HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bloom@inland.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Rocket powered R/C (Estes Astro Blaster)
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:44:11 CST
Organization: Inland Steel Company; East Chicago, IN

In article <C0ArBL.Jnt@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
> In article <LARRY.93Jan2233956@peak.psl.nmsu.edu> larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
> 
>>I thought rocket power was expressly forbidden for R/C work by the AMA. Or
>>is it just airplanes that shoot rockets?
> 
> Its planes that shoot rockets that are forbidden. 
> 
> I think the stipulation is a five pound weight limit and "G" total impulse
> for an airplane that uses rocket motors as its primary means of propulsion. 
> I was thinking that this would not include, say, huge scale C-130s with 
> JATO packs, since the C-130 uses its engines for primary propulsion.
> 
> It would, I think, be interesting to add R/C Rocket Glider and Boost Glider
> as R/C and Free Flight events.


A friend of mine, Dr John Kallend, designed an interesting rocket 
powered R/C aerobatic glider.  He's got it rigged up with a 2nd 
stage booster that he ignites with servo and on board glow.  
The plane will be the subject of a construction article 
soon in RCM.  If there's any interest, I can get more information
on the rules of AMA as applied to rockets.
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: hankard@osf.org (William Hankard)
Subject: Royal RC10 Motorcycle for sale
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:44:15 GMT

For Sale:

	Royal RC10 radio control motorcycle battery charger
	still in box. This was used once for around 1/2 hour.
	Asking $100.00 for the bike.  I just do not have the
	time to use it.

For Sale:
	
	Kyosho Buggy still in box not assembled.  Bought it from
	Tower Hobbies for around $65.00.  Will sell it for $50.00
	
	Will sell both for $140.00

-- 
============================================================================
William D. Hankard 	   	___   ___   ___	    Voice: (617) 621-7233
Open Software Foundation       /  /  /__   /__      Fax: (617) 621-0584
11 Cambridge Center           /__/  ___/  /         Internet: hankard@osf.org
Cambridge, MA 02142                                 UUCP: uunet!osf!hankard
Office Number: 214			            System Administrator	
============================================================================
From: guyer@spock.usc.edu (David Guyer)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Fuel Pumps
Date: 11 Jan 1993 20:23:28 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: spock.usc.edu

 Has anyone ever heard of a fuel pump for the Cox TeeDee .051 Engine.  I
  thought I might have seen one in a picture but, I wasnt sure.  Thanks
  in ad in nce.
                      David Guyer   guyer@spock.usc.edu

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 An unknown Aerodynamicist once said:
                               Anything will fly, 
	                               They just have different glideslopes!
From: souza@crd.ge.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Royal .46 engine
Date: 5 Jan 93 15:07:20 GMT
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center


I just bought a Royal Signature .46 BB ABC engine. Seems like a reasonably
well-made copy of an OS .46SF for half the price. I haven't run it yet,
but I noticed that the piston fit inside the cylinder is not nearly as
tight as my other ABC engines (Royal .25 and Magnum .40GP), although it
is definitely tightest near top-dead-center. Is this likely to be a
problem? Any opinions on this engine?
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda)
Subject: Re: Rocket powered R/C (Estes Astro Blaster)
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:55:34 GMT

In article <42995@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> dlou@ece.ucsd.edu writes:
|
|
|Anyone have any experience with the Estes Astro Blaster?

Well, no, but I wanted to clear up some things about .049's.

|3> the .049 pusher configuration means you can't use a clunk tank (the
|clunk will be facing the wrong way) 

Okay, here's what you do.  Use a normal tank with a balloon inside.
The idea is to have the balloon fill the interior of the tank without
inflating.  The balloon is held in place by the tank cork.  Then 
instead of clunk and vent lines, you use a straight tube going to the 
lower back of the tank, with notches cut through it (and smoothed so 
as to not cut the rubber).  You just cut a small hole in the outside 
of the tank for a vent.  When you fill the tank, first suck the air
out from inside the balloon, then fill away.  It really works.

|and the QRC/Texaco/Black Widow
|engines won't go inverted which, 

I've never had a QRC or Texaco, but I assure you that a Black Widow
has an inverted fuel system.

