HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: R/C Glider crashing!
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 18:04:42 GMT

In article <seanm.0sq8@terapin.com> seanm@terapin.com (Sean McCaskey) writes:
>Scott                                                                          
>  It was a funny experience, and even though you may be flying with others who
>ride ya abou your flying abilities, it is much better to have that than to have
>your crash be headline, full page news in the paper!


Reminds me of some construction article I read a while back. The writer
had put together a kit of a scale model of some low winged Beech or Cessna  
and went into excruciating detail about this or that feature and this or 
that technique for finishing and installing the radio. Then came the flying 
session. It was real short. The author again went into excruciating de-
tail about how the airplane was just slightly tail heavy and he thought
he could get away with it and that in retrospect he ought to have shoved 
the battery further forward. Yup, you guessed it. He crashed it on the 
first flight on takeoff. Had pictures too.




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
From: dtt@mitisft.Convergent.COM (Duc Tran)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: New kind of cover finish for R/C airplan.
Date: 24 Jul 92 01:22:34 GMT
Organization: Unisys Unix Systems Group, San Jose, CA

Hello World,

I am about to build myself a CG's Extra 300, and I am looking for a finish
cover that is different that the standard Monocoque or Ultracoque (thin
plastic base sheet.)

The cover that I look for is the same as the cover that many ARF pre-build
kits use; The cover (or sheet) has a smooth plastic outside and a thin
and dense foam-like inside. So the sheet (thickness: ~1/3mm) is much thicker 
the Monocoque or equivalent type. It has many advantages:

1) It hides all the body frame structure's hollows, especially the wing.
   With this kind of cover, the wing look so smooth that you think
   it is made from foam.

2) It has very smooth surface since the inside foam is forgiving with 
   dent and minor imperfection.

3) It is not transparent, so you can't see throught it if you 
   hold it against the sun.

5) The airplan looks more realistic, I think and it will definitively last 
longer.

I think most of the Almost ready to Fly models definitively look better than
the home-build, since they use the cover that I mention above. Anyone
who own a pre-build airplan (eg; EZ from Sport Aviation) knows what I 
mean.

Anyone in the net know where I can find this kind of cover? Or the inside
foam that i mention above?

Has anyone used any other material to finish the airplay beside Monocoque
(and equivalence,) japanese tissue, silk tissue?

I guess that what I really want is a cover that is thicker than the Monocoque
with a second layer of foam imsulation. Or any suggestion that make my
my airplan look realistic and stunning beautiful.

Thank you for your help.

If anyone think the Monocoque or equivalent is a better material, I want
to hear your openion too.
From: careyb@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (Brian Carey 283-4181)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: New Hobby Store?
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:13:39 GMT
Organization: McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company

I have received a catalog from a what I think is a new mail order Hobby Store.
The name of the store is Nationwide Hobbies. the address on the catalog is,
	979 Kettle Creek Rd., Eagan MN 55123
	Ph # 1 800 945 2121

The catalog indicat4es that they tack Discover, VISA, and MasterCard.
The prices look real good. For example the price for the Goldgerg Gentle Lady
is $18.99 while in Tower Hobbies it is listed on sale for $23.99.
If any one has any more information on this company can you let me know.

Brian C. Carey
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: mmcevill@mitre.org (Michael A. McEvilley)
Subject: Re: filler materials, striping monocoat
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:53:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.162352.27383@adp.uucp> kevinc@adp.uucp (Kevin 
Cherek) writes:
> Also, what kind of filler materials would modelers out there recommend?
> This is strictly for balsa and not for exotic materials like carbon
> fiber or whatever.

DAP filler, the stuff used to patch walls does a real good job.  It does 
shrink when filling deep holes/cracks so you should apply it in thin 
layers.  It dries fast (15-20 minutes) and sands easily.  When purchased 
at a home improvement or hardware chain store, this stuff is extremely 
cheap (much cheaper than the equivalent hobby marketed products) for the 
quantity obtained.    I've used it on balsa and fibreglass, both of which were 
primed and painted over, and have seen no negative side-effects.

