Here is a list of all the postings buster prop has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Moon landing|
I don’t know why the US moon landings would have been faked, it doesn’t make any sense. Each Apollo launch was seen by millions of people live on TV and those who were at Cape Canaveral. Presumably the conspiracy theory is that the astronauts weren’t in the rocket because they went back down the tower before it launched. Alternatively, the Saturn 5 launched them into an earth orbit for a few days instead of flying to the moon while the landing and moonwalks were being faked in a studio. Later, TV showed the capsule splashing down into the Pacific and the real astronauts emerging. I don’t see how either of those theories are possible and too many people would have known. Remember that the Russians were desperately trying to get to the moon first and their engineers knew that Saturn 5/Apollo was a viable system. Why would the Americans go to all the trouble and expense of building and launching several moon-capable Apollos and then take the risk of being discovered faking moon landings? Easier to just go there. The landings happened for the following reasons: Does anyone think the TV pictures from the Apollo 8 command module of the earth from lunar orbit at the end of 1968 were faked and were pictures of the un-docked lunar lander in orbit around the moon (Apollo 9&10) faked as well? If not, then NASA had a manned craft capable of orbiting the moon and performing 90% of the mission. The only possible reason for faking just the landing mission was because they realised in 1969 that they couldn’t guarantee a safe landing and re-launch from the lunar surface. Why would NASA only think of that so late in the project? Being discovered faking moon walks with actors in space suits would have meant the end of NASA because they’d spent millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money developing a system capable of getting men to the moon and then didn’t land them. Too much risk. Therefore, unless the whole Apollo program between 1962 and 1972 was faked, which I find hard to believe because of the huge number of people who would have had to be sworn to secrecy, all they had to do was ensure that the lunar module would land and take off again. Remember that Apollo 11 was tracked by Jodrell Bank, they brought back moon rocks, left experiments on the moon and evidence of the 1969-72 landings can be seen from lunar orbit.
Edited By buster prop on 22/07/2019 10:24:20
|Thread: Prostate Cancer|
I went for my annual ‘MOT’ blood tests recently and luckily the results are all marked Satisfactory. My PSA is 2.5 which is ok as I am 72. It has crept up slowly, 15 years ago when I had the first test it was 0.8. If it suddenly shoots up then I’m sure the Doc will have a closer look at me. We had a new GP a couple of years ago and she pulled me in for the DRE in view of my age (then 69). Was ok but recommended that I have an annual test. I’d tell anyone to get checked and know what your baseline PSA is.
|Thread: M6? Not If I Can Help It......|
I realise that we are getting off the topic but I'm reminded of something. In Germany they used to say that if you want a Starfighter just buy a field and wait.
|Thread: Almost a disaster|
A few months ago I treated myself to an Easy Glider 4, the RR version. I’m very pleased with it, nice to fly, good glide and the usual Multiplex quality. I liked the idea that the complete tail removes with one nylon bolt so that the model can be transported in its box. The bolt goes in under the tail and clamps the fin/rudder onto the tail-plane with the pushrods secured last. One day at the field and because of my haste to get the EG4 assembled and flying, this last bit nearly caused a crash. I put the tail on as described and connected the push-rods to the rudder and elevator. I centred the surfaces and tightened the grub screws but hadn’t plugged in the battery, thinking that the servos were centred. They weren’t. Out on the flight line I plugged in, waited for the ESC beeps, picked up the model and waggled the sticks, but because I was holding the model up I only looked at the ailerons which were ok and moved in the right sense. I launched and immediately knew something was badly wrong, the EG4 was circling right and power stalling. I got some height then cut the motor and fed in lots of left and down trim. Even so, it was way out of trim and I had to hold in a lot of down elevator to stop the EG4 stalling and then steer it back towards the strip. I still hadn’t twigged what the problem was, being so busy trying to get the EG4 back on the ground in one piece. I did land it, a fair walk away but it was ok. As I got near the plane I could see the rudder was off centre and then realised what was wrong. I centred the trims again and could see the elevator had a lot of ‘up’ and the rudder was over to the right. I was lucky to get away with that, I would have been furious with myself if I’d smashed an almost new model, which had been flying perfectly well, because of a stupid mistake. Now I have put a note inside the box lid telling me to set the rudder and elevator with the trims centred and the receiver on. I always mix in a throttle safety switch on the Tx so that I can make adjustments without the motor starting. My Easy Glider lives to fly again.
