RE: Different Types of Receivers Questions
some materials -if they surround th antenna will block signals - a big fuel tankful of fuelperhaps or a solid carbon fibre fuselage with antenna both inside.
Posted on: 9/18/2012 4:07 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232808

RE: Experience of JR DMSS
2.4 - the less some know about it the more prone they are to believe there is some "superior' protocol. This has gotten to be like gasoline some actually belive there are superior brands of gasoline ,here in th e US Note - gasoline supplies are often traded -
Posted on: 9/18/2012 6:19 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232231

RE: Different Types of Receivers Questions
[quote]ORIGINAL: BillinIndiana  I went with a basic Rx for my trainer.. Just a 4-channel AR400.. I don't see myself needing to have seperate aileron servos so I think I'll be fine while I train.. Thanks all for the info..  Side note.. I almost bought an AR500 off E-Bay.. I Googled it and almost every search result was something negative about that Rx.. Seems they might have had a problem with an IC chip in them or something.. I stayed away, sad too, it was only $23 NIB [/quote] There were a few bad ones I had one quit on the bench -simply would not turn on the other -works perfectly. HH pulled em replaced em if you wanted a plasement The 400's work great in anything which won't blank out the antenna.
Posted on: 9/18/2012 6:14 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232226

RE: Futaba MG digital servo-gear slop???
[quote]ORIGINAL: A.T. [quote]ORIGINAL: flyerdave    Thanks for the help. One of the links suggest turning one of the gears 180 degrees to use ''new'' teeth and lube with servo grease. I love saving money as much as the next guy and I can try this but I want to know if this technique is safe. These servos are on the ailerons of an aeroworks 100cc extra 300 and I don't want to take chances with a $2500.00 plane. Thanks   [/quote] Technique, ''turn the middle gears regularily'',  would not have been mentioned if it were not safe. ''regularily'' is the active word, this for a servo from new. If an already ''dead'' servo with slipping or jamming gears on a large expensive model, will still work but later failure will be without warning and no doubt other damage has occured to the posts and sockets in the case as was pictured in that [url=http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16622776&postcount=6]post[/url]. Have used the techniqure on many ancient servo on upto .60 size models and where gear sets are no longer available for the servo. see also . <a href=''http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18200025&postcount=4'' add_date=''1305068776'' last_visit=''0'' last_modified=''0''>Servo - Burnout. Cause & Prevention Alan T. [url=http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~atong]Alan's Hobby, Model & RC FAQ Web Links[/url]  [/quote] It is not just the gears that go junk Many cases will suffer from elongation of the gear pivots -this is VERY hard to detect in many cases - th gears tho good will not be in full engagement in many cases When in doubt change cases and gears
Posted on: 9/17/2012 4:35 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11231619

RE: Experience of JR DMSS
[quote]ORIGINAL: BarracudaHockey Why is it obsolete? Is it not doing something you expect of it? Its firmware is updateable and its fully supported by JR, I don't understand your statement. [/quote] JR will swap a DSMX to DMSS? Even If so, why do it ?
Posted on: 9/17/2012 4:31 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11231615

RE: Futaba MG digital servo-gear slop???
Those big engines will wreck any servos One thing which helps - is to balance the ailerons such that they feed back less energy to the gears .
Posted on: 9/17/2012 6:37 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11230961

RE: Having engine, wing and horiz. stab on a common centerline as opposed to having it otherwise.
Nothing wrong with those basic numbers - 5 pounds to 40 pounds - same setups are common.
Posted on: 9/16/2012 11:47 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11230112

RE: AR500 Thoughts ?
Ditto never a seconds trouble However the new ar400 is a cut above it in antenna setup - and 30 bucks Also the AR500 is actually a 4 channel with two aileron port locations ! product for the price - the new AR400 is an easy winner PS I also use these - work great at any distance
Posted on: 9/16/2012 11:20 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11230098

RE: NitroPlanes.com Crappy products and service to match
Their stuff is really bottom buck stuff - The molded models are nice looking and for the money they do work well enough You noted why yo bought their Kadet - so you shouldn't be surprised . PS I have a old Kadet Senior and Seniorita (original Sig models) also one of the electric Senioritas - which is a cut way below the originals
Posted on: 9/16/2012 7:55 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "User Product Reviews"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229958

RE: landing bounce
The classic "chop n drop" approach will get a bounce every time and remove the gear on many of the little ARFS
Posted on: 9/16/2012 6:12 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229878

RE: Different Types of Receivers Questions
[quote]ORIGINAL: carrellh Bill, I thought you were getting an Airtronics transmitter. If so you cannot use a Spektrum receiver. [/quote] The same thing I noted above,holds true on any 2.4 rx brand -unless only one type rx is offered.
Posted on: 9/15/2012 4:47 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229608