You can also use epoxy and micro-ballons to get very good (and strong if 
necessary) fillets, contours, fairings, etc.   The more micro-ballons you 
mix with the epoxy, the easier sanding will be, but at a sacrifice to 
strength; less micro-ballons, harder to sand, more strength.

Michael
From: WOLPERT@MAINE.MAINE.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: SuperTigre 2000
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:18:34 GMT
Organization: University of Maine System

Hi all,
   Has anybody ever had experience with the SuperTigre 2000 engine?
I have a chance to pick one up at a good price.  It's new old stock
and does not include the muffler.  What kind of muffler will work
for this engine and be fairly quiet?

Seth Wolpert
Bangor R/C Gulls
From: robertw@informix.com (Robert Weinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Soaring competition
Date: 21 Jul 92 14:39:32 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

Do y'all know that there is an AMA-sponsored slope soaring aerobatics  
competition on Milagra Ridge in Pacifica, CA, this weekend? Sunday, July 26 at  
1 pm.

Competition open to AMA members, with $5 reg fee to compete, but of course  
anyone can come and watch.

Off Highway 280, take Westborough Blvd. west (which becomes Sharp Park Road on  
the other side of Skyline Blvd). After you cross Skyline (hwy 35, top of the  
ridge), go another mile or so, where there's a traffic light and a sign saying  
something like "Milagra Ridge - GGNRA". Turn right there, actually entering a  
townhouse development, and the paved road ends about a hundred yards later,  
where you walk up to the site.

Or from Coast Highway 1, go up Sharp Park Road about a mile to the  
above-mentioned traffic light.

Parking is a problem, so you may have to walk in from one of the streets on the  
other side of Skyline, were there is a lot of parking. This would be especially  
good to do if you are not bringing a plane.

If the weather is good, the view will be spectacular from up there. Always  
bring a serious jacket and/or sweater when you visit Milagra Ridge :>)
--
+==============================+===============================+
|       Rob Weinberg           | Workstation publications tech |
| Email : robertw@informix.com |       Graphic designer        |
| Voice : 415-926-6754         |    <imagine your ad here>     |
+==============================+===============================+
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: jlw@world.std.com (James L Walker)
Subject: Re: Kit Info
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:50:53 GMT

I've been building a Royal Corsair for about the last 6 mos. as a side
project.  I can make some general comments since I don't know exactly
what you're interested in.  Royal makes Corsairs in alot of sizes, I'm
building the .40 size.

Royal kits require alot of carving.  There is alot of good, machined
balsa in the kit, but it all comes down to rough blocks anyway so
there is alot of sanding and carving to shape the wing.  You can't
build the wing or fuse with a jig so you have to do it freehand and
take lots of extra steps getting it straight.  I tried to do mine with
mechanical retracts but it was nigh unto impossible to get the
mechanism to work smoothly and reliably so I gave up and used fixed
gear (I understand that retracts are kind of a manditory mistake on
everyones first scale project.  The flaps on the other hand were
relatively easy and are shown on the plans.

I would say that the Royal kit is for a pretty advanced builder I
started it with the idea of flying it this summer, but I have since
put it on the back burner because I'm not that advanced of a builder.
There is alot of stuff that isn't in the instructions like mechanical
linkages and things.  Also some of the pieces didn't fit together
properly and had to be cut.  The wood that came with the kit was top
quality, but I opted to buy my own for things like fuse planking
either because I don't like stripping my own planks from sheets of
balsa or because the only wood I had left was inappropriate grade for
the particular step I was doing.

I'm certainly not down on Royal or this Corsair kit.  People tell me
that building it is "doing things the old fashioned way" and that the
result will be rewarding.  A guy brought a 1/4 scale Sig Morrisey
Bravo out to our field last week and that got me thinking about the
Corsair again...

