a bit of positive collective. Coordinated turn = start the turn (left for this example) with a small amount of left aileron, and then start applying left rudder, and perhaps a tiny smidge of aft cyclic (up elevator). The key is to not let the tail ride lower than the nose of the helicopter. If the tail rides high, the helicopter will slide through the turn, but it will turn. If the tail rides low, you run the risk of entering into a tail slide that will not end well for the helicopter or your wallet. The goal is to have the boom and tail remain level with the nose through the turn, but the reality is that having the tail ride a little high makes life a bit less stressful. Good luck. Chris
Posted on: 3/19/2012 8:30 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "RC Helicopter General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11007765

RE: Raptor 30 2.4G SC
I just took a look at the manual for the TS6i transmitter and it is fully functional with regard being able to set up throttle curves/pitch curves/throttle hold etc. The transmitter will not limit your ability to 3D. You'll hear lots of folks say don't waste your money on a 30 size heli.. go for the 50, and from one perspective they are correct. Where folks are wrong is that they would have you believe you can't do any aerobatic/3D stuff with a 30 class engine. The truth is a properly set up and well running .37-.39 engine has enough power to make the heli do most of the stuff, but you do have to be pretty good with collective management to avoid/reduce the bogging the engine. I don't see this as a reason to avoid the 30 size heli at all. In fact, I've got a Raptor 50 Titan, and I just purchased a Raptor 30V2 from a friend because it's such a blast to fly. Easy on the fuel, is capable of more aerobatics than I am comfortable with, same basic parts as the 50 size machine and.. in the future can be easily upgraded to a Rappy 50 Titan or better. The upgrade from 30V2 to 50 Titan is $69.00 plus blades and engine. While I wouldn't say they've packed the very best equipment possible into the package, they have done a respectable job of including decent equipment. Don't fear the lack of tuneability with the radio.. look at the manual for the unit and see for yourself that it has just about all the bells and whistles you need. Here a link for the manual... painfully slow it seems, but let it sit and spin and then read through it and I think your fears will be gone. http://mms.tiger.tw/upload/upload_file//Electric/8608manJC0165.pdf
Posted on: 1/27/2010 6:56 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Thunder Tiger - Raptor 30, 50, 60, 90"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9451712

RE: raptor 30 new to helis
A never ending debate with regard to 30 vs 50 and completely valid points can be made from both sides. Lots of folks ahve learned to fly on the Raptor 30 and lots of folks still enjoying flying the 30. Still.. most folks do wind up with a 50 sized heli due to the huge leap in power to weight. I came into the heli's from about 30 yrs of plank experience. It seemed like eveyone was jumping on the rc heli bandwagon and I guess I ventured into the heli's just to see what all the fuss was about. When I learned that everyone is using heading hold gyros and thought "gee.. no wonder everyone is flying them.. they nerfed em down so you don't have to really learn how to fly them". My logic was they had found a way to make heli flying easy, and I had 30 yrs worth of plank experience so I thought there woudl be nothing to this heli stuff. Completely wrong!!!!!!!! It was like trying to learn how to ride a unicycle while ballancing on top of a greased beach ball! Your plank experience will help you in one respect.. you're familiar with the left/right being reversed when the model is pointed toward you. You'll quickly learn that with heli's not only does left/right get reversed on you, but forward backward as well!!. I also found that there was a disadvantage to haveing so much plank time.... with a plank the tail is always following the nose of the airplane so it's pretty easy for the brain to determine the direction of flight. Taint so with a heli!!!!! Where the tail is in relation to the nose has absolutely nothing to do with which way the heli is actually going! That was my biggest hurdle! Welcome to the madness man. Do lots of reading on these (and other forums like helifreak.com and runryder.com) and decide for yourself about the 30 vs 50 stuff. Once you decide, just go with it and you'll have a great time! I enjoy my 30 as much as my 50... just in a different way I guess.
Posted on: 1/27/2010 6:47 AM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Thunder Tiger - Raptor 30, 50, 60, 90"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9451758

RE: buying raptor 30 v2 rtf
If waiting another 2-4 months would allow you to get the equipement that you really want, then I'd wait. You're gonna be sinking a sizeable amount of $$ into the heli either way - why make the experience less than what it could be by settling for something you don't really want to begin with? Just my opinion
Posted on: 1/15/2010 11:29 PM by Author "cmgtech1" in the forum "Thunder Tiger - Raptor 30, 50, 60, 90"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9419846