Here is a list of all the postings MattyB has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: for fast electic is supreme|
Technically impressive, but the aesthetics of some of those models... As my Gran used to say, "That's a face only a mother could love"!!!
...and the winner of the "My eyes are bleeding" cup...!
Edited By MattyB on 18/04/2019 12:45:32
|Thread: New Drone/Aerodrome Regulations - Is your club at risk?|
Would love to say I'm surprised, but based on my single year in the Old Warden Club that's exactly the kind of thing I'd expect. Whislt I was there the committee flatly refused to countenance the idea of a website ("banned by the Shuttleworth Trust " ) or even a members only email board/forum for allowing people to communicate. This was particularly important for me as I am a w/e flyer and needed to know there would be sonmeone there to spot for me whilst I was flying. At the AGM they also annnounced changes to the constitution that had not been communicated in advance; they didn't even have enough copies of the document to be handed round so it was voted on before most people had read the proposed changes!
Needless to say I left after 12 months; the picturesque outlook and beautiful strip could not outweigh the onerous requirements that come with a full sized airfield and the ridiculous attitude of the committee. I also got the distinct feeling anyone under the age of 55 who flew at the w/es, could fly a rolling circle and suggested crazy ideas like communicating on the interweb was not welcome here...
Edited By MattyB on 17/04/2019 17:42:38
|Thread: Sticky throttle|
Posted by IanR on 15/04/2019 13:47:42:
See my post about an unknockable safety switches earlier in the thread - that is essentially a variant on what you are are suggesting. I'm certain you could achieve what you are looking for using delays and nested ANDs, but it would probably take more logical switches...
Edited By MattyB on 15/04/2019 14:25:35
One other alternative - you could effectively add in a "dual" throttle cut functionality by linking the switch to certain flight modes. For instance throttle activation/dactivation could be enabled in Takeoff flight mode, but not in Acro or Cruise so if you knocked the switch whilst flying then it wouldn't do anything. The only disadvantage is that if you swtiched to that flight mode without noticing you'd knocked the switch you might end up plummeting quickly(!), but that should be easily remedied by an audio callout on the switch in question.
Fair enough. I doubt the developers would take that one on though, purely because it is pretty niche - the vast majority of users want this functionality to result in their TX having all the switches in exactly the same positions every time they power on, and the current system does that.
The other advantage of having your switches in the identical position every time is it enables you to do a simple visual check of your TX prior to switch on; for instance I always set all mine to be "everything away from me/up" at power up. This gives a small amount of additional safety in my eyes, particularly if you do it consistently across all your model setups. The only other alternative I can think of is swapping that 3 positin switch for a 2, but it may not actually give you what you want at startup as the software will still be looking for a 3 position.
Edited By MattyB on 15/04/2019 12:48:57
The problem with physical mechanisms like this is that if you want to cut the throttle quickly for safety reasons you can’t. On an electric model it’s less of an issue as closing the throttle stick should always stop the prop, but that won’t be the case for an IC engine. Given the huge functionality available in modern radios (particularly the Jeti’s and those which use open source firmware such as OpenTX) that allow software based safeguards to be put in place without that disadvantage I no longer believe physical safeguards on the TX are necessary. YMMV.
Edited By MattyB on 14/04/2019 22:44:06
You need to switch on the preflight checks at startup from the Model Setup menu. Rather than give an audio warning it lists all the switches in their current positions after you switch on, with any that are in a position you haven’t specified clearly highlighted. It won’t transmit until you either set all the switches into the right state or manually accept the current state via the Enter button.
You can enable this from the TX itself, but it’s a little easier from Companion:
Edited By MattyB on 14/04/2019 22:06:44
That’s an easy one - just set your audio to be triggered by a logical switch with !SA↑ (Plus any additional conditions you want using AND function).
PS - I actually designed an “unknockable” safety switch for my Dad’s IC models that addresses your concerns with the sticky throttle cut. It requires a sequence of movements on a three position switch to activate and deactivate across to states (for instance ignition ioff and ignition on).
It’s more complex to setup but works very nicely - downloadable example and documentation here.
Edited By MattyB on 14/04/2019 13:31:41
No need PatMc; when I made those posts I also posted up an eepe on the RCSettings site and linked it from the thread.
Edited By MattyB on 14/04/2019 11:29:15
|Thread: C rating on Lipo's|
Short summary... almost all pack C-ratings are made up by manufacturers to sell their packs. If you have a decent charger that can measure the internal resistance (IR) of your packs you can estimate the max C rating of your packs using this tool; in my experience it tends to vary anywhere between 30-70% of the rating on the wrapper depending on brand, age and number of cycles.
|Thread: Does your club prohibit the use of after-market receivers?|
As has been posted several times it is clear the pilot takes responsibility to ensure the flight can be made safely, not the committee. If an incident came to a court they would look to see what precautions the pilot had taken to ensure that was the case - i.e range and control checks done beforehand, no witnesses stating they were flying in an obviously dangerous way (such as repeated low passes over the pits) etc. The only time equipment could come into play would be if it was not certified for use in the UK for model aircraft (i.e. no CE mark and accompanying certificate of conformity), but the onus would still be on the prosecution to prove it were a contributing factor. Even if they did I fail to see how the committee could be held liable.
In reality we all know there are many other things we see in a club environment (ancient, undersized RX packs; poor quality switches; poorly thought out RX installs etc) that are orders of magnitude more likely to cause a crash. Even if that weren’t the case the assumption that compatible RXs are fundamentally more likely to cause an RF failure is highly questionable - since 2.4 came in there are lots of examples of big name brands making huge gaffes with their protocols (Futaba releasing kit with identical SSIDs; early Spek RXs with very high brownout voltages; Frsky’s first attempt at complying with the revised EU refs in 2015 etc). Banning non-OEM RXs will do absolutely nothing to address those kind of problems,
|Thread: Verhees Delta|
...and another longer video...
An interesting video popped up in my Youtube feed yesterday - Verhees has built a prototype 2 seat version, and in Bugatti blue it looks quite a lot prettier and more practical. It's big enough to sleep in and you can even transport it on a trailer if needed...
Fancy a v2 Max?
Edited By MattyB on 20/03/2019 09:17:07
|Thread: Cheaper Teslas.....|
Completely agree - without some kind of leap forward in battery tech these much trumpeted fast charging capabilities are going to reduce cycle life dramatically. Then there are the safety implications of charging at such high currents in highly populated areas. Would you fancy sitting in one of these vehicles whilst charging or even walking past it at the motorway services whilst 1400A are going in? No thanks...!
Edited By MattyB on 07/03/2019 15:53:34
|Thread: JR resurrection?|
Based on that and other sources I have read online I don't think we can really call this a resurrection. Yes the brands and IP have been picked up, but there is really nothing of the original JR company or it's reputation of engineering excellence left. This is effectively a new startup, and I struggle to see how they will gain investment for new products or expand their reach beyond supporting the remaining handful of legacy users of the "old" JR - most people who want a premium 2.4GHz solution have alreadymoved on elsewhere, and the competition at the lower price points is probably even fiercer.
EDIT - Apparently when these land they will be £800... I'm afraid at that price stillbirth is almost guaranteed; they are really only an option for die hards who don't want to give up their DMSS RXs. With no guarantee of the QC levels being the same as the old JRs it may even be a difficult sell to users of legacy JR kit.
Edited By MattyB on 04/03/2019 11:56:57
This was posted on their Facebook page on 13th Feb...
"Apologies if you are trying to call. I am away overseas, normal answering calls however Sim Card has decided to fail so I cannot receive make calls or texts until further notice. I can however respond to emails most times with 24 hrs. Our website and distribution of products are not effected apart from new requirements from HMRC which is preventing us from clearing imports at the present time. Very disappointed with HMRC the the last advisory was ' we aim to respond within 15 days'...
(NB - The "Shambolic" is part of his post, not my addition)
Edited By MattyB on 27/02/2019 10:49:22
Seems to fly very well - great work Max. Quite a bit faster than I thought it would be, but clearly an excellent flier.
Edited By MattyB on 25/02/2019 13:30:20
Interesting model Max. How is it controlled, just rudder and elevator? I can't see any ailerons but it also doesn't look like there is much dihedral either...
|Thread: DH84 Dragon|
I have a lightweight foamie parkflyer Spad from HK that was originally designed for 2S, but because of their strange design decisions ended up on 3S. I put it on an diet to be able to fly it on 2S in small spaces, and it has ~45W/lb.
It is perfectly flyable (from a hand launch, ROG is impossible due to it's small size), but was very hairy on the first flight. Given how much time and effort you have put into building this beauty I would encourage you to think of a way to get at least 60W/lb for your first flights, whether that is by going up to 4S or fitting new motors. The additional cost will be forgotton when you see it soaring confidently overhead, but it would be horrible to lose it because of a powertrain miscalculation.
Edited By MattyB on 18/02/2019 17:32:43
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!