RE: Weatronics....considering a change .is it worth the investment?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Woketman That is crazy. I don't care how technically superior the equipment is SUPPOSED to be, I want proof! I wanna see the signal strength or some way to KNOW how much margin I have in the link, not just blindly saying that my gear is the best. [/quote] Really? How much data did you have back in the 72 MHz days? These 2.4 links are *vastly* superior to the old 72 MHz links. I understand that [i]you[/i] may want the data, but I have enough experience with this kind of stuff to know that I, personally, don't need to see it. That's not "crazy," its just my opinion - based on a lot of experience. Probably the difference is that I see FASST work way beyond the distance that I can see a 13' wingspan aircraft on a routine basis, and that's plenty of proof to me and tells me *much* more that a record of signal strength on a typical RC flight ever would. YMMV... Bob
Posted on: 9/18/2012 8:48 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232988

RE: Weatronics....considering a change .is it worth the investment?
[quote]ORIGINAL: luv2flyrc [quote]ORIGINAL: rhklenke [quote]ORIGINAL: Woketman Bob, I fly Futaba so I am NOT bashing Futaba. But what I find inescusable is that the top brands do not give a real time indication of signal quality. Some sort of alarm to let you know that the signal being received in the aircraft is getting weaker than a set amount. Maybe the new Futaba 18 does this, but certainly
Posted on: 9/18/2012 4:42 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232846

RE: Weatronics....considering a change .is it worth the investment?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Woketman Bob, I fly Futaba so I am NOT bashing Futaba. But what I find inescusable is that the top brands do not give a real time indication of signal quality. Some sort of alarm to let you know that the signal being received in the aircraft is getting weaker than a set amount. Maybe the new Futaba 18 does this, but certainly not my 12FG. Weatronics allows you to see this. Were it not for the legendary crappy customer service, I'd be flying brand W. [/quote] Well now that there is telemetry in the Futaba systems, I too would like to see signal strength as one of the parameters that could be sent/stored. However, I have *never* had a occasion where I wanted to see it, so not having it was not a big deal to me. The FASST RF link has been rock-solid for me in much more harsh environments that typical RC applications, so I have not had the desire to monitor the signal strength. The data is out there on the receiver sensitivity of the FASST system vs. its closest competitor and it is so far superior that its no wonder the FASST link performs better. Before I'd go to any other system, I'd want to be sure that it had similar performance. *That* is the best way to prevent loss-of-link, so I'd want to be sure that I was not giving up that quality just to get telemetry... Bob
Posted on: 9/18/2012 1:00 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232659

RE: Weatronics....considering a change .is it worth the investment?
[quote]ORIGINAL: roger.alli [snip] In summery. the model was lost due to poor radio link quality. This was obvious from the recorded data and verified by Weatronics. The reason for the poor RF link was not determined, and probably never will be. HOWEVER, the Wea system worked admirably well in that the receiver data was being recorded right until the final loss of control. Examining this data enabled us to rule out all the other usual crash causes. Without this data, this crash would have been just another unexplained lock out. [snip] My opinions only.. Roger [/quote] Not to be a jerk, but your logic escapes me - you lost a model because of a poor RF link, but the advantage of the system is that it told you it was a poor RF link. I would think that the ideal would be a system that avoids having a poor RF link in the first place. As far as where its manufactured, some things manufactured in the west (or Europe) are far exceeded by things manufactured in Asia - it depends more on by whom than where... Bob
Posted on: 9/16/2012 8:13 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11230586

RE: Weatronics....considering a change .is it worth the investment?
[quote]ORIGINAL: bigbri OK.....So I have been flying Futaba 2.4 for a few years and it had been very good to me. Now I am considering upgrading my gear to weatronics. I hear it has many advantages over Futaba and SPectrum Could those of you that inderstand the advantages or disadvantages please explain it to me [/quote] Let me turn it around and ask you what the Futaba system can not do that you wished it did? I think that the Weatronics technology is quite impressive. On the other hand, having used the Futaba FASST technology in all of my RC airplanes, including my jets, and also having used it extensively in a number of UAV applications, I can tell you that it is rock solid and anything that Weatronics does to make (or appear to make) the RF link more robust is overkill. The FASST RF link is reliable enough that the weak link in the chain is always something else - that the Weatronics system doesn't help you with. That, coupled with the fact that the Weatronics customer service and availability is so bad, and has been for so long, made me write it off as a viable option soon after it came out... Bob
Posted on: 9/16/2012 12:23 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11230141