|Thread: CAA registration consulation|
I have returned the questionnaire to the CAA, confining myself just to answering questions 5,6,and 7 without any rants. I have also written (by email) to Baroness Vere re-iterating my concerns and expanding them to explain how model flying is such a worthwhile activity and that many professionals in the aerospace industry are, or have been aeromodellers. I don't know how interested she will be in all this, from her web page she seems more concerned about female equality. I used bits of a previous letter I wrote to the the previous Aviation Minister back in 2017 in response to another BMFA request. Let's hope all our efforts have some effect..
|Thread: Where's all the stock?|
I recently ordered an Easyglider 4 RR from Al`s Hobbies in Milton Keynes and it only took a week or so to get hold of. I went for an RR because I'm impatient to get it flying without having to find and/or buy a suitable motor, speed controller and servos, as well as put it all together. I don't think the R.R is bad value for its quality and flying reputation, I've flown my Easyglider and was pleased with how well it went straight out of the box and its easy to fly. Not my first Multiplex model but I wanted a relaxing go-to glider to replace my much repaired Radian.
|Thread: Which brushless motor and prop for WW Orion-E|
I used an E-max C.F.2822 motor on mine with a 9 x 5 prop on a 2S battery. 70 Watts was enough to give a reasonably good climb. There's a thread on here about this model, lots of info.
|Thread: Thanks for everybody’s time to reply|
I built two of Derek Woodwards` designs from free plans in a magazine. They both flew well and I still have one of them so yes, I was a fan. Someone else that I actually knew for a while was Ray Jones who used to write the `Slopeside` page in the BMFA mag. He was Chairman of the Clwyd Soaring Association when I was a member in the late 70`s and was a great character. Ray was a total gliding enthusiast, full of stories and was always helpful to beginners like me. I was sad to read that he had died a few years ago. Glad I once knew him.
I’m a fan of Balsaloc too, it really holds down the edges of film as described. However.. put some Vaseline on the pot threads or the lid may never unscrew again. I had a pot that was left for a few weeks and I only got the lid off after a struggle.
|Thread: Alula Trek|
Does anyone on here fly an Alula Trek? I have acquired one and trying a discus launch on the flat showed that it’s very pitch sensitive even with the CG on the bumps underneath the wing, the recommended position. Unfortunately I don’t have the instructions. I reduced the elevator movement and it was still sensitive in pitch. For slope flying I put 10 grams into the weight box over the balance point and launched. The first flight was a roller coaster, so I landed it and cut down the movement even more and increased the expo to 35%, more than I usually use. The Trek is very short coupled. Elevator movement is now only 20% on low rates, the elevator moves + - 4 mm. It was more manageable and I was confident enough to fly it faster. The Trek is not a floater, it can go surprisingly fast if you push it. I enjoyed just soaring and flying fast passes across the slope while being very careful with the elevator. I did one inadvertent loop. Another thing I found is that the push rods will easily slip in the clevises, tiny screws holds them in place. This may be designed to save the servo gears like a mechanical fuse so I keep checking the elevon alignment. I don’t want to move the pushrods to the inner hole on the servo horns because that would reduce aileron control. My Trek is getting there and is great fun to fly. The Trek followed the Evo and they both seem to be highly thought of. I wondered if anyone else had one and how they like it.
