HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lee@convex.com (Gene W. Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Dave Brown Flight Simulator
Date: 8 Sep 92 02:34:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.


I have the dave brown airplane flight simulator and have grown tired of it.

Rather than sell it, does anyone have the dave brown flight simulator
for helicopters who would want to swap software? Since we both have the
joystick controllers, we would just need to trade software.
I figure this would be a nice way to see if helicopter flying would be 
my bag.

-- 
Gene W. Lee          lee@convex.com         +1 214 497 4733
Convex Computer Corportation                 ------- __o   
3000 Waterview Parkway                      ------ _`\<,_ 
Box 833851, Richardson,Tx,75083            ------ (*)/ (*)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: sullivan@genesis.b21.ingr.com (Howard Sullivan)
Subject:  der Jager
Organization: Intergraph Corp, Huntsville, Alabama
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:33:18 GMT

I saw an add in a February, 1987, issue of Model Airplane News for plans for
a 1/5 scale model of a biplane called "der Jager".  This has for a long time
been my favorite homebuilt biplane.  I am a rank beginner in R/C flying but
have a lot of experience in building.  Has anyone built/seen/flown this model?
I have a House of Balsa "Swizzle Stick" as a trainer and would like to build
"der Jager" as an intermediate model during the winter months.  Would this
model be suitable or would it be too hot to handle?  If anyone has the issue
of MAN which has the article, I would gladly pay for copies.



-- 
|    Howard Sullivan                           | Intergraph Corp.             |
|    ...uunet!ingr!b21!genesis!sullivan (UUCP) | Test Engineering Department  |
|    sullivan@genesis.b21.ingr.com  (Internet) | 205-730-6517                 |
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: mtissand@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael D Tissandier)
Subject: Re: Thermodynamic laws
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:35:46 GMT

 I would greatly appreciate it if you would send the relevant equations
and enthalpies of reaction my way.....

               --Mike

                  mtissand@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: ericj@hwcae.Honeywell.COM (Eric Jacobsen)
Subject: Re: CGM Eagle 2
Organization: Honeywell, Air Transport Division; Phoenix, AZ
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:17:19 GMT

In article <Bun2y1.6Dw@csn.org> eeak@teal.csn.org (Ed Krejcik) writes:

   I've built a CGM Gentle Lady (my first plane ever) and been flying it
   with much success.  I've had a few rough landing, but no crashes, and
   never damaged it in the process.  Now I want POWER!  I'm thinking about
   a CGM Eagle 2.  What I'm looking for is this:

    1) Is this a good power trainer?

I guess I don't know what you mean by "power", but if the airplane is
built right (no warped wings, etc.), it is very nice to fly and very
stable. Mine did wonderful tail slides and is fairly manueverable for
a trainer. Had a Magnum pro .45 in it which was a very good combination.

    2) Is there anything I should know about building it?
       Things like, "I would do this, instead of what the instructions say."
		or, "You might want to reinforce this or that."

Don't do the rubber band wing business. Bolt that puppy on. We lost ours
when a student did a quick pitch-up and the wing let go (rubber band
failure). I still have the wing, in primo condition, but the front
foot-and-a-half of the fuse was toothpicks. If you bolt the wing on
you don't have to muck with the rubber bands at all.

Also, make the firewall where the nosewheel bolts on extra strong.
Reinforce it more than the plans indicate.

--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
* Eric Jacobsen        Honeywell Inc.                           *
|     1-602-436-3941   Commercial Flight Systems, Air Transport |
* HVN       436-3941   US Mail: P.O. Box 21111, MS 2Q34C1       *
| FAX 1-602-436-1310   Phoenix AZ 85036-1111                    |
* INet: ericj@hwcae.honeywell.com                               *
| UUCP: uunet!hwcae.honeywell.com!ericj@uunet.uu.net            |
* The opinions expressed are my own and therefore better        *
| thought out than my employer's.                               |
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: duncan@nevada.edu (DUNCAN MCCOY)
Subject: Re: Hobby Shack Birdie .40
Organization: University of Nevada System Computing Services
Distribution: rec.models.rc
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 22:17:51 GMT

Max - 

Regarding the snaps, knife edges, spins, etc.: those weren't done on
the first flight. First flight included exciting stuff like establishing
trim, checking stall characteristics, roll rate, trying to see if initial
control throws were about what I wanted, that sort of thing. The first
flight was kind of short and was followed up by disassembly and inspection,
checking for things working loose, etc.