You can also buy tank mounts for TD 049s that handle inverted flight.
That will give you more power than a Black Widow.

		Dave Svoboda, Palatine, IL
From: robertw@informix.com (Robert Weinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Materials for cheap'n'dirty fuse?
Date: 7 Jan 93 19:22:58 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

What have people used for an instant, cheap fuse - light enough for slope soaring?  
I've seen plastic "wiffle" bats used, and heard about plastic gutter downspouts.  
What kind of downspout do you use? Brand name? Square or round?

What else might one use for a quick fuse?

--
+================================+================================+
|         Rob Weinberg           |  Workstation publications tech |
|   Email : robertw@informix.com |        Graphic designer        |
|   Voice : 415-926-6754         |     <imagine your ad here>     |
+================================+================================+
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: wewallac@watsol.uwaterloo.ca (Bill Wallace)
Subject: Designing a plane
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 20:20:23 GMT

Could anyone suggest a book or two on designing planes?  Also, if there
are books on scratch building I would be interested in that as well.
What I am thinking of doing is building a canard sailplane (for fun,
since I haven't seen one before.)  I would probably start with a slope soarer
since I could use foam cut wings to build that.  Speaking of that, I need
a recomendation on a book about cutting wings (and a source of foam
in the kw area.)  

Finally, if anyone knows how to get lift curves and stall characteristics
for wings (especially for the set of wings in the plotfoil program),
I would be very interested in that.  How much force one gets for the
ailerons, spoilers and a front flap (a trailing flap force is easy to
get given the aileron information.) would also be useful.  Given equations,
or a pointer to equations I can probably work things out myself.

Thanks,

Bill
From: chaffin@vision.larc.nasa.gov (Mark Chaffin)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Spinner backplate slippage cure
Date: 11 Jan 1993 16:58:51 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: vision.larc.nasa.gov

I managed to solve this problem by using a "star" washer
between the prop and the spinner backplate.  Don't know
if that is the correct name for the washer or not.  Basically,
it's just a washer with teeth on the edges that are twisted.
Anyway, with this method, the washer locks the backplate to
the prop allowing the prop nut to be tightened without the
back plate slipping.

Of course, I've solved the problem in a simpler manner.  I don't
use spinners.  Safety nuts make things so much easier.

mark chaffin
sab46.larc.nasa.gov

-- 
/-\|/-\|/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/-\/-\|/
|            ____       _         Man plays only when he is in             -
\         | __\_\_o____/_|        the full sense of the word a             \
-         <[___\_\_-----<         man, and he is only wholly man           |
/         |  o'                   when he is playing.                      /
|                                       -Friedrich Schiller                \
\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|\-/|
                     MARTHAS OVER MISSOULA!!!
From: sham@cs.arizona.edu (Shamim Zvonko Mohamed)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: FAQ
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:33:10 GMT
Followup-To: world
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

The FAQ list as it stands today started out as a "A Beginner's Guide to Radio
Controlled Flying" [which is still the "Summary" of the postings] which meant
that some stuff got left out, whether by omission or comission. If there are
topics that people feel should be in FAQ list, by all means! Let there be
discussion, and when a consensus is reached, I'll definitely add it to the
file.

Any opinions on a slight re-organization of the file? Say into a beginning
"Beginners Introduction", followed by "Other Frequently Asked Questions"?

-s
--
The "Introduction to and Help with Radio Control Flying" file (aka FAQ or
"Frequently Asked Questions" file) can be obtained by anonymous ftp from
pit-manager.mit.edu; get /pub/usenet/news.answers/RC-flying-FAQ/part*
   If you don't have ftp, send mail to "mail-server@pit-manager.mit.edu" with
this message:
    send usenet/news.answers/RC-flying-FAQ/part1
    send usenet/news.answers/RC-flying-FAQ/part2
In Europe:
nic.switch.ch, /info_service/Usenet/periodic-postings/faqs/RC-flying-FAQ/part*
Or send mail to /S=archive-server/OU=nic/O=switch/PRMD=switch/ADMD=arcom/C=ch/
or archive-server@nic.switch.ch with the message "help" in the body.

  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / shamim@cs.arizona.edu
   Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to lpf@uunet.uu.net
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc,alt.religion.kibology
From: pfinerty@nyx.cs.du.edu (fun fun fun boy)
Subject: Re: KiboKrap here...AHRG!
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 20:20:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.185250.22041@ttinews.tti.com> sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz) writes:
>In article <C0Ayy4.IF9@world.std.com> kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) writes:
>>
>>Kibo's own glow engines use a special silencer which convert the sound
>>into a radio-frequency broadcast which is emitted at exactly the
>
> Mr Parry, would you kindly stop posting your nonsense in groups like 
>rec.models.rc? You already have an entire sub-species hierarchy devoted
>completly to your 'kibology' garbage...isn't that a significant enough 
>waste of bandwidth? Twit..
>
a bit sensitive today are we? oh poor boy! ha.
--
			PJF--->Biochem. grad student
			      PUBLIC ENEMY #1
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Airborne Battery Monitor Schematic
From: SRINGROS@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 08:07:22 PST
Organization: BC Systems Corporation

>  Mark... Your system does not seem to be answering and I have a question for
>ya.  I have sent a couple of MAIL messages only to have them bounce.
 
>  You list 3 resistors in your discription and "schematic".  In the schematic
>you refer to a 39kohm, r1 and r2.  In the parts list you refer to 820, 220 and
>39k ohm resistors.  Which is r1 and which is r2.  I assume the 39kohm is the
 
Mark, I had the same problem with trying to mail to you.  My question is
if I can't get 2ma draw LED's, and substitute a 20ma instead, should I be
changing a resistor value (the 820?). Could anyone else help me in obtaining
2ma resistors?
 
Scott Ringrose
Printing and Presentation Services
B C  Sytems Corporation, (604)389-3729 BCSC01(MVS)=SC32169
BCSC02(VM)=SRINGROS INTERNET=SRINGROS@BCSC02.gov.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: rjungcla@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (R. M. Jungclas)
Subject: Re: Rocket powered R/C (Estes Astro Blaster)
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville, IL.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:45:58 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.174318.21042@adp.uucp> KEVINC@haven.adp.wisc.edu writes:
>I thought you need a special license to use rocket engines of this size (past "D"). 
>Does anyone know if this is true?
>
>- kev -

No special license is needed in 48 states PROVIDED that launch in accordance
with the NAR safety code. I think that two remaining states are California
and either Massachusetts or New Jersey.

Until the FAA approves the NAR requested change of FAR 101 regulation, a 
FAA waiver is required for each launch of rocket with total impulse of "G"
or ANY rocket with a liftoff weight greater 1 pound!

R. Michael Jungclas                    UUCP:      att!ihlpb!rjungcla 
AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville, IL.       Internet:  rjungcla@ihlpb.att.com

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: djones@iex.iex.com
Subject: Re: hinge
Organization: IEX Corporation Inc.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:27:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.140200.11917@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> hqp@cbnewsk.cb.att.com
(hai.quang.pham) writes:
>
>
>I bought the Iron On Gapless Hinge from Granite State, but I did not
>use it yet, anybody in the nets use it? Do you have to do anything
>for the elevator or the rudder control?
>Thanks
>Hai Pham
>
I have used them on several planes now. Both ones being recovered
and new planes. I use them on rudder, elevator and aileron. You need do nothing
special for them. I find it helps to go ahead and draw a line down the MIDDLE
of the control surface as well as the mating surface. This gives you a guide as
you iron down the hinge. I also bevel the edge of the control surface except in
the case of a top mounting aileron or flap.
Cut them a little oversize, iron them on, and then trim. Hit the ends with a
drop of CA to ensure they do not unravel and you are done. It may take slightly
longer to use this method, but I have never seen them fail.
Unlike some CA hinges I have used!

Doug
-------------------------------------------------------------------
'I am a traveler of                |    Douglas R. Jones
     both Time and Space'          |    IEX Corporation
       Led Zeppelin                |    (214)612-2600 ext: 325
                                   |    djones@iex.iex.com
                                   |    uunet!iex!djones
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jmoonan@ccv1.bbn.com (John Moonan)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Test Message
Date: 8 Jan 93 16:49:39
Organization: BBN Communications, Cambridge, MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: ccv1.bbn.com


This is a test message to see if I can post to this news group.

