HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bryan@isrc.sandia.gov (Jon R Bryan)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Alcyon 2M glider
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:17:38 GMT
Organization: Sandia National Labs, Org. 1600, Albq., NM

jam@marge (John McNeil) writes:
: I have decided to build a competitive 2M thermal glider with flaps and ailerons,
: although I don't plan on getting a computer radio.  I have looked around, and
: poured of the Northeast Sailplanes Catalog (BTW this is a great deal for $5 US,
: it has lots of kits, and good articles.).  I think I have decided to get the
: Alcyon 2M because it looks like a lot of performance for the ~$100 US.

I think you mean the Chuperosa 2M, unless you have a newer NSP catalog
than I do.  I know Culpepper is planning a 2M equivalent to the Alcyone
since the designer says so in the latest NSP catalog, but I haven't
heard of it being out yet.

: Has anyone out there built one, or seen one fly?  Do you have any tips on
: building or flying it?

I have been flying an aileron Chuperosa (60" SD7037 foil) for a couple of
months now.  I like it.  Longest flight I've managed is 20 minutes.  I'm
still having trouble doing smooth thermal turns.  I believe the 2M
version is available with the 7037 airfoil, but I'm not sure.  I would
expect it to turn better with the tiplets.  I believe that the added
tips are the only difference in the kits.  Knowledgeable people in our club are
saying that the 7037 makes an outstanding wing.  If I built the 2M Chup
I would follow NSP's suggestion and add flaps.  Mine really scoots when
I drop the nose.  Some kind of "brakes" would be nice.

: Thanks in advance,
:  
: -- 
: John
: jam@trg.saic.com
: NeXTmail preferred
-- 
Jon R. Bryan	(505) 844-2015	<=>	bryan@isrc.sandia.gov
Sandia National Laboratories, Intelligent System Sensors and Controls
 
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Subject: Re: Glow Plugs
Keywords: Glow Plug
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:48:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.204118.14372@pixel.kodak.com> weimer@pixel.kodak.com writes:
>In article <Bw10oE.5p6@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz>, kaiser@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (Chris Kaiser) writes:
>|> Also, I have a plug per engine plus one or two spares - once you have
>|> things set up you shouldn't be blowing plugs unless you fly combat :-) or
>|> run race type engines, etc. 

	One of the reason why I stopped boat racing.  A $6 (3 years ago, God
know how much they cost now) OPS gold plug last about 3-4 run on
average.  $20 a day on plugs alone (not to mention fuel) make you think
twice.  I guess running 60% nitro on a boat racing engine will do that
to plugs.

-Anthony
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: jboy@camelot.bradley.edu (Jay Shannon Yamagata)
Subject: Re: RC ThunderDrome - RC Auto Racing
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: 10 Oct 92 01:48:22 GMT

Is anyone planning to go to the Thunderdrome?  I'm from Hawaii and a group
of my friends are flying up and participating.  I would appreciate it if
someone attending could post the results of the amatuers. 

Thanks.
--
                     
      oooOOOOO(jboy@camelot.bradley.edu)OOOOOOO  
     o
    o   ____          :::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::: __|-----|__
    Y_,_|[]| --++++++ |[][][][][][][][]| |[][][][][][][][]| |  [] []  |
   {|_|_|__|;|______|;|________________|;|________________|;|_________|;
    /oo--OO   oo  oo   oo oo      oo oo   oo oo      oo oo   oo     oo
From: bloom@inland.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Glow Plugs
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:16:53 CST
Organization: Inland Steel Company; East Chicago, IN

In article <Bw56H4.AzF@ra.nrl.navy.mil>, tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:
> In article <1992Oct14.204118.14372@pixel.kodak.com> weimer@pixel.kodak.com writes:
>>In article <Bw10oE.5p6@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz>, kaiser@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (Chris Kaiser) writes:
>>|> Also, I have a plug per engine plus one or two spares - once you have
>>|> things set up you shouldn't be blowing plugs unless you fly combat :-) or
>>|> run race type engines, etc. 
> 
> 	One of the reason why I stopped boat racing.  A $6 (3 years ago, God
> know how much they cost now) OPS gold plug last about 3-4 run on
> average.  $20 a day on plugs alone (not to mention fuel) make you think
> twice.  I guess running 60% nitro on a boat racing engine will do that
> to plugs.

