RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
Come with Hitec? I thought that someone made them as an aftermarket for other servos...I'm using Jr servo's. Yea, I know what you mean about missing the edge. Mine had been down for about 8 months...I've been out of work so I haven't really tried finishing the rebuild and getting it in the air....still too new to trust getting it up right no. (funny too advanced for a trainer not advanced enough just to go out and fly...from a heli background I can just replace a few parts when I crash...with airplanes..you crash and get a new airframe) would be nice if planes were made the same way heli's are...
Posted on: 9/18/2009 9:23 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9106636

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
Got a question on servo horns....I know this is the wrong place but I figured I'd actually get a response here... I've seen several people using these large red servo horns...they look like a big plus sign. They are red and about twice as thick as normal horns...the spacing is about 30mm on the outside hole. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
Posted on: 9/18/2009 6:37 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9106296

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
Got a question on servo horns....I know this is the wrong place but I figured I'd actually get a response here... I've seen several people using these large red servo horns...they look like a big plus sign. They are about twice as thick as normal horns...the spacing is about 30mm on the outside hole. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
Posted on: 9/18/2009 6:36 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9106292

RE: Trex 600 gyro ?
If you haven't bought one already...the gy401 is a great servo...you can find them used for about 80 bucks shipped...around 120 with the 9254 servo... Just a thought the other servos are great...but are you good enough to see the difference?
Posted on: 9/15/2009 9:20 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "T-Rex heli"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9098839

RE: depron ca
I use BS super gold plus...with accelerator. works great...very strong. during my initial build of the super xtra I used just plain Elmers white glue...tape the parts and wait...very good. 3M spray adhesive works very well too...only get one chance here. I've heard great things about gorilla glue...they make a super glue now. haven't tried it but from what I've heard it works very well
Posted on: 9/15/2009 8:28 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "3DFoamy Support"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9098651

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
The plane I purchased used had this problem. I planed on getting a CF tube but crashed before I had a chance. Another option would be to locate a thicker aluminum tube.
Posted on: 8/13/2009 8:17 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9012821

RE: EDGE 540T OR P-51D RTF??
Which one is better? this would depend on your skill set and what type of flying you want to do. The P-51 being a low wing with a little dihedral and lacking symmetrical airfoil , it will be an easier plane to fly but limited as to the type of aerobatics desired. The edge being midwing symmetrical airfoil, will do most all aerobatics you want but is more difficult to fly. The edge looks to be an FM tx but they may have upgraded those by now they do make a Yak 54 and CAP 232 both in 2.4Ghz
Posted on: 7/6/2009 7:12 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "Foamies! - RC Electric Foam Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8911527

RE: Wild Hare Baby Edge 540
how much trow was on your elevator? Factory reccommended specs? if so, that would be one reason for nosing in. As your cg moves forward, to get the same control rates in your elevator you'll need to increase it's throw and vice versa for a CG too far back. Though too far back is much more critical..(found that out the hard way) on my seagull edge 540 (close enough in size for a compairison) I had the CG about 12mm-12mm too far back and it made the plane wild...Of course, this made for great 3D, but since it was a madien flight...not good. Crashed...mainly due to CG beeing out.... a bad cross wind helpd. Next time you put one together stick with the reccommended GG. .5" forward or back will make plenty of difference. just an after thought. What about up elevator? I'd think that with a CG too far forward you'd need a little up elevator to keep the nose flying level....was there any?
Posted on: 6/12/2009 9:50 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8847895

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
I imagine that there could be many reasons for this...what has been common in flutter incident? what were you doing at the time of? aerobatics? high speed? how's the gap in the hinges? cheap chinese servos? flying wires? it needs them Just a first thought
Posted on: 6/11/2009 10:09 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8845532

RE: Who's right or wrong?
Call your local FAA ofice and ATC, make a complaint. Of course they'll ask for the N#, but describe the heli. ATC will know if they give regular clearance to someone in the area, though the'll not admit it. Let them know that it's causing a traffic hazard. Good idea on bringing a camera along. Since it's the guy's normal rout, I'm sure you'll catch a picture sooner or later. Good luck...
Posted on: 5/22/2009 12:06 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8790078

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68
Well another step closer. Got the servos installed inboard...three in a row just behind the wing tube. Engine installed, tail surfaces done, wings (already had them from the prior plane). I can already tell the difference the inboard installation made in balance. Going with push pull carbon tubing on rudder and elevator halves...probably move the throttle servo up front next to the tank (this depends on balance as does the battery. Keep ya posted.
Posted on: 5/17/2009 11:24 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8777749

RE: Who's right or wrong?
Interesting P-15 pic....RC? Looks much like a 3/4 my cousin has.
Posted on: 5/11/2009 11:28 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8761435

