Here is a list of all the postings eflightray has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: BMFA numbers. Is this true, or a gross exaggeration?|
Sorry, I can only think of more negatives.
With fishing, often there are canals, rivers, streams, lakes, ponds etc nearby, where a youngster can see what is happening and there will probably be a local fishing club, or even schoolmates who go fishing. I used to cycle to my local angling sites as a teenager, even cycled to my local flying site, (recreation ground/sports/school field). It was probably 6 years of modeling before I got a car.
But where does a youngster see model aircraft ? Do many clubs really want "young kids with their toy electric planes", as that's how I could imagine some club member feel, hopefully I'm wrong.
Perhaps the answer is, stop worrying about the hobbies future, those that want to join in will, it will carry on as before, at least as long as governments and councils tolerate it.
The hobby survived the loss of all those old airfields and runways we used for free flight. The only people likely to kill the hobby and flying field are the end users annoying other people.
Perhaps step back and take the position of a non-modeler.
Why would I want to take up a hobby I rarely or never see anywhere, not on TV, other than maybe on 'You've been framed' occasionally of crashes.
That schools never mention or have inter-school competitions, (Heavy lift ?, what's that ?). That probably many air cadets don't even get involved with.
That needs special places to fly as councils class it as a 'health and safety risk', probably the same for schools, 'not covered by our insurance'.
That needs a car to get to. That is often controlled by weather conditions. That a club wants to charge me quite a lot of money to join, then tells me there are loads of rules restricting what I want to do, and when.
Unless people see models flying, how will they even know it exists as a hobby ?. So where are most clubs ?, out in the countryside down a back road, out of the way.
It makes you wonder if the hobby actually wants more people to get involved.
Just my opinions and thoughts.
I will be honest and say this is probably my last year of building and flying. A combination of various, probably minor things, has led to my decision, the CAA/registration is probably one more of the minor nails in the coffin.
After 60+ years of modeling, with a few minor breaks, I realise the hobby was tending to control my spare time.
But the weather is now tending to control my flying more than ever before. I think I flew twice his year. Remember long calm summer evenings ?, trouble is they are just memories. The problems of good weather and no spare time, or spare time and poor weather conditions just add to the decision and frustrations.
I will probably renew my BMFA membership, ( I remember joining the SMAE), but sometime next year, will sell everything, (and I do mean everything), a total break.
|Thread: Cremation, or Composting ?|
But you need to understand that the green fanatics expect the UK to be protected by us getting rid of anything that may affect 'our' environment, a sort of 'bubble mentality'.
We may have to build our future dwellings from things like old models. Mud huts will be banned as it could affect the muds biodiversity.
I will probably be banned from the country for using plastic materials, (foam). Good job I'm too old to worry about it.
|Thread: Catapult Build for Ducted Fan Models|
I used a bungee launch originally, then realised it wasn't actually necessary.
Perhaps it was something to do with the models wing loading
|Thread: Looking for a 1930s low wing racer plan|
How about Miss Lizzy --
My electric powered version.
|Thread: source of 2mm Depron?|
What part of the UK David ?
I have some 2mm x 1000mm x 350mm white Depron sheets, but it would be a PITA to package and post.
The nearest 'happening' to me is the Bwlch slope soaring site, (20 minutes away), if you know anyone who visits there it could be passed that way.
Ray. Near Swansea.
Edited By eflightray on 29/10/2019 13:40:27
|Thread: Electric Thrust|
But what does static thrust tell you about how a plane will actually fly ?
I will declare right at the start that I feel static thrust measurement is not that important, and have for a very long time.
It may be handy for a 3D model that is expected to hover, and climb vertical, but then you will be selecting a suitable prop for that type of model.
More important, in my opinion, is 'pitch speed'. Prop rpm x pitch.
You can increase static thrust by increasing prop diameter, and dropping the pitch to keep within the motors current rating. But you can easily lose out on the required speed the model may require.
Most important is the right prop doing the right rpm to fly a model how you want it. Different type of models require different power requirements. You may get the similar thrust measurement from a small high pitch prop or a larger diameter low pitch prop, but they wont fly the plane the same.
I know a lot of people make/buy thrust rigs and do tests, but unless you know all the parameters, plus why and how you use that information, I would still say - get a tachometer, (you should already have a wattmeter), and look at what types and sizes of prop are generally used on various types of model to make them fly that way.
|Thread: Ailerons extending to wingtip|
You could consider the aerodynamics of full size aircraft, but from a model design point of view, if you run the aileron all the way out there is a greater chance of it's leading edge catching in the grass and getting damaged or even torn off. The wing tip protects that from happening with an aileron that stops short.
|Thread: Thinking aloud about Spits...|
Foxfan. I have always built wings flat, easier to build and see if there are any warps, twists etc.
The stall tend to be in the low end speed range, (unless you consider high speed stalls, never managed to go that fast and pull a tight turn). The heavier the model, the the greater the wing loading, the higher the stall speed, so I have always built light, plus there's the advantage of needing less power.
To me, adding wash-out where you don't think it's useful, is similar to reducing the wing area and lift capability. If the outer part of the wing isn't adding to the lift it just seems a waste.
Now if someone built a really heavy model, high wing loading, and needed to fly fairly slowish to land owing to a short runway etc, then adding wash-out may add a slight safety margin, then do it by all means.
I have never been a follower of build strong, (heavy), to survive crashes, or add a bigger engine to make it fly. I build to survive flying, not crashing.
Seems to have worked for me for many many years, both IC power, (30+ years), and electric power, again about 30 years since giving up IC, plus some experience in free flight, it all comes in useful.
But that's just me, many fliers have different ideas that work for them. The thing to do is always try something different to learn and gain experience of what suits you.
Edited By eflightray on 14/09/2019 19:16:09
Alternative would perhaps be, -
don't add wash-out so the whole wing is lifting better, (you are not wasting the outer wing area and making flying inverted riskier), and most of all, learn to build lighter, , and don't fly near the stall speed.
Seems logical to me.
Ray, (72" Spitfire with no wash-out)
But I should add, I don't make 'scale' models either.
Edited By eflightray on 14/09/2019 13:29:50
My 72" Depron Spitfire came in at 7Lbs - 2oz flying. No worries about stall speed and tip stalling.
I built the Tony Nijhuis 72" Mk V Spitfire from the free plan, but used Depron and electric power.
Still my favorite plane to fly after 7 years of use. It does fit in a normal size hatchback, (wing removable, and easy assembly).
To me bigger planes are so much more enjoyable to fly, (and easier to see), don't necessarily right off going bigger.
It would have landed slower, if I had remembered to lower the flaps
|Thread: Possibly going all electric, which motors should I use?|
Just my opinion, but don't bother converting IC power models to electric. You end up with a compromise.
Go straight for models designed for electric power only, and if you're a builder, consider some of the many fun, and profile scale models, designed and built using Depron foam, (it's also much cheaper than balsa).
Forget the, "It has to be oily, noisy, and made with balsa" stuck in the past club members. Show them what can be achieved with electric power.
(60+ years of building and flying, 30 with IC, 30 with electric, I wouldn't go back to IC)
Edited By eflightray on 25/08/2019 14:46:01
|Thread: Hands free mobile calls|
One of my pet hates is watching the driver in front of me talk to the passenger by always turning their head to took at the passenger when talking.
One of my late wife's pet hates was TV presenters who can't talk without waving their hands about. I hate to think what they are like when driving and talking.
It's a good job
|Thread: Sennybridge jamming trial|
Best way to prove the jamming works is loads of complaints from people who didn't know about the tests
Thanks Steve. I will have to put my tinfoil hat on after all.
Has anyone tried entering the coordinates into a map ?
I have, and it's nowhere near Sennybridge, unless I have it wrong. Used Bing maps.
52 21.12N, 00 45.975W
52 21.12N, 00 25.925W
51 44.05N, 00 25.925W
51 44.05N, 00 45975W
|Thread: Prop size and efficiency|
Many many years ago, (nicads and brushed motor), I did some thrust testing for I think it was my first electric model, found and used a prop that gave the best thrust.
The plane wouldn't fly much beyond a sinking powered glide.
Eventually it dawned on me, (Please excuse the the following, I'm not singing it).
'Thrust - It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing ....'. for swing read rpm, for rpm read pitch speed.
I'ts the right prop turning the right speed (pitch speed), that flies the model how you want, not just how much static thrust it measures.
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!