Here is a list of all the postings Erfolg has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Identification of Font|
I did suspect that the font would be a specific to Honda, so that it would be copyrighted.
I have checked word, again unsurprisingly it is not one that is listed.
I however did not suspect that it would be available on the Internet.
Can anyone identify this Font, please
|Thread: Snap Dragon|
Max, I will be following your build, RH has delivered an excellent model for those who like smaller models.
For myself, I still do fly smaller models, although at the club where I now fly, larger models are far more practical. On that basis i will be watching RH with the "Lowenmaul die Grosser" (no idea if the gender is correct).
Restating, now that larger Lipos and motors are available at affordable sizes, larger models work well. They tend to tolerate longer grass, deal easier with stronger wind and for us olduns, you can see them at some distance.
|Thread: Civil Engineering advice needed|
I woke up this morning thinking about broken props concept of how it should have been done. In the now dim and so distant past, which is circa 40-50 years back. I may have seen a variation of the concept. From what I think I saw and remember, As part of site preparation the site had been scraped to level. This had lead to one hill side being partially removed with a now steep embankment. The solution seemed to be the use of multiple steel strip laid horizontally into the hill side fastened onto concrete blocks which formed a retaining wall. a layer of earth was then dumped on, and the process continuously repeated, until the height of the unsupported hill top was reached. I guess it was a lot cheaper (even using the onsite batching plant) and perhaps quicker than multiple concrete pours etc.
Any way, I have started the implementation of the gravel and topping with sand method suggested. I have managed 1/2 of one side.
I may leave the other side, as it is not obviously as poor.
Just concentrating on completing the side started and then a fully supported central area, where there are obviously issues that cannot be left.
Thanks again, for good guidance.
I have just re-read your comments. As you know or remember, we never had these problems, as we always did a scrape, then piled if necessary. No backfill would move our build.
Gonzo, Unfortunately there are no weep vents in the wall, which would have been useful. On the positive side, the ground is very free draining. The trouble is I will now be thinking of retro fitting some, or at least drilling some holes through on a vertical joint. Then I start thinking, it is unlikely that the joints line up, so it becomes hard work, and will they block with time. Life is to short, it will out last me I am guessing. By then there will be a new fashion and it will be torn down.
The retaining wall is dead plumb. The brickies have done that part very well. I believe it is a different crew that laid the patio.
The comments about the wall moving, could provide a clue as to why that strip has not been consolidated. Knowing the wall was newly built, there could have concerns that the cement had not fully cured. As has been suggested it could well have been as the brickies finished the wall, the flagging company could have been pressed immediately to get the flagged area around the house done.
I will am now going to finish of filling with stone ballast, finally to get everything reasonably flat I will level all the ballast, so that a layer of sand can be used to lay the slabs, Although where the steps are I will adopt a more engineered approach, to produce a stable area.
Thanks for your replies.
I have little idea of the ground levels prior to the laying of this patio area. I assume that the area near the house, previously had a flat area. My best assumption is at least half of the present area, was there at essentially the same level. That then would suggest the rest is back fill.
On the other hand, using a long screwdriver as a probe. It is the area close to the retaining wall that is very soft.
As has been suggested, to do the job immediately properly would take a lot of effort, time and some money. From working experience a substantial part of a build project would be in the ground works. Having missed this part out, the profit would be good and the price apparently keen. The clerk of works seems to have slipped up, as the ballast layer seems to have been a surface scattering from the visual evidence.
I will be taking your advice in blinding the top area with sand. I will be using "builders sand" as that is what I have a bulk bag of. I may even have enough gravel, without getting a bulk bag delivered.
Again as suggested I will then leave the flags, to do their thing.
I had considered digging out a trench down to the original ground level. I quickly dismissed this as it could involve removing approx 18m3 of soil and replaced with concrete. Recently having laid to slabs in the garden, one for a Summer House and another to support a fancy garden bench, pouring concrete gets harder with age.
Simon, and I thought my days of pouring pipes and welding concrete were well behind me.
I have moved into this house about two years ago. A little earlier the rear patio was laid. By whom, I have no idea.
The issue is that the area adjacent to a retaining wall has slumped. Causing the flags in that area to subside.