RE: Has our hobby gotten to the point it needs federal regulation
I'd respond to everyone's points but don't have time today.... someone mentioned about my experience...didn't put everything here in my blog/history or what ever you call it... I have a few years flying when I was younger (teens) and about a year prior to becoming a member here....just don't care about putting all my personal info here as it has no real value. The comment about there is a license...no there is not a license, it's a club membership period, with a promise to follow rules. No training is involved. most the comments saying hell no, are based on fear...at least that's my opinion. manned aircraft always have the right of way? They have no right to put themselves into harms way. If there is a crash of a manned aircraft on or around the RC field, the NTSB investigator will rule as pilot error....pilot should gone around. It's the same as when a pilot flies around a known migratory bird area. If the pilot doesn't reasonably avoid the area and there is an accident involving said bird...it's pilot error.
Posted on: 5/10/2009 12:33 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8756779

RE: Has our hobby gotten to the point it needs federal regulation
There is no licensing, there is no nationalized training...Just the AMA membership and show up at a field and talk to someone. If we continue down this unfruitful path our hobby is doomed to have regulations forced on us. I understand that very few people like change but since we're not policing properly, who will do it? I can tell you for certain...if we don't all get together someone will get us very close to being grounded.
Posted on: 5/9/2009 10:40 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755469

RE: Seagull Edge 540 - 68" (60-90) ARF New v2- Building
Sorry if this has been brought up before but I just didn't want to read 34 pages of stuff to find the data I'm looking for. Finally got to where I'm going to get my edge built and decided to bring my rudder and elevator servos inboard. For those who have done it, can you provide some pictures? I've seen a couple ways to install servos and just wanted input. For example. in front of the wing tube there is a plywood plate that looks as if it's for batteries. if I slightly widen the slots I can install elevator servos there and the rudder servo is centered. (if I add a shim to raise the servos a little). My thought is that the further forward I bring servos the less lead I have to add. any comments?
Posted on: 5/9/2009 8:58 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755248

Has our hobby gotten to the point it needs federal regulation
Our hobby has grown by leaps and bounds over the last several years and it's going to continue in the same direction. We have issues with the FCC and the FAA that we have to contend with but no real way to resolve them, for example...proper licensing, full sized aircraft flying in hazardous rc flying areas, frequency issues. Lets take licensing: There is no such thing as an RC license. AMA has a membership that they call a license...should there be proper schooling, testing? Dealing with full sized aircraft. Just because the AMA says give them ROW, should they always have RoW? Can't they stay out of our AMA recognized fields? Let's not get into logistical issues here...less we're willing to discuss a mature way to resolve them. FCC-don't know enough to comment...I use 2.4ghz so there are limited issues other than staying a couple miles from a tower controlled field. So, lets start the debates. and please no....can't be done or won't be done. Let's keep this thread to how to resolve issues. Like an engineer mindset....there is a problem, we look for a solution, no matter what, we look for a solution. Every problem can be solved. Just trying to see what can be done before it gets done for us.
Posted on: 5/9/2009 8:45 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755208

RE: FAR for maximum altitude limit for models
I haven't read everything here but now you guys make me believe that what I've read from the FAA was wrong. The FAA clearly states that it has no intention of regulating hobby flying models....don't remember the advisory. What I do remember is that it basically directs you to follow the AMA rules and guidelines. As to UAV's that's a different story...some is a gray area...it depends on what you're doing, where you are, something about the size of the craft. anyway...I'll read and get back.
Posted on: 5/9/2009 8:25 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755166

RE: Issue of AMA membership revokation.
everyone is entitled to their opinion. Soon as you all realize that mine is right we'll all get along much better. That being said. With someone that is being so negative...Why is anyone listening?
Posted on: 5/9/2009 8:09 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755130

RE: What if you crash and hit a parked airplane
Didn't read all the comments...but homeowners will not cover this issue. It's your personal toy that you directed towards the craft on the ground either on purpose or otherwise. It's your sole responsibility period. Now, if you have separate coverage such as provide by AMA. Since it's reasonable that the AMA insurance is for covering RC accidents it's reasonable to expect that this insurance would cover said damage. I'd have to go back and look at the actual amounts though...don't have them committed yet.
Posted on: 5/9/2009 8:04 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755116

RE: The Ultimate AMA Rant
haven't gone through and read everything...didn't have time. Since this appears to be a rant, I'll put in my 2 cents worth. The AMA is an organization that has zero authority. They make no laws, can enforce nothing, have no actual licensing (paying a fee to get a magazine and insurance is not a license...it's a membership) Anyone who says "I Promise" can be a member. Make the AMA a federal entity and we'll get somewhere.
Posted on: 5/9/2009 7:58 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8755104

RE: Who's right or wrong?
Access doesn't believe what he says. If so, Access would not have posted here. After all, any posting is irrelevant according to Access
Posted on: 5/9/2009 3:06 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8753597

RE: Who's right or wrong?
far too mature of a response for this thread. We here only deal in finger pointing and assumptions.
Posted on: 5/8/2009 6:08 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8752412

RE: Who's right or wrong?
I may have used the incorrect term or designation for pilot, do apologize for being misleading Generally a commercial pilot is not the issue, at least not in the area's that I've seen. By commercial I meaning the pilot charged with the task of ferrying passengers from one city to the next in airliners, kingairs etc. I understand that there are other areas that commercial may apply such as carrying someone for aerial photography, news, emergency, etc. Most of those type of pilots I don't see causing a problem, well except for the news birds. It Jo dirt who has less than a 2k hours flying that thinks he knows what he is doing. Maybe he does, but I'll only trust him if he has white hair due to SEE's (significant emotional events).
Posted on: 5/8/2009 11:40 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8751367

RE: Who's right or wrong?
Good, looks like we're back on track. as to the it has nothing to do with parental attitudes...I disagree. Sure there is nothing wrong with a parental attitude...less it impedes a progressive process to a common goal. There is absolutely nothing wrong in standing one's ground, but to not try to remedy the situation simply for the belief it can't be done...well there is all kinds of wrong with that. Just think that if the Wright brothers or Otto Lilienthal, Clément Ader. Had they had "the can't be done" attitude, we wouldn't even be on this site. Because after all if God meant for man to fly we wold have wings. At least that was the mindset of the common man at the time.
Posted on: 5/8/2009 10:31 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8751188

RE: Who's right or wrong?
I know it's not simple to get something added to an FAA chart. But it could be. All that is needed is everyone to agree that a box around the rc field is necessary. Is it really that difficult for RC pilots and FAA certified sport pilots to agree on that? FAA aside, and what it would take. Please only FAA certified pilots answer this. Is it really that difficult for RC pilots and FAA certified sport pilots to agree that we actually can share the air and that in order to do so we must work as a team and know where each other are?
Posted on: 5/7/2009 8:53 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8749815

RE: Who's right or wrong?
emergency is a non issue here...lets not bring it up. Interesting how the more we try to work with the pilots in creating a sharing environment the more difficult and erroneous the comments become. If that plane that has an emergency and lands on a freeway....that in turn causes an accident I guess pilot has no responsibility, right. Doesn't the plane always have right of way?
Posted on: 5/7/2009 6:14 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8749414

RE: Who's right or wrong?
the "it can't work attitude" goes back to the statement of parental attitude thought processes. how many of you are parents, have had a child ask you a question that you didn't want to answer, so the response was "Because I said so, or I'm mom or dad Thats why? That attitude doesn't educated the child at all and diminishes their ability to appropriately think and respond in an adult fashion. After all, as parents aren't we grooming our children to be rational adults? By showing the child its better to avoid the topics that he/she doesn't like diminishes their maturity level. Because of his experience as Silent-AV8R mentions, it appears that he's taking the standpoint of "that's just the way it is" much like a parent would do. I don't at all disagree with how the FAA generally thinks. it appears that If it takes effort on their part just dismiss the possibility all together. He's right, chances are very slim....mainly because of the attitude that Silent-AV8R and others like him have. Really, how hard is it to not fly in a box around an rc park or any other park for that matter, up to say 500'. The FAA already recognizes that RC craft exist and affirm the AMA rules of 400', right? So, why not error on the safe side and have the "Crosswalks" on a map? At that height I believe it's a gray area with ATC. Here in Houston I believe that ATC takes over at 1500' and it's up to you to police 0'-1500'. In that case we need someone other than us to police the skies. Funny. We've spent more time arguing the point than it takes to resolve the issue. Put it on a map, manned aircraft stay out of the area and we stay out of yours...get the appropriate police to issue tickets.... We have here a situation that in this economic crunch can increase the job market. Extra park rangers for both rc parks, public parks, extra FAA inspectors to keep low flying planes at the proper height above neighborhoods. (akin to constables). Public parks can issue certificates to fly there. This would help pay for the personnel, updating maps. How about adding the AMA to a division of the FAA? Where people can be properly trained, licensed etc. Thereto is another avenue to add jobs to the job market.
Posted on: 5/7/2009 2:37 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8748852

RE: Who's right or wrong?
This has really gotten to be funny. There are simply two thought process here, mature adult and child sometimes confused with parent. For this to be understood either common sense is needed or a psych. class. adult: do what's necessary so we can all share the air....the FAA certified craft have their area and RC'ers have theirs. No airports will have any problems with a Parent/child. full size aircraft have RoW so get out of their way.... No objective to reasonably rectify the problem. This is a simple problem to rectify. It may be complex in the number of people and organizations that are necessary to make it work but it is doable if desired. Simply takes mature adults working for a common goal. maybe like common sense....the adult mindset isn't so common.
Posted on: 5/7/2009 10:14 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8748192

RE: Who's right or wrong?
the reason things like this get 7 pages is obvious to me....it is apparently a major issue. Seems like an easy problem to solve for the adult minded person. Guess there are more parental thinkers out there than I though...a real shame. Sorry to see tex leave...He's had much good words I've seen in other places
Posted on: 5/7/2009 12:34 AM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8747434

RE: Who's right or wrong?
still don't see how a 400' block would close anything down. Nice emotional response though. But you did in a round about way say that you are not for preventing hazardous flying zones...nice
Posted on: 5/6/2009 6:11 PM by Author "smh20502" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8746290