aspeed

Just wondered if anyone has used the Revolution Control Line System. It is a system where you fly from outside the circle. It is over $300 so it isn't something you want to try once and put in a garage sale. It seems well built and is about the price of a good radio. Maybe good for FAI Speed but wouldn't be legal, or older people with slight disabilities. Would it be like learning all over again? Anybody try it???

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Sorry I don,t know anything about the system you are asking about but it seems the problems of these systems that have popped up over the years all suffer from a critical problem and that is wind. Flying in anything but a dead calm could be a problem with the inability to step backwards.

I am older and with disabilitys. I am in a wheelchair and actively fly but the only reason I can still fly is because I had a twenty foot concrete circle poured at our RC field and can say I am all over that pad. If I could not roll backwards at launch and sometimes in the winds then it would not be possible.

Just some thoughts

John

Avaiojet

Guys fooled around with this years ago, I mean years ago.

aspeed

Yes, you always have to step back on takeoff and landings if it is a light plane.  That is kind of why I wondered if anyone actually tried it.  Maybe they haven't sold too many.  It looks quite well manufactured.  That is the worst feeling when the wind catches it when you are too high and the motor is stopped, and torque rolls on takeoff too.

Clean

I saw the pictures of giant scale airplanes teatherd to a substaontial control pole. They sat in a chair and pulled on a yoke, back in the 50's or 60's I think. I've thought about the little tethered .020's but not anything like the above system, not in this neck of the woods. You'd never be able to use it.

Avaiojet

You could set up an RC model and have it attached to CL lines. You would only need one.

aspeed

I read in an old magazine from the 1960's or 1970's about a flying demonstration where they flew an rc on a line and had another line on the other wingtip to balance it out. After flying in a circle for a while they would let go of the line and fly it on rc. All the unsuspecting spectators would run and hide. It needed the other line on the other wingtip to balance it out though. That would be a good thing to try on a foamy just to see how it goes. Maybe I will make a control line foamy for indoor flying. I don't think you can fly too high with it though so overhead eights are out of the question. (as if) I picked up a timer so I don't need a transmitter. This REVOLUTION CONTROL LINE SYSTEM is a brand name system available at RSM Distribution. I don't know how the link works or I would do it. It looks pretty well made. They only show a picture of it, no video. They say the model usually pulls itself tight if the wires go slack, but I don't know about the usually part. I would think of getting one but it is always windy here and it is a bit pricey at $300. Just wondered if anyone ever used one. I guess they didn't sell too many. They put a patent on it too. That doesn't come cheap. I will try to get the site here rsmdistribution.comindex-2.htm it is under 'special products' tether system I hope it goes in right.

coriolan

Tried something similar last year with a "round-the-pole" Micro Ring Master but using r/c for throttle and elevator. Used 20 feets Cox dacron line (one)attached to the top of a weighted photo tripod. The plane was about 10" span powered by a 12mm GWS IPS motor and 3"X3" prop, one micro servo and Pixie-7 esc, flew Ok with a 2 cells 180mA Lipo. This was a test for a Cox TD .010 version which is still on the back burner Saw an old Ron Moulton's book at our local library about C/L as it was in England in the 50's and there was an "outside the circle" system described which was quite elaborate with sunk in concrete pylon and routed underground control! More infos in my blog at RCG:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1427855
Here is the Revolution system in question:
http://www.p3models.com/inside.htm

aspeed

I tried a Ukie indoors last winter.  It was a Cox Sky Cruiser.  I think it was $20 at a surplus store.  I kind of forgot about it for 10 years or so and charged the little nicad battery and it worked.  I used 15 or 20 feet of cox dacron line in the gym.  It worked ok but even a small climb and dive was all it could do.  I was afraid of landing it too slow because there is no shutoff, the battery just wears out, so I whipped it for a few minutes to make sure the battery was right dead.  I don't think I needed to.  I like the idea of mounting a line on the transmitter and flying like that. Maybe I'll try that this winter if they let me.  They wouldn't let me turn the lights off to run the Night Vapour 'cause it wouldn'tbe fair to the other fliers', but the control line seems ok.  I will probably wear my helmet and safety glasses if everyone else wants to fly at the same time.  (maybe hockey pads too?)

coriolan

An early system from 1959:
http://www.outerzone.co.uk/planfiles...rovost_RTP.pdf

Clean

Well it's interesting.  I didn't find any clips of it on youtube, everyone advertises with clips on youtube nowadays.  Then I saw how much he is charging for a 1/2A profile ship. 80 bucks?! 