					THANX,  John Moonan
					SYSOP, 495th R/C Squadron
					Groton, MA
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Engine problems
Date: 7 Jan 93 16:12:29 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

In article <LARRY.93Jan5132642@rock.psl.nmsu.edu> larry@rock.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
>>>>>> On Tue, 5 Jan 1993 13:06:38 GMT, wwebster@bnr.ca (Bill Webster)
>Bill> said: Okay. I'll bite.  What is a "stuffer" backplate and
>Bill> where do you purchase them?  I expect it's a new backplate
>Bill> to decrease crankcase volume, thus increase crankcase
>Bill> pressure.

I've heard that this was one of the secrets to running a Fox Stunt. It
was partly crankcase volume but the other problem was that the conrod 
had a lot of forward-backward play. I forget the person who came up with
the fix but it was a nylon face on the backplate. I suppose Teflon would
work better.

I had a Brat .28 that had an inordinate amount of this play, and it 
vibrated like crazy. It also blew its rod after a half dozen runs. Qua-
lity control was a problem with this brand of motors, as was frequent 
parts spec changes - comparing it with other Brat parts the piston webs
were thinner and the head of the rod was narrower and this led to a lot
of fore-aft play. If I knew what I were doing I could have put a piece 
of nylon sheet on the front of the backplate and made a "stuffer back-
plate".

>As far as I understand, that is precisely what it is. My information came
>from _Round & Round_, the Tulsa Glue Dobber's newsletter. Apparently there
>is also a special hemi-head version of the venerable Fox .35 available now
>too. (It must be custom machined..)

>I personally like the OS FP needle valves, with the spring and knob
>removed. They are fairly cheap ($5 - $6), available, and consistent
>quality. I had bad luck on the KK assembly on a Dixon-modified OS-40FPS 
>once and have never messed with one since, although they appear to be of
>fine quality. (They also require drilling the case, which ruins it for
>smaller diameter NVs..)

One thing I've gone to exclusively is the remote needle. This is easy to 
make: use an OS FP R/C NVA - fuel comes in off the side and comes out at
the end. I use it with bladder pressure but I'm sure it'll work with suc-
tion - OS used to sell a remote needle bracket for its engines that at-
tached to the backplate. You also got a replacement jet for the carb. In
either case you need to make sure there are no leaks - use a piece of
small fuel tubing over the needle. 

At the engine end you can drill and tap for a fuel nipple (eg. Du Bro's)
if you are using pressure or just use an old NVA with a broken needle in
it (or a needle opened wide, or seal off the needle end with solder).



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: bob@harrier.demon.co.uk (Bob day)
Subject: Re: smoke systems for YS120FS 
Distribution: world
Organization: Harrier Softnet Ltd
Reply-To: bob@harrier.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:36:23 +0000

In article <96095@rphroy.ph.gmr.com> pfoss@cmsa.gmr.com writes:

>
>In article 726340578snz@harrier.demon.co.uk, bob@harrier.demon.co.uk (Bob day)
> writes:
>>By way of experimentation I'm installing smoke on an OS91 in a Pitts.. So far 
>>I've tapped the backplae to provide pressure to the smoke tank, and wrapped
>>some Ali tube round the head as a preheater.. That's about as far as i've 
>>actually got... I have a Dubro smoke valve to turn the smoke on/of...
>
>If you are talking about an OS91 four stroke, you won't get any crankcase
> pressure.

Nope this one's a two stroke, loads of crankcase pressure, I hope 

                                                                 
>The crankcase is vented (thats what the oil drain nipple is). On most
>four strokes you need an electric pump and a check valve.
>

On the 120 four stroke I ws thinking of using one of these Perry oscillating 
pumps.... Presumably the smoke fuel will  eventually screw up any ruber bits
inside it, but I picked it up cheap at an auction..

cheers

bob

Harrier Softnet Ltd    tel +44-734-731181              I'd rather be playing
Ivanhoe Rd             fax +44-734-734546              with my chopper
Finchampstead          email bob@harrier.demon.co.uk     O  / __________
Berkshire                                               -|-<>     /\======O
RG11 4QQ                                               _/ \_    __\/__
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: mckiou@cbnewse.cb.att.com (kevin.w.mckiou)
Subject: Re: Rocket powered R/C (Estes Astro Blaster)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:39:15 GMT

In article <C0Hu3y.Cwn@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
>
>
>Well, the Phoenix is quite a bit bigger and sophisticated. 

I  have a Phoenix and have  >300 flights on it.  It is indeed a
very well designed airplane.  It has a speed range of ~20-160 mph.
It will thermal and handles very nicely at low speed.  Mine shows
no tendency to tip stall and will fly "nose-high" when I want it
to really slow down.  When it does stall it does so gently and
predictably.  Though I am no aerobatic expert, it will do
any maneuver you can do without an engine.  All the reviews I have
read say the handling is outstanding - and I agree.

>The AstroBlaster flies 
>on Estes "D" (and a proposed "E") motors but the Phoenix uses a re-
>loadable composite "F" or "G" motor. The F reload runs for 4 seconds,
>the G for 8 - very long in terms of rocket motors. 

It is interesting that you can buy the F reloads for the Phoenix for
the same or even a little less than the D disposable for the AB.  And
it goes *a lot* higher.  I've flown the AB and tracked flights on both
rocket gliders (RGs)  A light AB will get about 250 ft on a D for a
flight of ~45 sec.  A Phoenix will get about 400-500 ft on a F for a 
flight of ~3 min in dead air.  A Phoenix with a G reload will get ~1000
ft on launch for a flight of 6-8 min.  The Phoenix can be thermalled
*up*.  The AB can be thermaled, but only for a reduced descent rate.
It won't climb in a thermal.

>
>You get quite a bit more airplane with this one.
>

The Phoenix is a *lot* more airplane.

>Problem is that Aerotech is supposedly having problems shipping re-
>loads at this point in time due to DOT regulations. You might have 
>to fly them with expendables.
>

You can do that, or, do what I do.  Fly the Phoenix off a high-start.
I get ~300 ft with a standard high-start.  Flys like a champ.  Rock
steady going up.

The other excellent option is to fly the Phoenix on a slope.  I wish
there were a good slope near me.  It will scream in a dive!  

If you want the *ultimate* knee-knocking thrill buy an AeroTech F25
disposable motor and fly your Phoenix.  It will accellerate from
0 to  ~160mph in about 2.5 sec.  Has about a 2 foot white flame.  You
won't be able to wipe the grin off your face for a couple of hours.
BTW, if you do this, be sure the Phoenix is trimmed to boost without
input from the pilot.  No glitches allowed!!  Also, make sure you build
it per the plans.

One final note, AeroTech is coming out with some disposable motors
specifically designed for the P while waiting for the DOT thing to
get resolved.

Have fun!  It's addictive.

Kevin


Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: careyb@dallas.jsc.nasa.gov (Brian Carey 283-4181)
Subject: B-17 kit question
Organization: MDSSC
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:20:59 GMT

Can some one tell me if there is a B-17 kit that has a wing span 
that is greater then 80 inches. If not can you direct me to a good source 
of plans for one greater then 80 inches.
I have recently been looking for B-17 Flying Fortress kits.
The kit I would like to get should have a wing span some where
between 80 and 100 inches. I have not found one at this time, the
only kit I found was from Royal and it only has a 77.75 inch wing
span. 

Thank You in Advance
	_ Brian
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Jet engines...
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:15:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.044646.13055@c3177208.ssr.hp.com> bill@ssr.hp.com (Bill Chidester) writes:

>  There are ram jets available, but nobody in their right mind will fly
>  them.  As near as I can tell, 49% of the energy emitted is heat, 50% 
>  is sound and about 1% is thrust.  

Now, now, they aren't that bad. The reasons they aren't used for R/C
are:

1) they're LOUD

and 

2) they run very hot.


If they only convert 1% of their energy to thrust then they wouldn't
go 200+ mph on a C/L Speed job.




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc