Talk:Radio-controlled aircraft

message: "Amateur hobbyists have more recently developed a range of new model designs utilizing the corrugated plastic or "Coroplast" material. These models are collectively called "SPADs" which stands for Simple Plastic Airplane Design. Fans of the SPAD concept tout increased durability, ease of building, and lower priced materials as opposed to balsa models, sometimes (though not always) at the expense of greater weight and crude appearance."  You just can't be serious about the above "Coroplast" comment -- I've been heavily involved in RC for the last 6 years, and I don't know ANYONE who uses Coroplast to build aircraft.  Alternatively, we use Dow Bluecore, Depron, and EPP foams -- these foams are inexpensive, durable, and easy to repair.  When was this article last updated?  :embarassed:
Contributions/70.169.212.130 (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Coroplast

message: I really appreciate all the information people have added to this article.
When this article gets trimmed back to a short encyclopedia article on what is a radio controlled airplane,
I think it would be good to move the trimmings over to a wikibook focused more on how to build RC planes, like other how-to wikibooks such as Wikibooks:Becoming a Private Pilot, Wikibooks:Jet Propulsion, Wikibooks:How To Build A Computer, etc.
Would Wikibooks:RC Airplane be a good name, or would you prefer something else?
--DavidCary 23:58, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see if I can do this. --phatmonkey 09:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Alright, I've moved a huge amount to the wikibooks article and cleaned up this page. --phatmonkey 10:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a great improvement overall. Though some of that could be pulled back as short summaries if needed or to fill out sub articles on specific topics. Also, please use useful Wikipedia:Edit summaries so people know you're chopping out large amounts of material. - Taxman Talk 14:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howto: building RC airplanes 

message: where can people fly these rc airplanes?  I see people flying them in parks, but is it really legal to fly them over cities?  What kinds of limitations are there?
:There are park fliers that can be flown pretty much anywhere, they are generally relatively small in size. If it is gas powered model, most pilots are associated to an RC hobby club. These clubs have very strict rules and safety procedures for flying model aircraft. Most clubs belong to either AMA (USA) or MAAC (Canada) organizations. These organizations are legal entities that provide insurance coverage to persons and property damage in the event of an accident. They also ensure that clubs enforce their safety guidelines on club members, etc.
:Gdavidp1 07:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point. I've removed the "hokey" statement. -- Jmc (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  legality 

message: Why were all the external links tossed... and now only the single electric RC-centric link exist? jsonin 21.May.08
I have removed external links to discussion forums as they are a violation of WP:EL. -- MakeChooChooGoNow 09:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I moved the para just before the Turning section into it and revised it, then removed this sentence:
There are generally two ways of turning a simple Remote Control Aircraft. Probably the most common way is via the rudder. The alternative is by cutting one engine or lowering the power while the other engine is at full power.
which was at one time the entire "Turning section". Seemed out of place, not to mention not entirely accurate. Nibios 02:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turning 

message: The subsections concerning the positioning of the wings on an airplane (e.g. high low and mid-wing) seem to suggest that an airplane can be treated like a pendulum. Specifically, the first sentence in the low wing section states: "... the weight of the plane sits on top of the wing structure, making the balance a bit top heavy." 
Any explanation of longitudinal or latitudinal stability involving a pendulum is generally wrong. As a plane rolls, the lift vector rotates with the airplane resulting in no restoring moment; it largely doesn't matter where the CG is with respect to the wing. Side slip of the airplane will result in a significant portion of longitudinal stability. From personal experience, classic high wing airplanes have large 
{L_\beta} from dihedral and large vertical stabilizers. Airplanes with lower wings often happen to have less dihedral and are less longitudinally stable. However, this is not necessarily always the case. 
There are several other relevant sources of stability in addition to {L_\beta}which are not particularly relevant to this page but are covered reasonably well on the Flight Dynamics page. Either way, the wing location section should be edited. As a final note, the second paragraph in the low wing section is gibberish. 
The.Nth (talk) 08:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Your comments make sense to me, The.Nth - certainly more sense than the current section. Please feel free to go ahead and edit. -- Jmc (talk) 21:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft Stability 

message: I just added a section on video piloting/first-person view flying. Since FPV is rapidly growing in popularity among RC hobbyists, I felt it was worth mentioning in this article. I'm not entirely sure I put this section in the best spot, however. Right now it's just after the section on 3D flying, since that part of the article was talking about different categories of RC flight. But if someone thinks it fits better in a different part of the article, feel free to move it.--DebateLord (talk) 04:50, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great stuff, but could you find some references for it? --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

text: It looks good, but references are needed.  I'm particularly interested in references for this:  "The most common frequencies used for video transmission are 900 MHz, 1.2 GHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz. Specialized long-range control systems operating at 433 MHz[.]"  –Sparkgap (talk) 19:20, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Okay, I'll work on finding references for that.--DebateLord (talk) 05:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

text: UPDATE: Added references. If anyone thinks the section needs more, feel free to add them.--DebateLord (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  This answers some questions I had about the frequencies mentioned.  The distance reference is questionable though.  Generally, web-forums are not considered reliable sources (See WP:SPS).  –Sparkgap (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: FPV section

message: I say this is relevant, and another editor says it isn't.  Frankly, we could put in a whole section on the video, as this is a very neat Radio Controlled aircraft that is being talked about.  We could do it one way or another.  Relevancy is in the eyes of the beholder.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Or we could put in text to this effect: At least one large radio controlled model of the A-380 has been built and flown in a model air show in Switzerland.
 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:36, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: On what basis could a link to the Airbus A380 article possibly be relevant? If a link to that article is relevant, then why not add links to articles on every full-size aircraft of which a radio-controlled model has been built and flown? -- Jmc (talk) 00:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Airbus A380#Popular culture|Airbus A380]]

message: An encyclopedia isn't the place for "shop talk" for enthusiasts and experts.The section on 3d flying has too much jargon to be understandable to someone who isn't already knowledgeable. Why is stunt flying called "3d"? All flying is in 3 dimensions (forward, left/right, up/down). This article is the least helpful one I've seen so far on r/c aircraft.(The FPV section is very good though.)77Mike77 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insider jargon 

message: I don't see any info on legal flight ceiling for RCs on this page. Considering recent events, that could be important.
Genepoz (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Air Near Miss--Legal Ceiling for RC 

message: The above lead image discussion led me to upload a few more useful pictures for the purpose of illustration. One key point is to include pictures of hobbyists with planes in view. I am uploading pictures specifically to plug gaps in coverage based on existing text. Perhaps one day I will revise the article text holistically.
In the process I may remove a few pictures. I will move these removed pictures over here for recording purposes, and in case I later find sections where they can be resurrected.
I agree with the above, that the ideal new (or replacement) pictures should include the following:
:1. A clear relative close-up of a plane as it is being flown
:2. The radio control transmitter should be in view
:3. And I would add that the radio control modeler's face should not be in view
:4. No advertisements should be in view
Just my two cents.  I don't even know if this would be possible, in a practical sense.
Eparaqutam (talk) 23:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uploading usable images and rearranging images 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Radio-controlled aircraft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140709152959/http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf to http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210100627/http://www.nzmaa.org.nz/frequencies.asp to http://nzmaa.org.nz/frequencies.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have a diagram, and I got it from https://maker.pro/custom/projects/rc-plane-beginners Erfson (talk) 21:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect a similar question I have just answered for you at the Teahouse relates to this website. The answer then is 'no, you may not add these images'. Unless I've missed it, I cannot see anywhere on that site a release of images for non-commercial and commercial use.  Without that CC-BY-SA release, you would be breaching another person's copyright, and that is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies. You can add images you've created yourself, or those that have been released with a Creative Commons commercial use licence. But not if they belong to another person, or  have only been released for non-commercial use, sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Copyright violations for further info. -- Jmc (talk) 23:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I add a diagram of how RC planes work? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion 

message: Hello JMC:
I noticed that you reverted my edits on basic flight controls for Radio Control Aircraft on the 18th of May.  Could you please explain why you reverted them.  Thank you
Eparaqutam (talk) 22:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  /* Basic flight controls */