|Thread: Christmas wishes|
Happy Xmas to all and best wishes for 2019. That’s whether you fly i.c. Leccy, jets, gliders, helicopters or.. Nearly wrote drones but I won’t go that far!
|Thread: Christmas films worth recording|
I've been recording Star Wars movies for my grandson, he's a great fan of anything to do with Star Wars. On the other topic, I also remember the scene in Battle of Britain with Susanna York in her underwear. Unforgettable. My schoolboy crush was on Liz Frazer, she was in some of the Carry On films. Neither actress is still with us unfortunately.
|Thread: which is cheaper,IC or ELECTRIC?|
Exactly. It depends whether you think the engine is the most Important thing or the plane being flown. After all you just need motive power, it can be I.c. electric, rubber band, CO2 or wind onto a slope. It's the flying that matters. Talking of which, are we glider flyers all soulless psychopaths because we don't use I.c. motors? In reply to the OP I admit that for large power models electric would be expensive but for the small ones I fly electric has advantages. I don't think you can even get r/c engines less than .40, certainly not as 4 strokes.
Ooh! I think I touched nerve there. My remarks were meant to be ‘tongue in cheek’but I just prefer the cleanliness and reliability of electric flight. For me it’s about flying, not tinkering with engines. Apart from my gliders I mostly fly small/medium electric models, not huge ones as I don’t have the space to store them. Each to their own but I don’t have to strip engines to replace bearings, adjust valves or use after-flight oil. I have seen enough dead stick landings and needle twiddling, although I admit that the MDS was a 2 stroke. A field I fly at has houses nearby so noise is an issue as well. Btw, thanks Rocker, you took my post in the right spirit.
I really don't know why electric models are said to be boring and soulless. AS long as the plane has enough power and performs the same as it's I.c. equivalent, what's the difference? If you really want the I.c. experience, play engine noises into headphones, spray the model with glow fuel and wipe it off after flying. Even carry a box of bricks out to the field if you miss carrying fuel, starter and tools about and if your transmitter allows, program it for random throttle closing then you get the dead stick experience too. I was once told that MDS stands for More Dead Sticks by a frustrated and oily I.c. flyer. When the plane is up there you have to do fly it in exactly the same way if it's electric or I.c.
|Thread: Ionic wind power|
I'm not being negative, just pointing out a problem that designers would have to overcome if they use this technology for a full sized aircraft. I also gave a description of the test model as reported in the Times. I don't resist change, going Ohm now.
An interesting principle but hardly practical. What would happen if it flew in the rain? The + and - 20Kv would flash over and then no propulsion. The model that flew in a gym in Massachusetts had a 5M wingspan and weiged 2.5Kg according to the Times, and it resembled a thermal soarer.
|Thread: Autumn is here...you been flying ?|
A fine breezy yesterday here with the wind from the south so good for Ivinghoe Beacon. The south slope is flyable except for having to land crosswind along the slope. The air can be turbulent there as well because it is downwind from another hill. Partly for those reasons I took my Slipstream foamie wing to fly. I have changed the pushrods from the kit supplied bike spokes to carbon rods but other than that it’s absolutely standard. Had several long flights, the lift was good and even some thermals went through. After my Cliffwhacker session a couple of weeks ago I’m getting more into slope soaring. This is an actual and metaphorical slippery slope I’m afraid..
|Thread: Spektrum transmitter for a beginner|
I agree, 7 channels have always been enough for me. 2 for ailerons plus elevator, rudder and motor. That’s 5 and enough over for retracts etc. I have the original DX7 like Peter but mine is DSM2 only. Did you have yours modified Peter? I also have a Gen 2 DX7 which is just DSMX because it was bought after the EU stopped Spektrum importing DSM2 Tx’s. I must say that all my Spektrum gear has been reliable.
|Thread: T9 Hobbysport|
T9`s website shows "out of stock" for all Hacker models. I wonder why this is. The Vagabond was quite big hit, several seen on my nearest slope.
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!