My rule for glow plugs is to run the cheapest plug that gives a reliable 
idle, strong top end, and little chance for a dead stick.  Sport engines 
with mufflers can usually get by with a $1.50 Fox idle bar plug.  Add 
a tuned pipe and I go with a Rossi #5 or #6 to get good plug life - 
Fox plugs would only last 1 flight.  Run an inverted engine with 
muffler like a YS 45 and I use an Enya #3, which gets a drastic improvement 
in idle.  The Rossi plugs go for about $3 and the Enyas cost about $6. 
For my 4 cycle YS 120 I run an OS -F plug, which costs about $6.  If 
you've got very short plug life with a cheap plug, replace it with a 
better (more expensive) plug of the correct heat range.  You may find 
that the expensive plug is actually cheaper in the long run, i.e. 
more flight time per dollar spent on the plug.
From: billg@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Bill Gingras)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:59:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Dynaflight Bird of Time
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc


I saw a mini bird-of-time fly last weekend.  It seemed to fly well and
the guy was quite happy with it ("no bad characteristics, " etc.), but
then he launched with the TX off (ouch!).  No real damage to it, BTW.

I saw someone else fly a mini once, and it fluttered quite severely when
he tried to winch it up.  

One more thing, when I was first getting into gliders, I asked a "pro"
(my instructor) what he thought of the B.O.T.  He said it's a neat
looking plane, but it uses "old technology" (airfoil, I guess), and the
wing is a bitch to build.

- Bill G

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: mkfeil@bcrki9.bnr.ca (Max Feil)
Subject: Radio interference - 1 more case
Organization: Bell-Northern Research
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 17:22:38 GMT

In the past while I've learned alot about radio interference and how radios
work, so I was intrigued when I read this month's Radio Spectrum article in
RCM (November 92). Someone wrote in saying they were having a problem where
their gold stickered channel 60 transmitter was interfering with someone's
non-narrow band channel 26 receiver. At first glance this does not fit into
the categories of image, 2IM or 3IM interference.  The radios are not 23
or 45.5 channels apart, and there is no third transmitter operating. At about
this same time it hit me that this situation was almost identical to a crash
I had in 1989 where somebody on channel 50 interfered with my Futaba Attack
rx on channel 16 when I flew too close to their transmitter (this was
confirmed afterwards with a ground test). This is just too much of a
coincidence! In both cases the tx's were 34 channels apart, and in both cases
the lower channel got interfered with. Back in 1989 I knew that there must be
some explanation, but just put it off to a "bad combination of radios" and
resolved never to fly again with this guy on channel 50, and never to fly too
close to somebody else's antenna.

I started thinking about it, and realized that since the lower channel is
getting the interference that this sounds like an image-related problem.  I
did the calculations and found that the receiver's local oscillator frequency
in this situation is 225 kHz away from the interfering signal. Twice this is
450 kHz, uncomfortably close to 455 kHz!

What I believe is happening in this case is this: The first stage mixer in
the rx is getting a signal 225 kHz below its local oscillator frequency.  The
mixer does its job (multiplication) and creates the 225 kHz difference
frequency, but then distortion creates a harmonic at 450 kHz which gets into
the 455kHz filter. The reason that only the lower frequency is affected is
that most, if not all, RC receivers use "high side injection" so the local
oscillator frequency of the lower channel is brought into play with the
higher channel.

This brings up the point that even if your receiver is able to reject
unwanted intermodulation products in normal circumstances, it may not be able
to do so when the signal(s) creating the unwanted products become very
strong, such as what happened in my case when I flew too close to somebody
standing at the opposite end of the flight line.

In the "Interference Problems for R/C Flyers" article I posted earlier, this
gives a whole new dimension to the problem I listed as problem number 5.