I decided that I would deal with the issue my self, partly because I have no faith that a tradesman would do the job properly.
I have now temporarily relaid a short section. I have found that the ground immediately adjacent to the wall, is still uncompacted. So far I have used the head part of a sledge hammer to use as a tamper to consolidate the ground as I go forward. Onto the consolidated ground i have poured stone chippings/gravel. Laying the the flags directly onto the ground, as a temporary measure.
From the picture below the extent of the problem can be seen.
The central area has also moved. Here I intended to lift the worst affected because of rocking and not being well supported and then do a full bed support.
The areas by the wall I am less confident that they will not move in the future. Here I am most unsure of the most prudent way forward. Should I relay a little later in the year on cement dabs. Or just leave them for another year.
Now that I am getting on, I am less sure that in the future I will be physically up to the job. On that basis I am inclined to do the job soon.
I cannot but notice that the whole of the patio is anything but flat. In that when viewing from various angles I can see slight slopes and depressions. I am now thinking this could be the reason the joints have not been grouted, to allow water to drain away.
What do you think?
|Thread: Autumn is here...you been flying ?|
There has been no flying for me, for about 20 days now, my trips of virtually every other day, has turned to not 1 a month so it seems.
For me it is about repairs, maintenance and finishing models. These are now mostly completed. The unexplained to me crash of my HK SRE, was probably the result of the fastenings of many of the interplane struts pulling out of the wings. Together with the wafer thin outer tube composite (probably glass fibre) of the top spar failing at possibly both ends, due to the top spar not even reaching the first wing rib. Done now. The list of transfers to finish my models is long.
Sunday is out as I am going to RAF Cosford.
What the heck, Spring will soon be here. Until then, it is a snatched day here and there.
|Thread: Forum members' new models: Let's see them.|
Re the Parkzone Albatross,
I have gone through a small number of Lipos with it. I use 2200 rather than the recommended size, what ever that is. What has caught me out once, is that I purchased a regular Lipo, only to find it would not go in, the internal moulding ( a plastic spar moulding) preventing the lipo from going in. I now carefully ensure that I buy a compact Lipo, paying particular attention to the thickness. The additional weight appears to be trivial to the flying characteristics.
I have also noted, particularly as a lipo reaches the end of its life, the model may intially fly quite happily, although it may have struggled a little in looping, 1/2 Cuban, it suddenly goes as near as dam it, dead stick. The problem with the Albatross is that putting the nose down results in it coming down, not having any gliding capability at all. So getting back to the field I have occasionally found tricky. I do however have a solution, I open my wallet and replace the Lipo..
It is a pity that E2K models are so fast. A bit slower, say circa 70-80 mph, I would not be surprised that a lot of clubs would be far more happy to run events, even if they were initially for the club. I do like the idea.
Edited By Erfolg on 13/11/2018 15:16:42
I am surprised that it is a first flight, in that it has been out of production for years.
Below is my own, still going strong, although I have had the cabane supports fail, which I have repaired, as bits were not to be found.
My simple jig to maintain relationships
|Thread: Which Set Should I buy|
I tend to think that there are at least two major groups of fliers with respect to RC Txs.
The first are users. In essence all they want to do is use the Tx as a tool, where all you do is switch on, then use it to control a model through its flight.
The second group, not only want to fly, they see the Tx as part of the intellectual challenge of not only flying a model, but also in getting it to fly. They are more than happy thinking about what they want to function on the model and how it should undertake that function. Part of the process is setting up the Tx to respond as required. I guess this group tends to be academically inclined.
If I take myself, I was taught Fortran, Pascal, Basic and Visual Basic. The whole time I was thinking, if I have to write all this code to say manipulate some information within a data base, it will cost a fortune and all the user wants to do is say extract say some expenditure, or do some matrix calculation. At the time I found it interesting as an exercise, yet as a user I am not in the slightest bit interested in how something is done, be it in Photo editing, a address file.
For flying I am a user. I do recognise others see flying as just a bit of the intellectual stimulus and manual skills set.
I woke up this morning reminiscing about the dim and distant past. Not being one for BS, I remember standing at the bar, pint in hand, pontificating about the future where all Keyboards would be "WYSIWYG" that print outs would be"GUI", that storage devices would be "Object Be Object Oreinateted". Ah yes those were the days, When DOS was limited to 760k, that programs were top down or bottom up designs, the days of absolute certainty.