I really didn't start "wringing it out" until about flight #4 or so.

Duncan
From: plumpe@oasys.dt.navy.mil (David Plumpe)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Standard RC Servo Data
Date: 8 Sep 92 11:52:54 GMT
Reply-To: plumpe@oasys.dt.navy.mil (David Plumpe)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.models.rc, ddm@hamby.tx.ncsu.edu (David Mann) writes:
>Can anyone tell me what voltage a standard servo (rc type) uses?  I want
>to use servos for a project i'm building, but can't find any specs in my
>mound of RC books, manuals, etc.  The servos are only 3 wires so i guess
>i need voltage and pulse time, any info would be appreciated...
>
    4.8 volts.  Actually, its four NiCad cells, so the voltage varies
somewhat under load and with how much charge is left - generally between
4 and 5.4 volts.  Current drain when driving a load can be fairly high
- maybe in the 1/2 amp range (?).
    Yes, the three wires are Ground, +4.8, and Signal.  Signal is a
positive-going pulse (travels from ground to +4.8 and back) with a width
between 0.5 and 1.5 millisec, and repeated roughly every 25 ms.  Either
LSTTL or CMOS logic should be able to drive them;  I've used both.
    Have fun!

DaveP
Xref: sparky rec.models.rc:3741 rec.models.rockets:2462
From: miked@syscon.rn.com (Mike DeMetz)
Subject: Re: Heli-engines and Airplane-engines
Organization: Syscon Corporate Headquarters - South Bend, IN USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 12:11:54 GMT

Also ring engines are easier to start and some copters have the engine in
positions that make it flood easily. A few manufacters simply put heat sink
heads on standard engines to make them heli engines. Also many 'hot dog' flyers
use plane engines in their helis. The Webra Speed 50 heli engine is avalible
in both ringed and ABC. 


?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
! Mike DeMetz                                          -----|-----          !
! Secretary-Michiana R/C Choppers                   *>=====[_]L)            !
!                                                         -'-`-             !
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: bohlkejh@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Jon H. Bohlke)
Subject: Battery chargers (pulse)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:33:17 GMT


Hi,
   Does anyone have any info on what duty cycle, voltage, and current  
specifications are needed to charge a 7.2V NiCad pack for a RC car?   
Schematics would be an extra bonus.....


Thanks

Jon 
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: bill@c3177208.ssr.hp.com (Bill Chidester)
Subject: Re: FAQ? (questions about engines)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 03:01:51 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Orlando Fl.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

bill@c3177208.ssr.hp.com (Bill Chidester) writes:
: 
:    Other fights I like to start are with statements like:  "Dry air cools
:    better than humid air" (not an easy one to put over on pilots, but 
        ^
	|
	|
   I'm sorry!  In order to suck people in on this one, you have to say 
   that "Dry air is heavier than humid air".  I misstated the hook.

:    almost anyone else will bite at it) and "An electric arc is a great heat
:    conductor".  Both of these statements confound our intuition (everyone
:    knows water weighs more than air, right?) but they are easily demonstrated
:    to be true.
: 
--------------------------------
Bill Chidester    KE4WS
bill@c3177208.ssr.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: ce239@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronald J. Hegler)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: engine problems solved
Date: 12 Sep 1992 10:57:21 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


I have been having problems with all of my engines for some time now. 
The engines would start and run but would lean out in the air. I tried to 
run them rich but still the same result. I tried new fuel, same problem.
I tried adding caster, same problem. New glow plug (actually the first thing I tr[Cg
I tried), different prop sizes, fuel lines, fuel tank. None of this fixed the 
problem. Thats when I changed the engine and discovered that all my engines
were running bad. 
So what was the problem? The glow driver. 
I had tried others glow drivers at the field and this never cured the problem.
But , the problem was a too hot driver.
My driver is the type that connects to the 12v gell cell and chops the current
to supply (hopefully) the right current for the plug. 
My theory is that by having a too hot glow plug, the platinum is being burned
off the plug. This way even a brand new plug goes bad very quickly and trying
someone elses driver ( after using mine) wont work.