Any comments?
Max
--
Max Feil  mkfeil@bnr.ca | Disclaimer:
Bell-Northern Research  |   What do I know? I'm just a Nerd on the Big Ranch.
P.O Box 3511 Station C, |
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.| "Enrich The Soil, Not EveryBody's Goal" Peter Gabriel
From: earl@trsvax.tandy.com
Date: 09 Oct 92 09:02 CDT
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Second plane for an ambitious new p
Message-ID: <1195667316@trsvax>
Nf-ID: #R:noose.ecn.purdue.edu:6149:trsvax:1195667316:000:3039
Nf-From: trsvax.tandy.com!earl    Oct  9 09:02:00 1992



/* ---------- "Second plane for an ambitious new p" ---------- */
I've been wanting to get into RC planes for years, but I never
had the money or an instructor before.  As a substitute I've spent 
countless hours flying various PC flight simulators.
I bought a Goldberg Falcon III as my first plane about a month ago. I was
so excited that I built it in 8 nights.  It turned out very well I think,
although the color shceme is minimal (to save time).  I've got a .46
OS SF MAX ABC engine and a Futaba FM radio.  I've been flying using a 
buddy cord with an instructor from the local club for the last few weeks.
I'm having a heck of a lot of fun. Yesterday on my 8th flight ever I made my
first landing.   And on the next flight I took off flew around for a while
and landed with no intervention from the instructor. He seems to think 
that I'm progressing fairly quickly.
Anyway, I'm already dreaming of my second plane. Everyone I taked to before 
I bought my first plane told me to get the most stable trainer I could find.  
I didn't take their advice and I don't regret it at all. I don't think a 
trainer would have been nearly as fun as zipping arround the sky with my 
Falcon.
I'm thinking about a tail dragger with a mid or high semi-semetrical wing,
maybe a .60 size engine, maybe flaps.   Something that looks more like
a real plane than the Falcon.  I really liked the quality and completeness
of the Goldberg kit.  Maybe a Cub would be good.  I'd apreciate any 
sugestions, or recomendations for a next kit or for things to be thinking 
about at this point in my learning to fly. I don't want to get into 
something to far above my abilities, but I do want a plane that will 
chalange both my building and flying skills.
Please respond via E-mail.  Thanks a lot.
Matt Wheeler
mgwheele@clausius.ecn.purdue.edu
************************************************

   It's real important to be able to master the basic flying skills. Practice
   thousands of "touch and go's" and dead stick landings, et cetera. I would
   stick with a tricycle geared model for your second plane. A low wing with
   a constant chord semetrical thick section airfoil would be good. It is
   important to get real good at landings and takeoffs. Many modelers have a
   lot of trouble with taildraggers as they have to use the rudder for
   steering and torque prop compensation on takeoff's, plus you have to
   use the elevator to prevent ground looping, besides keeping the model
   on the ground until it gets up to flying speed.


***********************************************************************


<This information is provided by an individual and is not nor should be
 construed  as  being  provided  by  Radio  Shack or Tandy Corp.  Radio
 Shack/Tandy Corp has no obligation to support the information provided
 in  any way. > 
						
						Earl W. Bollinger
						@ <trsvax!earl>


"You were in the Clone Wars!", said Luke excitedly.
"Yes", replied Obi Wan, "I was a DOS programmer. But that was before the dark
 times, before OS2."


Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: cal@admiral.uucp (Cal Phillips)
Subject: Re: Hi-Start
Reply-To: cal@admiral.uucp (Cal Phillips)
Organization: The Grid/Waffle BBS, 203-661-2873, -1279, -0450, -2967
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:43:19 GMT

bigfoot@btv.ibm.com writes:

> 
>   Just purchased a new Hi-start from Northeast Sailplanes.  Looks impressive.

It is which one and WHAT are you going to launch and where. I'm local to
you and fly out of New Canaan, 2m poly for now. Drop a reply here or
smtp.

Good Soaring, Cal Phillips

--
cal%admiral.uucp@yale.edu (Cal Phillips) <yale!admiral!cal>
The Admiral's Public UNIX - Greenwich, CT - System Administrator: Doug Fields
(HST/V32) (203)661-2873 -- (PEP/V32) -1279 -- (V32) -0450 -- (V29/MNP6) -2967
>FREE!< Unix shell accounts, Usenet access, and Internet-style mail available
From: rene@rubble.UUCP (Rene Lampe)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Buddy-Box
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:19:39 GMT
Organization: Rubble, Toronto, Ontario



I have a Futaba	6 channel PCM transmitter and would like to build a buddy-box
to use with it.	 Can anyone give me the	pin-outs on the	trainer	cable connector
and/or the schematics for a buddy box ?

I'am posting this for a	friend who does	not have access	to Usenet so please
email all replies to douglas@ryder.

Thanks...