I then thought about our radios and my house hold, you have gathered that I am somewhat of a dinosaur. It struck me that increasingly the interfaces around me are voice activated.
In my car, the inbuilt sat nav and phone, can be accessed by voice instructions, plus a few other things. As per the menu, there is so much available, you cannot shake a stick at them, to keep back the tide of options and information. Yet it is the voice activation that is the easiest to use. Just command, phone "Mrs Grumpy Knickers" and the dulcet tones are there barking out.
Then there is my good friend "Alexa". She tells me about the weather, switches the TV on and off, and so on. She is now my timer for cooking. Even plays music. Unfortunately she is not infallible, she does not know consistently "who is the fairest of them all", often she does get it right, that "thee is the fairest in the land", more often wrong, wrong, wrong.
I can see this concept spreading into our RC systems. Just barking out Geraldine, 3 clicks of down elevator, adjusting the pitch trim. Geraldine go into settings and mix aileron and rudder and so. Geraldine, play "Silver Machine", on landing approach play "8 miles high" then "Die Sonne". Sheer heaven, can barely wait.
I know using female voices is sexist, and that all this technology is flawed being the product of male, middle class, white boys, as I heard the complaints on TV, and that the female inventors and developers have been side lined. But on this I am sure "relational Spreadsheets" are the next thing.
It is the concept that "Apple" then "Microsoft" came up with, as an idea, it is finding things in a way that the user would expect. The idea is for the user to find things as their mental model would expect. This would mean that relationships would be arranged in such a way that prior knowledge or training was not to be expected.
At a practical level, the user may be presented with icons, which represent, objects that they are familiar with and in the context of what they wish to do is relevant. An example could be symbol for a wing. clicking on it could reveal a set of icons or headings related to wing functionality. Associated with wings could be imagery associated to wing servos.
Yet to avoid the tree type relationships, on the introductionary desk top or sheet there could be an image of a servo. Again by intuition and anticipated by the user relationship, the same option could be reached, without going down the wing route.
Likewise with all the other capabilities.
Microsoft drop down menus are slightly different, in that the degree of standardisation in addition to anticipation of how users think, allows a user to engage with a plethora of options utilising the same concepts. Perhaps not truly intuitive.
Many of our RC interfaces are anything but intuitive, in that some of the functionality is located on a branch where the first item appears to have little to nothing in common with other options on the branch. An example could be the first item is servo reversing, followed by timer settings, then switch allocation. I know non of our sets are quite as bazarly structured. Although I bet 90% of us need a diagram of the menu, or we scroll around the planet until we stumble on what we want, then continue in the same frustrating and time consuming manner.
Edited By Erfolg on 09/11/2018 23:19:45
It is really only a bit of fun, not ridicule. Observations of why often some things are done. I have been bitten by future proofed etc., both professionally and at home.
Perhaps you may have gathered I believe all the sets work, just fine. Often the differences are trivial. Now all the sets are extremely reliable, who in their right mind will die in a ditch to support any other brand.
I do not even care what others use at the field, as sets are changed quite regularly.
The one exception that seems to tick all or most of the boxes for me is Frsky. Until it has an intuitive interface, that is not tree structure based, or needs lines of something approaching code, not all the boxes are as yet ticked. Yet no one has a intuitive coloured interface as yet, I believe it will come.
Finally no offense was intended, just a leg pull as Martin is doing with me, Sorry.
Edited By Erfolg on 09/11/2018 20:36:12
Martin, at least you get paid, up north, we have to work for nowt, then pay to stand in line for a zero hour contract. Get whipped daily, As for housing, it is a cardboard box for many and then consider how much we pay, compared with your palaces Buckingham, Crystal. You even pinched the one decent castle we had, Leeds and moved it down south. Unless you live in Wimlslow, Alderly Edge, then you pay £4m for terraced house.
Frsky Rxs for Futaba Fast cost £14. And that is all we northerners can afford.
Most of us up here, use every single brand and model, under the sun. You know I have noticed, that people with expensive sets, only crash because something unfathomable happened. Where as some one who has just started, with a cheap set, made a mistake.
I seriously upgrade my RC set when i purchased an Aluminum Case for it to go in. I did think of spraying Futaba on it, to increase the street cred. In the end, I used a felt tip pen to add that urban mystique.
We all have our prejudices, my own is Waltron, followed by Space Commander.
Ahhh, yes future proofing, upgradeability those silken words that spill of the tongue of the salesman then past the lips. Just a month or two down the track, of course it is future proof, just need to throw out this circuit board, ah, yes and this can go to, between you and me, that was not very good, this is much better. Well, no one saw the EU changing the regulations. For you, we can do a cunning deal, it will save you shed loads of money, in the long run, just more than a new Tx now.
There is innovation and innovation, then gimmicks. Are all the other producers making Txs which are not ergonomic?
Ah, yes quality. if it is a carbon fibre reinforced moulded box, Well I would be bored. If on the other hand a box machined from a billet, I would be thinking lets make a virtue of low volume sales. Tooling for a case for a few thousand cases, that would cost money, now a case from a billet, well that is added value, it is quality.
I guess with respect to ergonomics, the big red emergency button goes in the middle, that can now be the on off switch. As for the rest, lets just blag how superior our pretty much standard layout is.
Eric, I followed the link and was not frightened, more a case of experiencing tachycardia.
Who said that Futaba was expensive?
I guess if you live in the money bags SE, the costs, just a bagatelle. For us dour Northerners, the power house of the UK, with our noses to the grind stone, OMG that is a lot of money.
Given that Graupner most definitely are now owned in the Far East, and I understand that Graupner paid for the development of the HoTT system, how sure can you be that the present owners will keep investing in the Brand?
How many radios actually fail, when in current usage?
There is an irony in that my Waltron on 27, still works (after 50 years), I think my Sanwa 2 channal works, although after 20 years neither my Sanwa Clubman or Futaba Gold did nothing when switched on for the first time after sitting about.
I just hope I have not jinked my current set, although i do have another Futaba to fall back on, which I do keep an eye on using it to drive my flight simulator.
Reliability seems extremely high in this era. I will go as far as to suggest if a badge needs an extensive repair centre, I would steer clear.
Personally I do not get to uptight with respect to many of the brand names. In reality many of the brand names outsource production. Does it matter, almost certainly not. With consumer electronics most now originate from the Far east, Malaysia, Singapore, from factories which are extremely modern, using the latest equipment and production techniques. On that basis outsourcing can be a very good thing, from the perspective of quality and quality control.
Going back in time, many UK RC companies, comprised of a few guys in a workshop, with a soldering iron, manually inserting components, together with some work outsourced to individuals who sat at their kitchen table doing the same thing for pennies.
For some Foreign companies at the time, RC equipment was a side line, where the bulk of the products were domestic radios. Ir was done because the percentage profit was good, and helped in the struggle after WW2 to re-establish themselves having been stripped of all their assets and IT property. I understood that Graupner particularly at the start of HoTT outsourced everything to the Far East relating to HoTT.
In the case of JR, I wonder if the similar products that some are saying are very good and appear to perform as per JR are a consequence of their Bankruptcy? As BMW and VW found out when they bought what they thought was RR. One ended up with a clapped out factory and a brand name apparently that was not their target. The other had the brand name, with no facilities. Could be similar, a tier 2 supplier may have acquired the IT, yet another holds the brand name?
Unlike others, a case hewn from aluminum or glass, or Carbon Fibre does not impress me much, compared to the issue does it do what it says on the tin, and can I easily afford it, particularly when compared to other brands. A plastic case will do me, even a folded aluminum case with end plugs, as long as the case works ergonomically, and doe not require a work out, to be able to lift it. One of the major influences on me was the 70s, where a friend had a Hi-Fi, it was made from glass, with surface mounted sliders for controls. It had everything possible, from rumble control, squelch and all the standards. A few years back I asked what happened to it, It had to go he said, some of the components were no longer available and it broke. It had cost the equivalent of thousands today. My Sinclair that cost about £40, had gone, because i could get something much better.
It seems we all have our own ideas, for me it is what can I afford, it must do a bit more than I want today. As for tomorrow, it may never come and if it does, it will be different.
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!