RE: Having engine, wing and horiz. stab on a common centerline as opposed to having it otherwise.
[quote]ORIGINAL: karolh I have noticed that some models have the engine and wing on a common centerline on the fuse while the horizontal stab is sometimes on that line or above that line in varying amounts. What are the advantages of having the stab in line or above the wing / engine center line. Also what advantages are derived from having elevators and rudders with those counterfoil sections. Karol [/quote] A good aerobatic setup can have variance on wing/stab power placement - keeping em all reasonably close to a common line is a good idea but NOT mandatory balance tabs? only if you just want to play with em. it's all fun. We could go on n on but the single most important goal? keep the wing loadings down and make the control surfaces as light as practical and balance em as close as practical to hinge line this eliminates possible flutter if done correctly .
Posted on: 9/15/2012 11:08 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229373

RE: Different Types of Receivers Questions
easy to get mixed up IF you do not appreciate how 2.4 works. The "park Flyers are typically smaall ,built of light and transparant (will not block signals) materials So the rx really does not need to have multiple or strong antenna capabilities These RX WILL WORK on transparant larger models but longer range simply reduces signal strength so multiple and or better antenna setups are used . Things now get more involved. Once the model is both large and has numerous signal blocking components or structural material, AND is flown at extreme range - you better use maximum diversity (good multiple antenna) You are dealing then, with reduced signal strength due to distance AND signal blocking . Got it?
Posted on: 9/15/2012 8:45 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229280

RE: found this interesting discussion on Spiral Slipstream
The air does change direction as it passes thru a prop- the angle causes that - obvious stuff The rate at which it straightens out is another thing all together. It is far too easy to confuse motor torque reaction with the airflow. On a pusher you can demonstrate the the true action quite easily- dun it The flow quickly becomes a fading column of higher pressure - Air which flows from a heavy jet wing tip is a different thing - A ducted fan -yet another thing .
Posted on: 9/15/2012 8:32 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229265

RE: When a receiver battery goes low...
Looks like some serious study of batteries is inorder The basic problem -apparantly is that the selection of rx battery is simply incorrect . Additional batteries /seperate for servos is fine IF you understand incompatibility issues ( different voltages .) So bite the bullet get new high capacity, high current type batteries - in NIMH if that is all the charger capability you have just jumping to higher voltage is not a good plan. Search internet for RCbatterysuppliers - read up on modern NiMh cells and then get cells which supply power under higher loads and enough capacity for the flying you do. 4 cell packs WILL work with any 2.4 system, provided the cells have adequate C rating (the ability to provide power under loads) The comments about one brand being able to work under lower power simply is wistful thinking. 2.4 radios are small computers FORGET all you knew using the 72.xx systems. Those rx would work-tho poorly down to a couple of volts. The old load tests? forget those too. you need cells which WILL NOT loose over one volt-at max load- - when measured with in line volt meter. BTW-I have A Senior a Seniorita and a electric Kadet Seniorita- all on 2.4 all electric power now great models- I would hate to loose any of em due to as simple a thing as bad batteries.
Posted on: 9/15/2012 8:07 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229243

RE: Violent dive on rudder right - Fly Baby
[quote]ORIGINAL: Winrich Hi guys, We are running out of ideas how to correct some very strange behavior of a 1.20 size Fly Baby ARF. When applying right rudder (without any aileron input), the plane has not the slightest tendency to turn right but immediatiatly goes into a dive. The more rudder the more violent the dive. The response to rudder left is reasonably well although the plane needs some more than typical elevator to compensate for a notworthy dive tendency. This behavior is more or less the same at any throttle position. The CG is according to plan. We checked that there is no mixer active. There is no unreasonable slop in the rudder train and a powerful rudder servo is installed. Any suggestions what's wrong? Thank you and best regards Winrich [/quote] Sounds like basic trim is not correct - for example left trim is countering aileron setup which produces aright turn and /or it is quite nose heavy.
Posted on: 9/12/2012 12:51 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11226386

RE: Am I the only one who flies pattern with no mixes in their plane ??
Guy told me one of the local pattern flyers has zero mix in his new model and apparantly - it needs none .
Posted on: 9/11/2012 3:01 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11225410

RE: How much were we at risk
[quote]ORIGINAL: acdii My DX8 runs off a 4 cell Nimh, and it normally reads below 5v, and has an alarm when the voltage drops to a low level with enough time for you to land.  What is freaky is at full charge the meter on the TX is only at half bar.  The TX can take a Lipo instead and it will show a full bar. I am considering it, but get enough time out of the pack for a night of flying with plenty left over. [/quote] The DX8 charged to a reading of 5.1 or so- will provide power for 12 hours of ON time the std battries - NIMH- need occasional charging - when the y finally get to 4.6 or so, 5-8 hours typically fills em up . never a need for field charging The only problem I have seen with these batteries is overcharging -typically by those who think the battery drain is like the old 9.6 tx and want full batts for each flying session- . As A Kunz noted the electronics run at 3 volts -just a trickle of current . Typically, users go weeks even months without a recharge. We see lots of DX8's, this is not unusual .
Posted on: 8/28/2012 4:14 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11208718

RE: wing loading
Well - depends on who is doing the evaluation IF you take two craft having same TOTAL area -one a bipe one a monoplane- the old rule of thumb was 70% % efficiency for the bipe However The bipe gets the nod for better maneuverbility in some cases due to it's lower aspect ratio and the fact that it was once possible to add more area for less weight . Thats why they came about - -structural reasons
Posted on: 8/22/2012 5:42 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11202666

RE: Flutter and air balancing
My own experience on THIS problem is twofold ONE- proper guy wires (4) to stab. TWO- run no more than 20% aerodynamic counterbalance but add weight such that the elevator balances fairly close to hinge line quick n positive.
Posted on: 8/20/2012 6:56 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200322

RE: Wing type question
FWIW -The low aspect ratio constant chord is almost as stable as a flying disc -or card table Because of the extremely high spanwise flow at AOA more than just a whisper. Your Bipe is a very low aspect ratio model Most aerobatic bipes are low aspect ratio (some extremely low when you figure span and total area). sweep adds to stability - as AOA increases .
Posted on: 8/15/2012 3:50 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194888

RE: Wing type question
Actually a low aspect ratio. constant chord can do excellent snaps spin entries , -whatever As for stability- has to do with spanwise flow on very low aspect ratio stuff- i thought I explained that . The BIG reason for tapered wings is simply- beam loading. generally the aspect ratio -(figuring span/area- is a low for good 3D aerobatics. - 4-1 thereabouts-or lower for more scalelike aerobatics- bump this up a couple of notches. as the span increases -it is practical, to reduce lifting area - (Like an EDGE wing) Think of piling on sandbags -you will see what happens as length and weight increases Lowering inertia for maneuvering is important BUT a long tapered wing has effectively, a lower aspect ratio. You don't have to like the rectangular shaeps apperaance -but it does work. We fly different 3D designs every week- some tapered planform, some not . of the two basic designs a gentle taper is the preferred setup - mainly an appearance thing.
Posted on: 8/15/2012 5:22 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194142

RE: twin motors back to back
The Cessna - was marginal on one - BUT good ol Uncle Sam bought em anyway Theay also bought the Ospry- good performance is not a criteria for government purchasing
Posted on: 8/14/2012 11:46 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11193260

RE: Spektrum vs. Futaba?
You are wasting ink - We have entered the realm of the terminally bewildered
Posted on: 8/14/2012 11:43 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11193253

RE: twin motors back to back
[quote]ORIGINAL: da Rock [quote]ORIGINAL: rmh Am I the only one to see thru your gag setup [/quote] Jeez, I hope not.... ;) After all, everyone knows that Grumman used a V-8 that turned out to be the famous Chevy 283. Heck, there weren't any electric motors back then small as that V8. [/quote] Wow -good thing they didn't use the 307- it would never have gotten off the ground that one
Posted on: 8/14/2012 5:12 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11192803

RE: twin motors back to back
Never overestimate your audience Henny Youngman?
Posted on: 8/14/2012 5:06 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11192794

RE: Spektrum vs. Futaba?
[quote]ORIGINAL: jmdairplane futaba receivers do not need sattelite reievers and do not get brown outs. [/quote] You are new at this aren't you.
Posted on: 8/14/2012 5:03 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11192788

RE: twin motors back to back
Am I the only one to see thru your gag setup
Posted on: 8/13/2012 1:09 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11191922

RE: Ail differential in friese ailerons?
[quote]ORIGINAL: da Rock [quote]ORIGINAL: pimmnz And yet, all the full size rigging diagrams of the popular WW2 fighters, Spits, 109's and 190's all with Frise ailerons, all show some differential in the aileron movement. Go figure. Evan, WB #12. [/quote] I believe that's not a real surprise. A lot of them actually carried design problems into the air because everyone back then was feeling their way into new territory and stuck with ''what everyone knew to be true'' design concepts. The P40 was basically unstable in yaw at power up for example. They designed the plane by what they knew to be safe and it wasn't. They added more rudder area and it didn't help enough. They lengthened the tail and it did. You know they didn't choose the original areas and moments knowing they were insufficient. They thought they were sufficient for some reason. You know your list of examples has 3 of the most successful fighters of the war. That would suggest that differential is a good thing to have with ailerons. There are lots of puzzles, aren't there. [/quote] Those old fighters had high wing loadings and flew , for the most part -upright A natural choice would be differential. Good, lightly loaded fully aerobatic stuff? little if any is more desireable No mystery here -It has to do with effective AOA of the wing during most flying. The lower the aoa -the less the need an exception is in some soaring craft - the relatively long spans -with ailerons on outer panels - produce more leverage (from aileron applictaion) and greater adverse yaw I set these models such that turns with ailerons are similar to rudder turns - The ailerons have quite a bit of differential. A basic trainer I had long ago - a Klemm 25- demonstrated the issue very well.
Posted on: 8/13/2012 5:29 AM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11191400

RE: why are wing tips UP , Down , or flat ?
plates done right really do add to low speed performance .and assist knife maneuvers been there
Posted on: 8/10/2012 12:02 PM by Author "rmh" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11188408