								-- Rene
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Subject: Re: Black Baron Epoxy Paint Questions
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:43:33 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.215251.25200@primerd.prime.com> <J.Cook@ENS.Prime.COM> writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.184812.4342@mlb.semi.harris.com>
>mwp@ms9.mis.semi.harris.com (Mark W. Poole) writes:
>>2) The instructions say "...dries in 7 days in ideal conditions, and 
>>if unsure, wait 30 days".  I didn't know this when I bought the stuff, 
>>or I may not have done it.  Does it REALLY take that long?????  Should 
>>I plan to NOT work on it for a WEEK after I paint it??

	Why don't you use K&B epoxy paint.  They are two part paint.  I find
them to be much stronger, much easier to use, and dry much faster (like
running my boat 2 days after I painted it and dry to touch within
hours).  You get what you pay for, sure, you save the mixing hassel with
Black Baron, but they are a damn pain to use.  I remember using Black
Baron primer to save time once, then I put K&B epoxy paint on top, bad
idea, the primer was dissolved by the K&B in no time flat.

-Anthony
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: wd6cmu@netcom.com (Eric Williams)
Subject: Re: Is there a FAQ for RC electronics?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:12:21 GMT

I learned most of what I know from building my Heathkit transmitter,
receiver and servos.  That was back in the AM days, but things haven't
changed much since then (with the possible exception of PCM).
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Williams     wd6cmu@netcom.com  |  Never attribute to malice that which
WD6CMU@WD6CMU.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA       |  is adequately explained by stupidity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: ch@eiaut2.tuwien.ac.at (Christian Kral)
Subject: Re: Nose in hovering
Organization: Technical University Vienna, AUSTRIA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:08:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.133510.10580@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, goza@norm.JSC.NASA.GOV (Mike Goza) writes:
|> The second method is the one that was described to me and works well.  It is the one that I chose
|> to learn the maneuver with.  It requires though that you be fairly proficient with forward flight.
|> Basically, fly the heli to a nose in position 40-50 feet (or higher) off the deck and slowly 
|> progress into a nose in hovering posture.  When you get in trouble, just increase forward cyclic
|> and pitch to climb away.  Circle around and do it again.  With practice, you will eventually 
|> learn to hover nose in at a safe altitude.  Once that is done, start lowering the circuits until
|> you are as close to the ground as you wish.  Then learning to take off and land nose in is easy
|> at that point.  I used this method and managed to learn nose in without damaging the heli.

Thanks for telling this method, Mike!

|> Hope this helped.

I hope it will!

    Christian Kral
(ch@eiaut2.tuwien.ac.at)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: gizzi@rtsg.mot.com (James A. Gizzi)
Subject: Response to sbixby@cup.portal.com
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:34:01 GMT

I am unable to get mail to you through the mail system here.  Assuming that 
you'd be willing to pick up the shipping charges for UPS I'd certainly
be willing to wrap and deliver to UPS.  Let me know. If you'd like you can
call me at (708)632-4429

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Gizzi             "Western Society needs to prioritize life-support
sqa.rtsg.mot.com       systems and to question its commitment to Materialism"
                                Audrey Shenandoah - Onandaga "Elder"
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: gregt@col.hp.com (Greg Tarcza)
Subject: Re: How fast should I launch my electric glider
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:17:11 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

adar@parcplace.com (Michel Adar) writes:
> 	The main problem was the take-off, after leaving my hands the plane was
> not stable at all, and only after a few meters it stoped trembling and
> started to climb. My question is whether it will behave better if I throw
> it harder so it starts faster and whether it is easy enough to do that with
> the transmitter in one hand and the 48 oz. glider in the other.

     This is gonna be almost the same answer as the one I posted for the 
hi-start thread.  I hope the question doesn't generate as many different
answers!

     It sounds like you either didn't have enough airspeed from the launch
or perhaps the nose was pointed up too high.  Initial airspeed is the key. 

     You need to throw the plane as you would for an unpowered trim flight.
Its not that hard to do while holding the transmitter, just concentrate on 
keeping everything reasonably level as you throw. Between 0 and 10 degrees
of nose-up attitude won't hurt as long as your throw gives the plane enough
airspeed to stay aloft (figure on about 15 mph).  

							Greg Tarcza
From: sringrose@galaxy.gov.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Hi-Start
Date: 14 Oct 92 11:47:16 -0700
Organization: BC Systems Corporation

> 
> ...my technique varies somewhat from this.  I throw the glider as if it
> were a javelin, at about a 45 to 50 degree up angle.  The difference is, I
> THROW it, as bloody hard as I can.  
Now, of course, how hard you throw your glider also depends on how fragile
> it is.  You don't want to tear the wings off your Gentle Lady or anything,
> but any 100 inch glider can easily take a strong launch.