I am now using a 1.2v battery type driver, works fine with new plugs.

I hope these ramblings help someone with simular problems.

Ron
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: pad@galaxy.nsc.com (Paul Denny x8349)
Subject: Re: AM vs FM AGAIN? - Have Mercy
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:07:39 GMT

In article <BuKoo1.Ixs@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
> In article <1992Sep5.042114.3993@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> fisher@kay.enet.dec.com (kay::fisher) writes:
> 
> There isn't anything magical about dual conversion + AM. Dual conversion
> simply means that the receiver uses two intermediate frequencies instead
> of one. Single conversion receivers use 455 KHz for the IF, so the osci-
> llator crystal on the receiver (which is mixed with the incoming RF) is
> 455 KHz above or below the frequency to be detected. A filter then admits 
> 455 KHz to the rest of the receiver. Problem is with the megahertz wide band
> we operate in these days the frequencies at the top and bottom of the band
> may interfere with the ones in the middle. 
> 
Right - the image freqency is twice the i.f. away from your channel 910KHz
above or below depending on whether your receiver uses high or low side
local oscillator injection. If you have a high side injection receiver
the image will be 910KHz above you. With single conversion you rely on the front
end filter to remove the image - but your receiver must allow all the R/C
channels through if you are to use crystals as the only channel defining 
component. Narrower band front end filters would be more expensive and
would give the manufacturers the requirement to use particular front
end filters for particular channels. I strongly suspect that the front
end filter of R/C single conversion receivers are wide enough to allow
all channels through. If you have a high side injection single conversion
receiver the image filter will do a better job of rejecting the 
image if your receiver is a high frequency in the band.

> Double conversion receivers get around this by using a 10 MHz or so IF,
> with a 455 KHz second stage. Such receivers are also supposedly better
> at discriminating between adjacent signals. 
> 
The adjacent channel rejection is defined by the channel filter at 455KHz
if a single conversion receiver and a double conversion receiver have the
same channel filter they will have the same adjacent channel rejection
exactly (and for economy of scale reasons I bet that from one
manufacturer this will be the case). Anyone who supposes otherwise would
suppose erroniously 8-).

> Now: Whats to prevent someone on a totally different band (i.e. 10 MHz
> away) from interfering with you?

With a double conversion receiver the image in the first i.f. is still
twice the i.f. away - this is now 21.4MHz away which is easily filtered
out by the same front end filter that you have in your single conversion
receiver. You can now filter the first i.f. with a filter narrow enough
to remove the 910KHz image that will be in the second i.f. 
From: billg@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Bill Gingras)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:21:29 GMT
Subject: Tantrum Folding Wing HLG Review
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc


I finally flew my Tantrum hand-launched glider (HLG) last week.  It is
the first time I've tried HLG.

First off, the Tantrum is a rather small kit, with a wingspan of about
43".  It also has a gimmick - The outer wing panels are hinged and fold
under the inner wing panels.  You toss it as hard as you can, then full
up elevator releases the outer wing panels, which are spring-loaded and
pop opened.

I'd have to say that the company needs to up their quality control.
Several of the wood parts were missing or wrong.  Some of the hardware
was missing or useless.  I felt that the design needed beefing up in
several places.  For example, there is a spring in the wing that is used
to pull the wing opened. When the wing is folded, there is tremendous
pull on the spring.  The original design had this spring anchored in
1/4" of balsa!  I used plywood instead.  The wing hold-down pin was also
a joke, IMHO.