-- Les Walker
-- High Flyers
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: plb@dcdwest.uucp (Phil Blais)
Subject: Re: filler materials, striping monocoat
Organization: ITT Aerospace/Communications Division - West
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 05:25:23 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.162352.27383@adp.uucp> kevinc@adp.uucp (Kevin Cherek) writes:
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm finishing a Sig Senior (my first plane).  I plan to cover with
>monocoat.  My question is: How does one stripe this stuff?  Do you cover
>with a base color, cut stripes out of some other color and stick them on
>with the iron?  Or do you get some kind of paint, mask off the stripes
>and paint them on?  Or do you cut the monocoat to fit (i.e. different
>pieces for the stripes, but they only overlap the rest of the covering
>and are not placed on top of a base covering?  The latter seems quite
>ridiculous!

Trimming monokote with monokote can be a nightmare if your not careful.
One method which has worked well in the past for me when applying sunburst
type trim or similar is to first cut the trim to exact size. If I wanted
precise placement I would then trace the trim outline with light pencil
onto the base coat. Next, remove the backing and place the trim piece onto
the base coat and tack it with a monocote iron at low heat at or near the
its approximate center. Next, pick up either one of the two loose ends
with your free hand and SLOWLY iron outwards from the center to the
end of the trim keeping the loose end in the air. Repeat for the other side.
Because monokote gases when heated the idea is to give the gas time and
room to escape as you go. It takes a bit of practice to get right but
it does work. Also experiment with your iron's heat setting. The correct
setting is when the adhesive activates but shrikage does not occur.


>Also, what kind of filler materials would modelers out there recommend?
>This is strictly for balsa and not for exotic materials like carbon
>fiber or whatever.
>
For balsa, Goldberg Model Magic is one of the best I've ever used. It
works and sands beautifully and doesn't shrink like the hardware store
brands such as DAP. It is however more expensive than the DAP type fillers
and should not be used where strength is needed or in high stress areas. 
more expensive.
-- 

=========================================================================
phil blais  N6KXD AMA 12662      ITT    Aerospace Communications Division
dcdwest!plb@ucsd.edu           DEFENSE    10060 Carroll Canyon Road
From: sbixby@cup.portal.com (Steven W Bixby)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Which Mechanical Retracts?
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 14:45:28 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

SEZ:jnchou@iastate.edu

>    I would like to install a set of mechanical retracts on my next
>airplane (a trike .40 size pattern airplane).  Because I haven't
>installed one before, I would like to hear your experiences with
>retractable landing gear.

>    First, someone told me that you need 180 degree retract servos to
>operate them.  Some says no.  Does it depend on the brand of retracts
>you use?

Many/most mechanical retracts require some tension on both sides of the 
pushrod range to activate the locking mechanisms.  With a standard 90 degree
servo, the end of the travel throw will have the retract gear holding
significant tension against the throw of the servo, thus causing a large
current drain, whether up or down.  With a 180 degree servo, the end of the
throw has the pushrood in line with the servo wheel shaft - the only tension
is on the shaft, and not the drive train - ie, no rotational tension is applied
to the servo.

Basically, you have more power, slower speed and less current drain with 
a 180 degree servo - but if you design your setup right and be careful
about it, I would think you can get away with a regular 90 degree servo.
Caveat Emptor.

>    In Tower Talk, there are Hobbico retracts & Dave Brown mechanical
>retracts.  Hobbico's is much cheaper than Dave Brown's.  Is Dave
>Brown's really worth the extra money?  Do I need retract servos to
>operate them?  Also, Hobby Lobby sells a set of 3 gear retracts for
>only $28.40 which needs 11/16 in. linear movement to operate.	Looks
>like all standard servos can do the job.  Is this true?  Can someone
>who is using this make some comments?

Unfortunately I've never used any of these, but I've compared the Dave Brown's
to the Hobbico's - the Hobbico retracts are somewhat flimsy and problem prone
in magazine reviews, wheras the DB's are nicely made and are even recommended
for some of the Great Planes kits, so I would be more inclined to cough up
an extra $20 and get the DB's.  I have never seen the Hobby Lobby ones, so..?

You might consider pneumatics - they are a little more expensive and take up
more space, but they're really reliable and can be actuated with the cheapest
(or lightest) servo you can find.  Weight wise, when you take out a heavy
retract servo and it's linkages, and replace them with a lightweight air
cylinder and almost weightless lines, it's only an ounce or so more weight.

I'm sure there's some other opinions on the net.....?

   -swb-
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: djones@iex.iex.com
Subject: Kit Info
Organization: IEX Corporation Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 22:20:33 GMT

Has anyone in netland had experience with any of the following
kits:

- Pica FW-190D
- Midwest Corsair
- Wing Mfg (Any short kit)
- Balsa USA Bristol
- Balsa USA P-51
- Royal Corsair (any size)
- Royal Bearcat

Thanks in advance
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: billg@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Bill Gingras)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Noise elimination for embedded aileron servos
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:34:07 GMT
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA


Is it possible that the aileron movement is restricted?  This will cause
hum and a slight amount of jiggle.

Also, could it be possible that your radio always had a problem on the
aileron channel and you just never used it before?  This happened to me.
It turned out to be a bad solder joint in the Tx.

- Bill G
From: john@kennel.FIDONET.ORG (John Hamilton)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Hamilton Hobbies
Date: 28 Jul 92 04:29:40 GMT
Organization: Fido's Kennel, Cupertino CA

To: skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU

 TBR> As one of the final customers I hate to see HH lock the doors but
 TBR> it's understandable. At least John will still be on the net.

Thanks for the nice words, Tim! It was nice dealing with the people,
I will miss that part, especially the net folks.

John

--- GoldED 2.40.P0720+
--  
John Hamilton                  uucp: uts.amdahl.com!kennel!john
DoD #0327   ToT #11            internet: john@f8.n143.z1.fidonet.org
ZX-11 From Hell.               arpa: john@kennel.FIDONET.ORG
She said, "Its either me or that ZX-11!" Too bad, I'll miss her.
From: wiegley@phakt.usc.edu (Wigs)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Which Mechanical Retracts?
Date: 24 Jul 1992 22:38:47 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: phakt.usc.edu

>You might consider pneumatics - they are a little more expensive and take up
>more space, but they're really reliable and can be actuated with the cheapest
>(or lightest) servo you can find.  Weight wise, when you take out a heavy
>retract servo and it's linkages, and replace them with a lightweight air
>cylinder and almost weightless lines, it's only an ounce or so more weight.
>
>I'm sure there's some other opinions on the net.....?
>
>   -swb-


I'm totally impressed by retracts and I hope to have a plane someday with
them (P40 Warhawk floats my boat :-).

Though I love the way planes look with active retracts on them I don't have
the foggiest idea of what one needs to do to incorporate them into the
model. (I realize kits have the plans) but what I'ld like to know is how
much more effort is it to install mechanical retracts. and more
importantly...

What is all the hardware you need for pneumatic retracts?
the retracts, I guess an air cylinder which you mentioned, and probably an
activation mechanism to open/close the air valve.

for the air cylinder how does one get air into it? bicycle pump? (silly but
possible) or a compressed air cartridge?  How much weight is this type of a
system?

- Jeff

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: JECHRIST@130.187.170.178 (JEFF CHRISTENSEN)
Subject: AIRFOIL V2.01  00/03
Organization: This space intentially left blank
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:30:30 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

About the program...
The program is designed for the IBM PC with graphics capability.  The
user can manipulate, edit, and plot (to a dot matrix printer) airfoil
curves.  Some data curves are included in this .ZIP file.  Extract this
using the -d option (ie. dosprompt> pkunzip -d airf1_01.zip ).  This is
version 2.01 which corrects known bugs in earlier versions.  I am also
including the manual in this post.  The program and subdirectories can
now be installed to hard disk (even in non-root directory).  Please
specify disk size and type (eg. 3.5" 1.44M, 5.25" 1.2M, etc.) when
registering your copy.  Improvements will follow according to success
and feedback.

Jeff Christensen
jechrist@gemini.sim.es.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Taildraggers taking off (P-factor & Torque)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 18:48:08 GMT

In article <5797.2a6b026a@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:

>Faugh! Thrust INCREASES in the air. It does not "drop off." What causes
>the airplane not to accellerate any further is the subsequent increase
>in DRAG! When the aircraft reaches the speed at which the total drag
>equals thrust, it ceases to accellerate. That's the cruise speed. 

It increases up to a point, then it drops off. Which is why you can 
only go a certain speed with a low pitched prop but can exceed that 
speed with a higher pitched prop. Which is why one often can't have
unlimited vertical climb even if static thrust exceeds weight (see 
Francis Reynold's column in Model Builder 3-4 months ago on vertical
performance). Which is why props can act as brakes in a dive.




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: djones@iex.iex.com
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.models.scale
Organization: IEX Corporation Inc.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 22:07:06 GMT

In article <ceRQsFC00WB3Ab_V8W@andrew.cmu.edu> dp2r+@andrew.cmu.edu (Denise
Pullen) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.rec.models.railroad: 28-Jul-92 RFD:
>rec.models.scale by Randy J. Ray@lookout.it. 
>
>
>>                   Proposed Charter for rec.models.scale
>
>
>I vote a hearty "aye" for this proposal. Anything that advances our
>hobby through interaction is positive. I encourage everyone else to vote
>in favor of this proposal and show active support. Thanks.
>
Count me in the 'aye' column!

-------------------------------------------------------------------
'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: hatke@ll.mit.EDU (Gary F. Hatke)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: replacement for Super Kaos 40
Date: 31 Jul 92 14:00:20 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

Hi folks, I need some advice.

For the past five years, I had been flying a Great Planes Super Kaos 40.
I say had, because recently someone at my flying club failed to look at
the frequency board before he turned on his transmitter. 5 year old
planes re-kit themselves quite quickly when they lose guidance during a
Cuban 8. Anyway, the guy who caused me to plant my plane offered to get
me a new kit, although he really doesn't have a lot of money. If this
had happened a few years ago, I would have just gotten another Super
Kaos. But alas and alack, Great Planes, in their infinite wisdom, has
decided to discontinue that kit. Thus, my dilemma. I really liked the
way the old Super Kaos flew, and I have a few .40 size engines lying
around. Can any of you folks suggest a plane which has the following
characteristics:

--- Pattern-like performance (smooth manouvers, not jerky like contest
    fun ply ships)
--- .40 size engine (I would like to re-use some of my present engines)
--- Fairly simple to build (I live in an apartment with limited space,
    and I don't have a lot of time to build)
--- Not much more than $100 for the kit (the guy buying the plane can't
    afford much more)

Any suggestions would be welcome, reply either to the net, or by e-mail.

Thanks in advance.


Gary F. Hatke
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
hatke@ll.mit.edu
From: fisher@kay.enet.dec.com (kay::fisher)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Indoor RC
Date: 28 Jul 92 05:17:40 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
X-Posted-Via: NEWS-NOTES gateway (a hack!)

>           <<< Note 25.1 by ::earl@trsvax "earl@trsvax.tandy.com" >>>
>                              -< Re: Indoor R/C >-
,..
>Does anybody have experience flying indoor R/C? I'm curious about what wing

During the NATs in Westover AFB last month, on the 2nd day of RC HLG
we were standing down for rain and adjourned to the BASE hanger where
all the scheduled indoor events were over.  So the AMA said we could
use it.  Unfortunately the CD wouldn't allow an official round in the hanger.
He was influenced by the California guys (Jolly, Wurts and Perkins)
who were against the idea.

But we all brought our HLG's in and spend a very funny hour inside.
The best flights were by a fellow from Michigan (sorry I forgot his name)
who wasn't entered in the HLG but brought his in for fun and was getting
41 seconds inside the hanger.  That was right up there with the best times
for the indoor non-RC HLG flights being recorded.  Also he managed
3 loops.  The California guys were trying to do as well but didn't make
it.  In most cases (all?) they were not flying their own planes in the
hanger because they didn't want to damage anything.


Bye          --+--
Kay R. Fisher  |
---------------O---------------
################################################################################