RE: Wanted civil plane plan
[quote]ORIGINAL: ByLoudDesign Check out my Dee Howard 500! [/quote] Hum, doesn't look like a twin turbofan to me... [:'(] It didn't look like a model either for that matter... [8|]
Posted on: 9/14/2012 5:55 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228790

RE: Wanted civil plane plan
Check out: [link=http://rauch-airliner.com/]http://rauch-airliner.com/[/link] Norbert has done many of the civilian airliners and Peter Michel has done most of them as turbine-powered models... [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ267UUuRyw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ267UUuRyw[/link] Bob
Posted on: 9/14/2012 1:08 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228592

RE: CO2 extinguishers
[quote]ORIGINAL: Jgwright You should not be using Halon as it depletes the ozone layer. http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file29105.pdf CO2 for our application is quite adequate, the only time I have seen it fail to put out a fire was a Lipo fire in a jet. John [/quote] Of course that is a UK document and Halon, while expensive, is still legal, at least in the US: [i]While the production of Halon ceased on January 1, 1994, under the Clean Air Act, it is still legal to purchase and use recycled Halon and Halon fire extinguishers. In fact, the FAA continues to recommend Halon fire extinguishers for aircraft.[/i] Bob
Posted on: 9/14/2012 11:49 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11228521

RE: FEJ Rafale - Getting ready to maiden :)
Thanks! Ours is 17 lbs without fuel, so we should be OK. Bob
Posted on: 9/12/2012 5:07 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11225936

RE: Turbine Heli Qualification
[quote]ORIGINAL: flyinfool1 IIRC it was only last year that the rule was changed to allow you to use a turbine heli for the sign off, prior to that the rule REQUIRED it to be a NON turbine heli. Those not up with the latest rules may not be aware of the recent change. The rule does still require a .60 or larger engine, as written the rule does not allow any electric heli to be used. Some of the first people to get a rotary CD status had never even flown a heli just to get some names on the list, now they are grandfathered as rotary CDs. Bergen also does a lot of rotary waiver sign-offs at IRCHA. [/quote] Actually, according to the document, that part was approved in 1996 and was not part of the amendments (shown in bold in the document) approved in 2011. I don't know how to find the old version to verify however... As a turbine CD, when someone asks me a question, the *first* thing I do before answering, is *read* the document (again) to make sure that I get the answer right... Bob
Posted on: 9/6/2012 2:30 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219921

RE: FEJ Rafale - Getting ready to maiden :)
Thanks guys - I was a little worried when I weighed mine, but then again, there isn't much I could do about it - except leave some essential stuff off... [:D] If you guys get a chance to weigh yours, I'd appreciate knowing where yours are. We're hoping to test fly in a couple of weeks... Bob
Posted on: 9/6/2012 2:26 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219918

RE: Turbine Heli Qualification
[quote]ORIGINAL: Wren Turbines USA There was actually a heli pilot at IRCHA that had stopped by our booth. He said he had specifically attended the event (5 hour drive one way) to get his turbine waiver. He had a turbine powered heli, and was told that he could not use that machine to do the waiver flights!!! So it is my understanding that a nitro or electric 600 to 700 size machine is required! Hope this helps... A bit off topic for this forum, but a good question anyway. [/quote] EEEEEEE! Wrong! [:D] Sorry Ron, I know it probably wasn't you that told the guy this, but guys have to read the documents before telling people stuff like this - they are usually pretty specific. If not, the folks at AMA are but a phone call away (on weekdays anyway)... [i] From the AMA "SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT POWERED BY GAS TURBINE" document: The qualification flight shall be completed by the following method: .... a) Rotary wing: Using a helicopter with 0.60 cubic inch displacement or larger [b]or a turbine engine[/b]. Aircraft must be capable of 50 mph forward flight speed. The applicant must first have flown the aircraft on a buddy box with an experienced turbine pilot in control of the master transmitter. The experienced turbine pilot will assist the applicant with as many flights as necessary until satisfied that the applicant is prepared for the qualification flight after which the experienced turbine pilot will declare the applicant qualified to perform the qualification flight flying solo without buddy box assistance.[/i] Bob
Posted on: 9/6/2012 10:44 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219601

RE: Current FEJ 1/7.5 F-14 owners I have a small question
The main issue is that if you are not using the full travel of the servo (i.e., you're reducing the travel or "ATV" on the transmitter), you are reducing resolution - either with an analog OR digital servo. Depending on the aircraft and the type of flying that you do, that may, or may not, be a consideration... Bob
Posted on: 9/6/2012 10:22 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219613

RE: FEJ Rafale - Getting ready to maiden :)
Guys, We just finished the conversion of ours from an EDF to P-60 turbine powered - with a single pipe. Ours came out at 22 lbs with 80 oz. of fuel onboard. What weights are you guys flying with turbines? Bob
Posted on: 9/4/2012 10:45 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11217091

RE: BVM F-100
[quote]ORIGINAL: JackD [quote]ORIGINAL: dubd Bob, thanks for that info. The few full scale Huns I've seen at USAF museums were not very shiny. Here's my Hun. There is nothing shiny about the finish. [/quote] Every time i see a picture of your garage i feel so sorry for you. I think everyone on RCU should pitch in a help you buy some decent airplanes [:D][:D][:D][:D] [/quote] Yea, really, that garage is pitiful! [:D] Actually, the A-10 and F-100 are not yet flyable, so he might need some help there... [:)] I would say that your F-100 is probably more scale in appearance to an F-100 when it was in service than a FliteMetal one... Bob
Posted on: 8/31/2012 11:04 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11212727

RE: BVM F-100
[quote]ORIGINAL: dubd My F-100 has been painted in silver. While not as stunning as Flite Metal, it'll make for a less delicate Sunday flyer. I hope it flies as well as everyone says. Maiden should be in a few weeks. [/quote] Actually, while doing some research on the one I built, I ran across a guy who worked on them in the AF when they were silver (not camo). He told me that the operational ones were actually painted with an aluminum paint and were more uniform-color and not as shiny as most models you see. The one below looks painted like that. Although not as flashy, your painted one is probably more scale - unless its a model of Cutshall's meticulously restored one... Bob
Posted on: 8/31/2012 7:18 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11212542

RE: The New JR XG 11 Transmitter DMSS
[quote]ORIGINAL: hooker53 [snip] Would I like to have an 18 in a 12X case? YES but that's not going to happen. [snip] [/quote] How do you know that? To me, the release of DMSS in the US means that JR is going to compete head-to-head with Spektrum, and I *hope* that means that they will release their own 12+ channel radio. They (JR) certainly need it to compete with Futaba (and Spektrum) on a global level. To me, the big advantage of the JR XG 11 is that is all JR and *finally* has the quality RF link that other 2.4 radios have had for some time. I would not consider a JR radio in the future otherwise... Bob
Posted on: 8/27/2012 3:16 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11208151

RE: Maj. Woody's X-Treme Jets F-4C Phantom
Thanks Joe. I think I found the path through there with a wire this morning, but I had to go to work [:'(] before I could see if I could get anything through there... Bob
Posted on: 8/23/2012 6:51 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11203227

RE: Maj. Woody's X-Treme Jets F-4C Phantom
Joe, Thanks again for the info. I am trying to route my servo lines and airlines like you and Dom did. However, there doesn't appear to be a hole in the wing rib that is on the outside, forward of the landing gear mounts. Thus, when I get the servo lines into the space forward of the box, that is outside the landing gear mounts, I can't figure out how to get it from there to the exit in the wing root where you guys had it. Dom said that there were holes in all of the ribs necessary to route through there. Were there holes in your's or did you have to drill them somehow? The area around the gear mounts looks different on mine then on Dom's... Bob
Posted on: 8/22/2012 8:14 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11202856

RE: Maj. Woody's X-Treme Jets F-4C Phantom
Joe, I was just about to post on this thread because I started the assembly of mine. Thanks for the flight report, PLEASE keep them coming! I'm glad it flew well. I'm going to look into dropping the engine on mine as well. Did you have to do all of the fiddling around with the gear to get it to retract correctly like Dom did? On mine, the gear came installed on the correct side and I adjusted the tracking to be parallel with the inboard edge of the wing and the gear still retracted into the wing with no problem? Also, did you use the stock main tank or the 32 oz. DuBro tank like Dom did? Thanks! Bob
Posted on: 8/22/2012 9:24 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11202147

RE: Leaf Blowers - brands?
I thought this thread was going to be about EDF's [:)] Bob
Posted on: 8/21/2012 1:27 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11201182

RE: I'm still around folks.
[quote]ORIGINAL: tamjets [quote]ORIGINAL: rhklenke Ah, great news! I need good P-60 pipe soon! [:D] I'll contact you when I get the dimensions together. BTW, I saw a bifurcated thrust vectoring pipe for Quique Somenzini that I was told that you did - impressive work. I hope to see the new owner fly it soon! [:D] Bob [/quote] I joke with him the vectoring nozzle look nicer than the plane
Posted on: 8/21/2012 1:24 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11201179

RE: I'm still around folks.
Ah, great news! I need good P-60 pipe soon! [:D] I'll contact you when I get the dimensions together. BTW, I saw a bifurcated thrust vectoring pipe for Quique Somenzini that I was told that you did - impressive work. I hope to see the new owner fly it soon! [:D] Bob
Posted on: 8/21/2012 11:21 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11201042

RE: EA-18G Growler Maiden Video
[quote]ORIGINAL: k_sonn So back to the reason for the thread instead of arguing over something stupid like branding with someone who hasn't been in RC jets long enough to know about this F-18. Great job Bill.  I'm ready to do some more videos of your awesome plane.  [b]Maybe we can do a walk around to show all of the mods you made.[/b]  See you on Saturday at Jets Over Whidbey. Kirk [/quote] That would be cool. Bob
Posted on: 8/20/2012 9:12 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199683

RE: Twin Turbine Jets, loosing 1 turbine
There is information around somewhere of a guy who did an F-18 with a single engine on one side only - no bi-pipe. I don't recall if he tried to angle it a bit to help with the asymmetrical thrust, but the engine and thrust tube were definitely off to one side - not in the middle like a Eurosport. I think the reports were that it flew fine... Bob
Posted on: 8/17/2012 10:43 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11196968

RE: BAE Hawk vs F-16 (fun poll)
[quote]ORIGINAL: jlmaviation Not to hijack this thread but I have a question. I had purchased several years ago one of the early Skymaster ARF Hawk. I never built it because of all of the issues with it like snapping on various forums. Than I spoke to several well known pilots and was told it was not good to fly. So it has been in the box collecting dust. Was all of this hype wrong? What would I need to do to get it to fly like the current ones? [/quote] The Jet Legends Hawks had this problem and they eventually came out with a new wing that had some washout to solve the problem. I'm not sure if Skymaster has done this or not. You might check with Anton at Skymaster out this... Bob
Posted on: 8/17/2012 5:27 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11196649

RE: BAE Hawk vs F-16 (fun poll)
[quote]ORIGINAL: jetpilot So you want a jet doing 400-600mph to look like a CAP? [/quote] No, actually what I'm saying is that most model Hawks doing a knife-edge pass from one end of the flight line to the other have a boot-load of top rudder in and look just like Matt's Cap - which is definitely not scale, and as I said *for me* is no fun to watch - but then again, its not all about me. To each his own... Bob
Posted on: 8/15/2012 12:06 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194597

RE: BAE Hawk vs F-16 (fun poll)
Hey you are right, and he actually held it for all of 9 seconds and it looked like he had top-rudder in as well. I stand corrected. Still, curiously boring though - I'll stick with that... I'll take the F-16 flying in a scale manner over a Hawk knife-edging from horizon-to-horizon - YMMV... Bob
Posted on: 8/15/2012 12:03 PM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194592

RE: BAE Hawk vs F-16 (fun poll)
[quote]ORIGINAL: jetpilot Bob, Your lack of interest in Hawks shows in your lack of knowledge. Need to spend more time on youtube so you know what a Hawk can do. just one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBtux7OojGM Scott [/quote] Scott, This is a fun poll, remember? Everything I said was in fun - including that fact that I would take an F-16 over a Hawk any waking minute! [8D] To me, the definition of a "knife-edge pass" is a 90 degree roll with 1.0 G's along the aircraft's later axis. That's what most model pilots do when they do a knife-edge pass and its what Matt Chapman means when he does it in his Cap 580 (as do many , many other full-scale acrobatic pilots). Nowhere in those videos did I see a true "knife-edge pass." I saw a couple of 90 degree rolls, but they were accompanied by a change in direction - i.e., they were 90 degree turns, which are easier to do than a true knife-edge pass. Even the announcer in the second video at 5:20 says, as the aircraft passes show center, "a 70 degree bank angle" - not a knife edge pass. Show me a full-scale jet doing a knife-edge pass like this one and I'll stand corrected. [;)] Bob
Posted on: 8/15/2012 11:46 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194564

RE: BAE Hawk vs F-16 (fun poll)
[quote]ORIGINAL: GrayUK The Hawk for me..... [:D] Best looking plane out there. And they fly soooo well. Paul G [/quote] Paul, I agree with *everything* you've written on RCU, right up to the point where you said "Best looking plane out there" [:'(] There no Hawk in existence that looks as nice in flight as the F-16 in the Kentucy Jets video gunradd pointed out above. The Hawk looks like a pregnant Guppy in comparison! [;)] And for all of you guys espousing the knife edge capability of your Hawks, when was the last time you saw *any* full-scale jets flying knife-edge for more than 2 seconds? Save the knife-edge passes for the sport jets and 3D prop flying! [:'(] [:D] Bob
Posted on: 8/15/2012 9:43 AM by Author "rhklenke" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194412