I must say that I was impressed with the building instructions.  They
were several pages of step-by-step instructions with check-off boxes ala
Heathkit.  The kit was easy to build.  I did it in three weeks of only a
couple nights a week, and that included cutting the parts that were
missing and building the folding-wing version.  The fixed wing version
should build alot faster.

Flying - I still haven't tried launching it with wings folded yet, since
I'm still trying to master HLG in general.  I must say that it flys well
for such a small plane, but since the fuse is all balsa, it is rather
fragile.  It seems like any time a wingtip touches down on landing, the
wing hold-down block (1/4" ply) breaks free and splits all or most of
the formers along the grain, which runs top to bottom in this design.

Price-wise, the kit was a bit expensive ($30.00) for such a small,
simple kit.  I just hope I can keep it alive long enough to test the
folding wing mechanism.  I'll probably build a more conventional design,
like a Skeeter, next (anybody have any experience with that kit?)

- Bill G

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: billh@bleep.com (Bill Hassell)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Beginner seeks recommendations: 2m sailplane/radio
Summary: First 2M sailplane recommendation
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:37:25 GMT
Organization: Bleep node,  Boulder Creek, CA

In article <1992Sep07.061045.13626@ecst.csuchico.edu>, rferrel@ecst.csuchico.edu (Robert Douglas Ferrell) writes:
> Hello, RCers-
>         I'm a greenhorn who recently got hooked on RC soaring.  I've always
> been intrigued by RC flying, but never had the time or money (or an
> instructor) to get involved.  Well, now I have some of each.  My roommate
> has been flying RC models for about 10 years, and has "lent" me a Goldberg
> Electra as a trainer.  We have been out flying twice now and I'm itching to
> start building my first kit (while I slowly wear out the Electra).  I have
> landed successfully four times and crashed once (so I get my first repair
> lesson this week).  The last time we went flying we took a highstart and an
> RO-8 (by Dynaflight) along with the Electra.  It was a blast!  Lots of lift
> and a light breeze.  Anyway, I really liked the RO-8, but Ray says I should
> start off building something a little easier.  So here's where you come in:
> recommend a good 2M glider kit for me to start building.
>         I have model building experience ranging from polystyrene kits (a
> long time ago) to balsa and cardboard (scratch built architectural models
> for friends in school).  I've built model rockets, too.  Anyway, I'd like a
> nice flying sailplane as a sort of second model.  After trying out the RO-8,
> I'm a bit spoiled as it flies much better than the heavy Electra.  I'll
> probably be highstarting and hand-launching whatever I end up with.
>         I'm also looking at radios.  Right now, I don't think I'll really
> want to slope soar much, or fly sailplanes which need a winch for launching.
> I'd like to keep it simple--eventually maybe ailerons and/or flaps, but
> nothing too big or too fancy.  I'm torn between keeping it cheap and getting
> a 4 CH FM or going for it and getting a nice programmable set.  I've read
> the FAQ, but I want some specific experiences (especially regarding the
> radio).  Anyway, any info regarding RC soaring is appreciated.  If I get
> worthwhile feedback, I'll try to summarize it...thanks again.
> 
> -Doug Ferrell
> rferrel@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

I have had good success with an Oly 650. It was a good kit, easy to build,
a good flyer and very forgiving of hard landings. Just my $.02.
Hope it helps.
Bill Hassell 
sco.com!bleep!billh

---------sig currently under repair----------
From: robertw@informix.com (Robert Weinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Radio dreams
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:07:29 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

OK, set loose your electronic imagination.

SUPPOSE all transmitters used the SAME frequency, sending out packets of digitally  
encoded signals. The receiver would look for a packet addressed to it with a  
digital code, and only pay attention to that packet.

Everyone would have to time-share the same airwaves, so the packets would have to  
be brief, and there would have to be assurances that if there were, say, 25 planes  
up, nobody got bumped.