Nothing nice to say past that.

aspeed

If that is the RSM Distribution place, I thought it was a bit pricey for most stuff.  A good 1/2A stunt plane will have the same number of parts as a full size stunter.  $80 is a lot for just a kit, it is not an ARF though for that price.  There was a profile 1/2 A for $40 something dollars that wasn't too outrageous.  There really isn't that much wood in a half A plane to make it worthwhile buying a kit IMHO.  It is easier to just throw something together, but someone has to keep the companies in business.

coriolan

Buying a kid has the convenience of getting all the wood needed if you have no LHS to shop, so its kind of an added value unless one is very specific about wood selection. A small cottage company doesn't has the buying power as a larger outfit and probably pay the same for their wood as you would at the LHS, they must absorb the cost of waste wood after making these kits and hope to make a reasonable profit for their effort. The real way to save money on hobby stuff is not to have a hobby[&o]
The race to lower prices as already killed many small US/Canadian companies, I consider hobbies in general as a luxury and when I want something enough don't let the price get in the way. I never bought a RTF model as I love building as much as flying, prefer scratch building over kit building because I like doing my own thing and experiment with new ideas. But some kits have something about them that I cannot resist............so I pay the money and enjoy
But in that case $80 for a simple profile 1/2A size is a bit stiff!
http://www.p3models.com/require.htm

aspeed

It does include a motor. It doesn't include the timer, lines,  battery.

Clean

Speed controller, finish

fordman1

You DON'T always have to step back on take of or landing. Not if the plane is built right and you take off on the downwind leg. One can not just casually step back in events like combat or rat race. There are other guys in the circle with you. A combat plane is about as light as they come.

da Rock

Have to step back or not?

Most people won't be flying rat race or combat using a remote system. I doubt if AMA would allow it as well, but that's not the point either.

The important point is about whether or not anyone using the system might encounter slack while flying with the system. Like anything new, beginners to the system might not think about the problem before discovering it is a problem.

From years of flying competition stunters, the one problem area I know exists is landing. Stunters often have the absolute lightest wing loadings you'll find. They seldom have shutoffs and where the engine quits is up to the model airplane gods. So I'd expect that using the remote system would rather quickly put you into an upwind landing situation fairly soon after starting to use the system.

I'd also say there are a number of solutions that could help. Mass helps sustain the centrifugal force needed to fight that wind. Heavier wing loading brings models down quicker. Rat racer fuel shutoffs help determine where the model begins it's landing glide. Lot's of things could help on the landings.

Not using the system with a brand new model is something to consider. How many brand new models have you maidened to discover they're too light on the lines?

Lots of things to consider....

aspeed

Just digging this up again. It seems RSD does not list this any more. Here is an old design https://www.facebook.com/PhillyFlier...type=1&theater if it shows up . Looks kind of cool for being made so long ago.

Joe Fisher

My Feedback: (4)

Reading all of this I am thinking why not just use a 2 channel RC. You can get car radios a lot creeper than $300. My friend built a flying wing back before computer radios. He put the elevator servo on one wing and the aileron servo on the other. He would hold the transmitter at a 45deg. angle it worked good.So you could use a 2 stick car radio put elevators on the searing and fly with the transmitter on its side. Use one control line. When it slacks out you still have elevator and throttle control.

aspeed

That is a good thought. I have tried an indoor micro foamy Suquoi with a line on one wing and a tip weight. It kind of worked. It went slack even with a bit of rudder. It was too fast to fly indoors anyway. I was kind of thinking about the Revolution idea for flying speed. I found that I could fly quite fast until I got in the pylon, and was thinking of a solution. Pretty sure the rules would not allow it, but it sounded like it was interesting. I could see problems with wind. I guess hardly anyone bought the Revolution system.