RE: Why not move on to R/C ?  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       



All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Control Lines >> RE: Why not move on to R/C ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/27/2003 5:48:09 AM   
littlefly



Posts: 90
Joined: 1/20/2002
From: Crawfordville, FL, USA
Status: offline
He better not be inferring that 5-man combat is tame. Just like Downunder described, but 5 flyers in the ring at a time! Started flying that with the grown men when I was eight years old. Flying Bill's favorite target--"Slight Freak" with Torpedo 35. Had a damed good time from 1960 to 1970. Got out of hobby, came back in 1988 and went 1/2a control line with my nephew and back into the R/c end.
LOVE IT ALL.... HAVE A BALL...
51 now...STILL LOVE IT ALL!!


littlefly

_____________________________

littlefly
I fly smallfry!!

(in reply to downunder)
       Post #: 26

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/4/2003 9:18:36 PM   
goldguy


 

Posts: 339
Joined: 11/7/2002
From: Nanaimo, BC, CANADA
Status: offline 		Some of us are "modelers" and enjoy all forms of the hobby, U/C, F/F and R/C. May new modelers miss out on all the fun, going directly into R/C as that's what is the most visiable in the magazines and at the local fields. Afterall, it's a consumer driven business, just look at electric today as compared to one year ago. Many new modelers are sport pilots and not modelers. We have newbies locally that have to get someone else to put their BARFs together for them and fix them when they crash. They miss out on the fun of being creative, solving problems, learning the math of aeronautics, building, designing and dreaming!!!

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 27

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/6/2003 7:41:24 PM   
jessiej



Posts: 1803
Joined: 7/6/2003
From: STATESBORO, GA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Many new modelers are sport pilots and not modelers. We have newbies locally that have to get someone else to put their BARFs together for them and fix them when they crash. They miss out on the fun of being creative, solving problems, learning the math of aeronautics, building, designing and dreaming!!!


The BARF crowd does indeed miss a lot. I suppose we live in the age of instant gratification. It seems that many want an engine that needs no break in or tuning to bolt into their ready-to-fly and go flying with neither effort or learning.

Personally I get a great deal of pleasure from building and tinkering with engines (both model and motorcycle). These activities have the additional advantage of not being hampered by weather or darkness.

I get a lot of satisfaction from seeing my own creation fly. For me a arf would be like displaying a trophy won by someone else.

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 28

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/8/2003 11:30:33 PM   
RRyan



Posts: 242
Joined: 10/10/2002
From: Belleville, MI, USA
Status: offline 		Well,

I guess I'll get in here too, I haven't been here for a long time, don't even remember if I've ever posted here or not.

Anyway, what many of you are saying is so true, I am a scratch builder mainly, a Free Flighter first but have and do enjoy all 3 disciplines. My Free Flight activity has slowed a little over the last few years because I've been enjoying my return to CL Stunt. I can't remember NOT building model airplanes. I learned to fly RC on escapements in the '50's, CL too, on my Dad's shoulders flying a Firebaby. Free Flight was the first I competed in and that started at age 11, CL just in the last few years. I like RC and fly some vintage stuff, but the fact is its not near as much fun for me as FF or Stunt.

Randy

< Message edited by RRyan -- 10/14/2003 12:17:24 AM >

_____________________________

Randy Ryan
AMA 8500, SAM 36, BO all my own M's

(in reply to jessiej)
       Post #: 29

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/9/2003 4:51:37 PM   
gcb



Posts: 2383
Joined: 10/24/2002
From: Port Ewen, NY, USA
Status: offline 		Escapements, those were the days. Engine powered models with rubber band powered controls. Some flew pulse, some flew tone. Then there was the compound escapements, and, and, and...sorry.
May those days RIP.

George

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 30

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/9/2003 5:05:17 PM   
RRyan



Posts: 242
Joined: 10/10/2002
From: Belleville, MI, USA
Status: offline 		George,

There are some crazies doing it again. Of course their using good radio equipment but modifying to drive escapement relays etc. I thought about it, but I built a Guillows Trixter Beam and try as I may to retrain myself I ended up with 3 channels.

Pulse was fun too, I still have my Min-x gear, the Rand LR-3 (3 function actuator) would work flawlessly on the bench, but once at the field it would strip or rather lose a gear tooth and I'd end up a spectator, there were alot of us then, remember. A good day was only minor damage sustained in 1 flight using an full tank of fuel. Touch and goes?? Ha! touch was more like impact, no more go after that.

Randy

< Message edited by RRyan -- 10/10/2003 10:49:53 AM >

_____________________________

Randy Ryan
AMA 8500, SAM 36, BO all my own M's

(in reply to gcb)
       Post #: 31

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/10/2003 6:14:28 AM   
kdheath



Posts: 1275
Joined: 11/9/2002
From: Rochester, MN, USA
Status: offline 		Lessee. CL stunt and sport 1/2A to 40 size. RC sport, pattern, Q-500, sailplane, contest fun fly. FF HLG, catapault, P-30, indoor peanut, A-6, stick, Phantom Flash. Trains in N, HO including scratch and craftsman kit, and O gauge. Occasional plastic car kit. Occasional rocket for the kid.

Move on to WHAT?

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 32

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/10/2003 11:54:46 PM   
Strykaas



Posts: 4087
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Paris, FRANCE
Status: offline 		Kdeath. It's OK for u

_____________________________

ProBro #2077
http://image2-0.rcuniverse.com/e1/forum/upfiles/57402/Nl29490.jpg

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 33

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/11/2003 7:24:31 PM   
Shortman



Posts: 5971
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Clovis, CA, USA
Status: offline 		I have a question for Control Line pilots though, is there a limit though to the flying manuevers one can do. Wouldn't you get bored being able to have such a small envelope of flying manuevers. Seems like its more a precision/combat sport and thats it. I did control line when I was younger but R/C flying seems more involving and more to do.


_____________________________

Steven Carroll
AMA# 738035

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 34

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/11/2003 11:46:15 PM   
Jim Thomerson



Posts: 2792
Joined: 10/9/2002
From: Austin, TX, USA
Status: offline 		It is true that you can't roll the airplane. Control line racing is great fun, much more exciting than RC Pylon racing because of manditory pit stops, in my opinion. I've been flying CL Precision Aerobatics since my knees told me that I was no longer a racing pitperson. About 25 years now. The Modern Precision Aerobatic pattern is a sequence of 15 maneuvers. I find that the pattern is interesting, not boring, to practice because each maneuver is different and offers different challenges in doing it precicely and correctly. As you said, a precision event. Combat is fun to watch, and takes great skill to fly well. Of course, if you don't wish to compete, you can build an airplane and do whatever you can with it within the limitations of the situation. By the by, I have read an article about flying tethered RC. Not clear why one would want to.

Jim

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 35

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/12/2003 2:39:34 AM   
Clean



Posts: 990
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Parkville, MO, USA
Status: offline 		I beleive if you go out to the RC field and watch, you'll find the majority of RC flying is just folks going around in circles with an occasional loop from time to time. Rolls are used to point the airplane in another direction. Aerobatics and 3D guys really are the only ones to use the whole flihgt envelope, that and more advanced sport pilots. Then of course there is RC combat which made the rest of RC flying to mundane for me to worry about.

(in reply to Jim Thomerson)
       Post #: 36

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/12/2003 4:08:13 AM   
Shortman



Posts: 5971
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Clovis, CA, USA
Status: offline 		Yeah, I like to push the flight envelope you could say with flying such as 3D. One other thing, R/C seems to evolve different planes that are completely different from the next. Like the SPAD/PBF coroplast planes that are really a whole new breed. Profile planes much like the control line planes are mainly used for 3d flying because they excell at it. Has anyone ever done a completely different new thing that changed control line so to speak?


_____________________________

Steven Carroll
AMA# 738035

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 37

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/12/2003 9:07:39 AM   
Strykaas



Posts: 4087
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Paris, FRANCE
Status: offline 		I agree Shortman,

As time goes on, R/C offers more and more !

For example 3D flight. Today, an increasing number of 3D aircraft kits are available. It's really trendy...



_____________________________

ProBro #2077
http://image2-0.rcuniverse.com/e1/forum/upfiles/57402/Nl29490.jpg

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 38

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/12/2003 3:36:44 PM   
gcb



Posts: 2383
Joined: 10/24/2002
From: Port Ewen, NY, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shortman
I have a question for Control Line pilots though, is there a limit though to the flying manuevers one can do.
Well, you can't do a four point roll (on purpose ).

quote:

Wouldn't you get bored being able to have such a small envelope of flying maneuvers.
Not really. You make up for it with the smaller maneuvers and the instant feedback through the lines.

quote:

Seems like its more a precision/combat sport and thats it.
Not exactly. Although most competition oriented people lean toward stunt or combat there are other types of models such as scale, carrier, racing, fun (low key competition) events, and of course, sport.

quote:

I did control line when I was younger but R/C flying seems more involving and more to do.
You probably had a minimal involvement with CL because you were more interested in RC...and that's OK. All forms of modeling can be fun and interesting. On my workbench at this time are two 1/2A CL "Scientific" biplanes and a 1/2A Q-Tee (3-channel). I like all forms of modeling but currently only participate in CLPA (stunt) and a little RC. I would like to develop good FF skills eventually.
Of course this is only one person's opinion

George

(in reply to Shortman)
       Post #: 39

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 10/12/2003 10:58:35 PM   
sigrun



Posts: 1023
Joined: 7/18/2003
From: Dunnunda, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline
quote:

I have a question for Control Line pilots though, is there a limit though to the flying manuevers one can do. Wouldn't you get bored being able to have such a small envelope of flying manuevers.


Perhaps you're encumbered with a severely limited perspective exacerbated by a strong personal preference bias, plus I suspect, influenced by a tinge of irrational R/C elitist nonsense (?).

Or to put it another way to reflect that, don't you think R/C is boring? After all, all R/C pylon pilots do is fly around a rectangular course at full throttle, and your average R/C sport flyer has exhausted his entire envelope with a loop and aileron roll....if in fact he can manage those.

I suspect that most here who fly C/L, and particularly those who fly only C/L take umbridge at the intonation of the original statement veiled as a question that C/L is flown by dinosaurs suffering from dementia or those not bright enough "move on" to R/C.

The question itself is silly, and one doesn't have to look for what the original poster was seeking by how he framed his question.

As for why? Take up the C/L FAI F2D challenge and see how "boring" it is. Compared to flying a FMJ on LJRs or the quest for fastest circuit qualifying lap on a 250GP bike, F2D rates the same pure adrenaline punch compressed into 4 minutes, albeit without the physical danger or expense. Exciting yes. Challenging yes. Boring...well that depends upon each individual's perspective.

Personally I find all model aviation racing events boring be they R/C or C/L, even when participating. Spectating, I'd rather watch grass grow...but there you are. To some, they become so obsessed by their chosen interest that their perspectives are narrowed and their lives become all consumed by it. As for those R/C Pattern or C/L Stunt fliers who become equally fanatical...better we don't even go there.

We're all individuals. There is no inferiority superiority afforded by either R/C or C/L , only a fashionability which affects those same silly people who depend upon their sense of worth and acceptance from others from being seen in the right label clothing, wearing the fashion of the moment shades and displaying all the other status accoutrements endorsed by the 'cool' people pushed by marketing monkeys. The salient question really is why not move on to C/L?

(in reply to Shortman)
       Post #: 40