One way would be to have a transmitter in the plane as well, sending back a  
"received" signal, so that the pilot's transmitter would re-send until it got a  
"received" back. But that's expensive and adds weight, etc.

Instead, would it be possible to make the transmitted packets so brief that they  
could be broadcast repeatedly? Say, a .1 ms packet, sent every 5 ms, so that the  
chances of 4 or 5 packets in a row getting bumped by somebody elses radio would be  
small (true statistically?). That would assure that within 5x5 ms, or .025 seconds,  
a signal got received.

Another possibility: a crude receiver inside the transmitter box. The transmitter  
would wait until it could detect no transmission from other pilots, then send out  
its .1 ms burst. This way there would be a lot fewer signals in the air during any  
given second. If 20 pilots each needed to send out 20 signals per second, that  
would only occupy .1X20X20ms or 40ms of each second.

I am suggesting something like this instead of trying to eliminate interference  
between multiple frequencies. 


--
+================================+================================+
|         Rob Weinberg           |  Workstation publications tech |
|   Email : robertw@informix.com |        Graphic designer        |
|   Voice : 415-926-6754         |     <imagine your ad here>     |
+================================+================================+
From: lew@4ccvw16.scg.hac.com (Lyman Lew)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Air Brush
Keywords: air brush paint
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:42:37 GMT
Reply-To: lew@4ccvw16.UUCP (Lyman Lew)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <1992Sep11.130343.28975@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> careyb@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (Brian Carey 283-4181) writes:
>I have a question for he air brush experts out on the net.
>	First can one air brush on monokote?
>	If you can air brush on monokote what kind of paint is used to prevent 
>	glow fuel from dissolve or lift off the paint?
>	Also can you give me some information on the thickness the paint 
>	should be and what kind of preparation should be applied to 
>	the monokote.
>
>	Thank You in advance for any help in these matters.
>
>
>	Brian C. Carey

1. Super Poxy or Poly-U will work. These are fuel proof.
2. Mask your trim with masking tape and scuff the monokote with steel wool.
2. Clean surface with alcohol or thinner.
4. Spray your color on. Use a mist coat first then a heavier coat of paint.









Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer)
Subject: Range
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:22:55 GMT

I'm using an RC transmitter and a number of RC receivers in some
ground-based equipment (an array of lighted targets used to provide a
good, high-gain handling qualities task for aircraft evaluation).  The
transmitter is in a central location and the receivers are located
some distance away, all on fairly flat ground.

What is the maximum range I can count on?

I'm interested in varying the size of my target array as a function of
the aircraft speed.  I currently use a projected-diamond-shaped array
with a length of 319 m and a width of 108 m.  The transmitter is on
the centerline, 119 m from the bottom of the diamond and 200 m from
the top.  The bombing range is quite flat.  I have had no problems
with the more distant receivers not getting the signals, but I'm
wondering how much larger I can go before I do.

If it matters, I use 220 stepped down to 110 into power supplies to
power the transmitter card, the receiver cards, and the other
electronics.

--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "There's no kill like a guns kill." LCDR "Hoser" Satrapa, gunnery instructor
                       "A kill is a kill."  Anonymous
From: fsjinho@pike.lerc.nasa.gov (Jinho Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: X-Cell Helicopter mod's
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:28:11 GMT
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]

Steve,
	I've got two questions about the hiller mixing ratio mod.
1- are changing the hiller mixing ratio for the new symmetric high tilt
   delta hinge setup or the older setup which DIDNOT have a symmetric
   delta hinge setup?

2- the newer xcell head setup has roughly 60% bell-hiller mixing ratio,
   what do you get when you change the setup like you suggested?  Depending
   which way you went either you'll get very SLUGGISH cyclic response or
   a fast cyclic response.  I don't have a ship in front of me right 
   now but I'll look into it.
				Jinho

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jinho Lee			|     phone: 216-433-4000
NASA Lewis Research Center     	|    
Cleveland, Ohio  44135         	|     email: fsjinho@pike.lerc.nasa.gov 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc