Clancy Arnold

Hi all,
Ijust wanted to remind everyone that the 2.4 GHz rule is not a done deal. The one thing everyone seems to ignore is that just like in the pre Spread Spectrum days there is still a fixed number of channels, just more of them and the radio picks which channel it sees as unused. If Control Line starts using 2.4 GHz radios then the RCfliers may start having problems with their radios not finding a usable frequency. Then what will happen??
Clancy

Hossfly

Well Clancy, with the current technology I don't think there is much of a problem except the older JR Radios including the unmodified DSX 8. The RCers face the same problems.

Now IMO, Control Line is Control Line. I am going to use that system I bought from you and it will be going soon, even though not ready for this year's NATs. Actually, I don't think I would have a real feel for the machine with one of those handles with all the stuff hanging on the handle.
Many years ago I could never appreciate the Jim Walker U-Reely because there was little of any feel in the handle. It was almost totally a mechanical control. To me flying any airplane is a FEEL and PRESSURE item, even RC, and not a mechanical bashing of sticks like kid's computer games.

I cannot justify why I should condone a Control Line model to be flown any method than through the control-Lines. If they want the RC options, then fly RC. I will not support the use of total RC in any Control-Line Elevator-Only competition rule book. OTOH what sport fliers do just for their fun and play outside of formal competition is, of course, their own business and not mine to judge.

Sure wish I had started that Cub last year, or even better that wifey had not broken the ankle.

Clancy Arnold

Hoss
Hope to meet you at the CLScale NATS in July.

This should be a great NATSwith all of the fliers entering new and unusual models.

My Taube will not be the biggest!!
Clancy

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Clancy that is a pretty empty threat given the numbers of controlline flyers at any RC field in the country. Even at the nats although I have regretably never been to one the numbers at any one time are so small that fear of 2.4 interferance is just pointless especially considering the numbers of simultanious operations that are occuring at many fields across the courtry.

I am the only flyer who uses anyform of throttle control at my field but have been successful in getting a few more involved. I have used my Bill Young three channel system for around eleven years now and that was even before I had to use a wheelchair. This system works like yours Clancy I.e by sending encoded signals over the insulated controllines and it was the key for me to continue controlline flying after I dropped into the chair.

But for me the added setup time and difficulties in setting up are becoming more difficult for me and that is why I decided my next Ukie will use throttle via 2.4. 2.4 saturation is not a problem and yes of course it is outlawed in the competition rulebook however that does not apply to sport flying.

Actually that is quite an antiquated rule that needs to be changed appropriately for 2.4. I beleve there have been a rule proposal to change it, that may be in the rules cycle already. Perhaps Hoss you can enlighten us on that.

Either way it will have no effect on me since its unlikely that I would ever be able to make it to any controlline contest.

Hoss I would urge you to rethink your stance on RC features for controlline. I know the purist says no way man however that same purist cried foul when the first real controline arf came out. I think no one now could argue aginst the fact that those ARFs have keep controlline alive.

The advantages of using encoded info over the air rather than over the wires are many that have become apparent over the last eleven years using my system and now it time (at least for me) to move on.

The fact that we can now freely use 2.4 (with the exception of AMA rulebook events) Is going to be a major benefit to many of my fellow gympy flyers and 2.4 is the key to that.

Now how about a wheelchair class at the nats, How cool is that! I know, I know[8D]


John

Clancy Arnold

Here are some pictures of myU/Tronics ControlHandles.
First is an original U/T design single channel. Only the slide pot at the handle.
Second a Universal U/TSingle Channel Handle for glo or electric power.
Third is the U/T Handle for my CL Scale Taube.
Fourth is a 4 Channel U/T control ready to mount on a handle with 2 proportional and 2 switch controlled channels. Box sizeis 2 x 4 x 1.5 In.

Clancy

Clancy Arnold

John

Have you seen the pictures of the "Pilot Seat."  It was featured on the back cover of Control Line World magazine Vol. 2 Num. 2 in April 2008.

www.thepilotseat.com

(209) 470-8351

Looks like it was designed for you. 

Clancy

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks Clancy I think I will stick to my chair, gives a lot greater versatility and can fly in bigger winds with it. The down side with the chair is it needs to be on a hard surface.

The Magician will pull me around by chinning the handle and flying a forty degree line angle to shorten them increasing the rotation speed but normally use my feet anyway for propulsion and have no foot pedals. I travel backwards in stores and such.

This chinning and line angle trick has saved me a number of times when I have suffered a break in the throttle circuit being neccessary to fly out a tank. I prefer to keep my flight under three minutes.

John

http://www.youtube.com/user/JohnBuck...36/T3b8ndVIhII

Clancy Arnold

John
Great video!!
How often do you have to re-lube the wheel bearings in your chair? LOL

Congratulations,
Clancy

Monellar

I am a member of the Belfast Model Flying Club in Northern Ireland. We are a dedicated Control Line club who dabble in RC flying.

I bought a Bill Young handle a few years back so that I could run "down the line" throttle control to a 54" wing span Avro Shackleton Mk3 that I have built.

When I connected everything up as per instructions nothing happened. I checked that a signal was getting down my lines but still the ESC's refused to operate. When I installed an RC receiver bingo all worked exactely as planned - 4 motors running and a beautiful noise.

SO - The maiden flight consisted of myself with the handle and another member with the transmitter for throttle control - RESULTCRASH but thankfully repairable.

Does anyone have any thoughts on how I can get the handle to work or suggestions on an alternative method for down the wire throttle control.

If this cannot be achieved with the Bill Young handle then it is up for sale.

Thanks

Eric Millar

R8893

My Feedback: (20)

Eric,
As I mentioned in posts earlier in this thread, I use a JR transmitter in the direct servo control mode and am not familiar with the Young handle. I have noticed, painfully, that any short circuit in the control lines will cause my system to fail. Had a problem using eyelets at the end of my lines that had sharp edges. Under the load of flying the sharp edges would penetrate the insulation on my flying lines and short out the system. Pretty ugly crash. I haven't done electrics yet, but in my reading, or discussions at the R/C field, I have heard that some ESC's are sensitive to the end points of the throttle channel. Maybe you can't get the right range on the Young throttle channel to enable the ESC.

How about posting a photo of the Shack.

Chuck

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

As chuck noted the Young handle does not have end point adjustments on the throttle trigger or any of the other channels.

I have been using the Bill Young handle quite successfully now for I beleve about 12 years however this has been only with glow aircraft and as noted by Chuck I beleve your problem is related to this lack of endpoints when using a ESC.

I am not sure how to help your situation as I am not a electronics type. Trouble with this is the Young handle was developed some years before the whole world except me it seems was in such a mad rush to convert from glow to electric. Your handle I suspect would work fine if you left out the Rx and just used a servo but of course that is a problem for the ESV.

Using the Young handle I found that you had to be creative with the actuator horns on both the servo and throttle arm to acheve reasonable endpoints for even the glow installations, kinda like the not so good, 'good old days'.

Now after those years of successes with the over the wire systems which I am still using today with two airplanes set up for it. Also note with all my controlline airplanes I have to have thottled systems because I fly from a wheelchair. I am going to abandon the over the wire systems altogether and this is only possible because of the miracle of 2.4 over the air systems.

The real trouble with an over the wire system is it requires four connections or (Y)'s to the flying wires two at the handle and two at near the leadouts. These are the Achilles Heal and over those years these take a beating and I have suffered every possible mannor failure usually related to this Achilles Heal and had to complete flights with no throttle which for me is a genuine problem.

My next airplane will us a a simple over the air system which will consist of an old Hitec Prism 7X with the Hitec 2.4 module system and of course a RX and small battery as well as a small servo on board for the throlle. You could of course just use the ESC plugged to the throttle plugged to the throttle channel in the normal way and of course just as with RC you will have full end point control. My intent is to also use an onboard servo an release for a launch stooge as this will greatly facilitate my set up time when I am alone and minimise trudging through the dirt in my wheelchair.

Monellar I suspect your problem when you tryed using RC with a separate operator for the transmitter, if I read right was at the root of your crash. You need to control everything and not depend on a second party.

The system I will use next will be a conventional over the air and the transmitter will be worn simply from a neck strap and (key point) backwards with the sticks pointing toward the airplane, the ordinary attachment point for the strap cannot be used to do this. Now I have tested the ergonomics of this setup by hanging and operating the sticks like this as a test and I was actually flying the airplane with my Young system. The neck strap will need to be attached in some fashion to both sides of the transmitter.

What I have found is that its very easy to operate the throttle simply with your free hand or any of the other sticks for matter. The transmitter is worn high right over you chest and not low near you beltline. Its actually easier to do this than to train yourself to operate a handle for elevator control and a pistol trigger for throttle. That was a definate skill set that had to be learned with an over the wire system using a trigger operated throttle.


Oh by the way Monellar wecome to RCU

John

Monellar

Chuck & John thanks for your quick replies.

I have a 3 wire vintage TomTit and have found it impossible to use the index finger of my right hand to control the throttle.  I always fly this model using my left hand up at the handle for throttle control, "so much easier".

Back to Shackleton problem.

John - I hadn't considered that the handle was perhaps not compatable with modern electric flight, so perhaps the wise move would be to sell the handle and as you suggest move to a 2.4 set up.  My local Model Shop have already suggested this as a way forward so it looks like the purchase of a transmitter tray is on the cards.

No doubt someone somewhere has develpoed a successful "down the wire" control system for electric CL flying.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

The problem you speak of in operating a trigger of a three line system is the what I was speaking of even with the trigger pot on the Young system.

Yes no doubt there are folks working with an over the wire system that is compatable with electric ESC's but all of them will still require the Achilles Heal I spoke of earlier and that is the connections on each end of the flying wires. These even increase the work load more just winding up you lines which I am sure you are aware with the short connector on each end of you insulated lines. These make just winding or extending your lines a time consuming task.

Yes the over the line systems were a major improvement over the three (or more) multi line mechanical systems. Now I beleve the 2.4 over the air system or set ups is another just as great a step forward as the move from the multi line systems.

Just think about it will be just like when you were a kid with your simple ringmaster or equivilant and you could quickly and simply set up. You can even do the same with your complex shackleton. You will simply need the charge both a receiver and transmitter battery just as you would do with an RC airplane.

I would definately not invest in a conventional Transmitter tray its all wrong for what we do. You will find that the tranny flat aginst your chest with the 'sticks pointing at airplane' (key point) is the best position for it. All you need is an adjustable strap that attachs to the top corners of the transmitter. Your could either bolt or screw them if there is room internally or simply bond the attachments anyway to like to the top sides of the transmitter.

2.4 is becoming a major boost to the controlline community and many are not even aware of it just yet.


John

aspeed

I know it isn't related to the scale thing, but I think I will try one line on a foamy indoor this winter.  I am just going to hook the line onto the back of the receiver and fly with the sticks.  A variation could feasably be worked out with a pistol car/boat radio if it is strong enough for a real plane.  One or two lines wouldn't matter and they wouldn't need to be insulated.  It definitely isn't going to be an official way of doing it though.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Aspeed there is no "offical way" when it comes to creativity and that creativity is 'Part n Parcil' of what we do as modelers.

What I think you described is a single tether line on a foamy and using a 2.4 RC system to operate a throttle and elevator with you standing outside the circle. That indeed would be very cool and probably a lot of fun, indeed go for it dude!

John

Old worn out Dude

aspeed

Oh. I'll stand on the inside the normal way.  I need the exercise.  I'll get dive bombed with the other foamies but they seem to miss me.  They all turn left circuits anyways. I tried it once with a electric control line once. I'll wear a helmet and safety glasses, (maybe hockey pads)  Safety forced.  As for officially, any time you compete there is always someone saying you cheated and brings out the rule book.  Just for fun, whatever is good is great.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Hey cool why not get some vidio of the fun and post it here.

As for competition actually rules are required if it ever goes beyond just playing around with a few buds. Otherwise it will degenerates into fights and Kaos. Its human nature. How well the rules are written can make all the differance in the world to a successful Event. Poorly witten or conceived rules also can destroy an event almost overnight.

Monellar

A video would really showcase your flying fun.

When I get the Shackleton sorted and the weather improves for flying I will be hoping to get a video

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Monellar, indeed vidios are great but how about just some stills of the Shackleton (a very interesting subject choice) right here on the thread. Just click on the box below "click here to upload images and files".

John

Monellar

John
I've uploaded shack pics, the site says I have been successful, I just dont know where they are???

Monellar

Ah There they are
Pic 1 of very poor quality shows it did fly
Pic 2 Gives an indication of the crash damage - now repaired.

skylark-flier

Monellar, that Shackelton's beautiful!

Monellar

Thanks Skylark - flier

I'm a slow builder and it took 3 years to complete from plan, of course a house move in between didnt help.

Just back from the workshop after some repair work.

Not sure when I shall be making another flying attempt, Havnt got the control system sorted yet.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Yes it is simply magnificient, Ya done good

Will be looking forward to your future successes

John

Clancy Arnold

Moneliar
Ibuild the U/Troics Control systems for Control line models to give the modeler one or multiple (4 to 7)channels of electronic control through the lines. I have attached a sketch for adding End Point adjustments to my systems.
Clancy