If you have an airplane that will take the strain - lean back and fire!
but maybe if you are unsure of the method or the plane , 
SLOWLY work your way into a shoulder injury. There is nothing worse than
throwing your shoulder out and snapping a wing.  
self into a shoulder i 

Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: fhage@virga.rap.ucar.edu (Frank Hage)
Subject: one handed control + a foot
Followup-To:  koebrich@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (koebrich jeff)
Reply-To: fhage@virga.rap.ucar.edu (Frank Hage)
Organization: Research Applications Program/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:52:26 GMT

> koebrich@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (koebrich jeff)
> Jeff Koebrich 
> UI Div. Rehab.
> 217-244-8265 (w)

RE: single handed controls for RC cars.

I think a good solution would be to use a Control similar to the COX
"Cobra" 3 channel system which has all three channels on one stick.
Rotating the knob on the stick could control steering, (which is very
similar to existing RC Car controls) with forward/back controlling
throttle/brake. Left/Right would be unused.

Unfortunately, as with most systems with multiple channels on one
stick, they are intended for Airplane use only.  (RC car & airplane
frequencies are different). While the system would work off the shelf,
you would risk "shooting down" someone flying an RC airplane on the
same channel. The potential for injury and damage is much greater for
airplanes, so it is important to avoid using the aircraft frequncies
for cars.

I checked TOWER Hobbies, and they don't carry the COX Cobra radio in the CAR
frequincies, but perhaps COX will sell you one direct.  (Usually, there
is an interchangable plug-in RF module made for each seperate channel
that fits into a manufacturer's radio line) TOWER price: Retail $177.50
NOW: $111.99

FYI:

72 MHz - Aircraft Channels 11-60
27 MHz - Boat/Car Channels 61-90

?? MHz - General Use Channels A1-A6


-Frank Hage. National Center for Atmospheric Research. Boulder, Colorado.
From: eeak@teal.csn.org (Ed Krejcik)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Balancing a wing
Keywords: Crash, Bang, Snap
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:55:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: csn.Bw7w0E.HBK
Distribution: usa
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

Well, It finally happened - I've christened my Gentle Lady - %(

The wing cracked above the polyhedral, damage wasn't bad and
easy to fix.  Now the obvious - I`ve got the wing all repaired
and covered, and now it is heavy on the damaged side.

What do people recommend for balancing a wing that is finished?
I was thinking about maybe monocoting something like a dime into
the wing tip on the other side to counter balance.  Is this a
good idea?  Is there something better to do?

Thanks in advance...

-- 
*** Ed Krejcik                  +--------------------------------------+  *** 
*** Precision Visuals, Inc.     | "Don`t be outraged, be outrageous!!" |  *** 
*** Boulder, CO                 +--------------------------------------+  ***
*** 303/530-9000      Email to: eeak@pvi.com          Disclaimer: mine... ***
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
From: jlw@world.std.com (James L Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Micro Servos
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:59:30 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In article <1992Oct7.175636.4463@netcom.com> wd6cmu@netcom.com (Eric Williams) writes:
>As for servos, coreless servos tend to be smaller and faster (and more
>expensive), BB servos last longer but don't have any other advantage. 
>If you're using micro servos for flaps or ailerons, consider getting
>ones with metal gears.  The plastic ones can strip teeth on a rough
>landing.  Airtronics 92141 seem to be almost legendary in this role.
>

Isn't one type of servo better at centering than others?  The S148's I
use sometimes will accept a center that is off even when there is 
negligable slop in the linkage.

-- Les Walker
From: johnm@hpmcaa.mcm.hp.com (John Mosbarger)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Fieseler Storch Plans?
Keywords: Availability?
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:16:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: hpmcaa.1992Oct15.161647.7045
Organization: HP Cardiology Business Unit - McMinnville, OR
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


     A friend here is looking for plans or a kit of the Fieseler Storch 
for an R/C flyer.  If anyone can help, he (and I) would be most grateful.
Email or posting is fine.  Thanks.

John

--
John Mosbarger
HP McMinnville, OR
johnm@hpmcaa.mcm.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc