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 >> Why not move on to R/C ? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 3:23:03 PM   
Strykaas



Posts: 4087
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Paris, FRANCE
Status: offline
Hello,

I'm just wondering why you R/C control line pilots do not move on to R/C controlled aircraft, which provide more realistic flight ?

_____________________________

ProBro #2077
http://image2-0.rcuniverse.com/e1/forum/upfiles/57402/Nl29490.jpg
       Post #: 1

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 3:27:11 PM   
David Cutler



Posts: 2163
Joined: 9/13/2002
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: offline
Control line flying isn't really a 'poor man's RC' as you are implying. It's entirely different, using different skills and aims.

If you really want an exciting time, try control line combat. You spend all the time much closer to earth and the ground is just as hard as for RC!

-David C.

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 2

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 4:07:34 PM   
catdaddy2


 

Posts: 17
Joined: 10/17/2002
From: Skiatook, OK, USA
Status: offline
I did "move on to RC" after several years I couldn't wait to move back to CL.

I found RC to be way to much like a video game. It just wasn't fun.
Started flying 75 and 80 mph CL combat.
60ft from the ground...now that is a rush! plus the feel of the plane is much better feedback than a transmitter.

regards,
catdaddy

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 3

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 4:10:12 PM   
downunder



Posts: 3168
Joined: 10/10/2002
From: Adelaide, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline
It's a common misconception that RC is more like REAL flying. RC has all the feel of a simulator without the reset button whereas with CL you feel directly how the model is reacting to the wind and your control inputs. In other words, it puts you in the pilot's seat (but without the G forces, luckily). We routinely fly within a tenth of a second from total destruction with a slow moving stunt plane (13 times in every flight) and far less than that with a combat plane as Dave mentioned.

I fly both types and I can quite honestly say that I get far more sheer enjoyment flying CL. OK, I'll admit that CL is second nature to me and I'm a very average RC flier but I've yet to see an RC pilot who LOOKS like he's having fun. And isn't it all about having fun?

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 4

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 4:38:42 PM   
Bigiron13



Posts: 13
Joined: 10/21/2002
From: KS
Status: offline
Went there , Done that --- came back up to UC. I tried RC for several years (had a very goos tutor I might add). I had NO feel of what the plane was doing and there was NO rush of the low altitude maneuvering that I get with UC. My tutor said "I was moving UP" in model aviation, but I found that he had his controls reversed. I went inverted and came back UP to UC and will stay here.
Bigiron

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 5

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 6:28:28 PM   
Sport_Pilot



Posts: 7639
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: Acworth, GA, USA
Status: online
I fly both and prefer R/C. I like U/C for the feel and the thrill flying close to the ground. But if I fly it too much I get bored with just two dimensions after a while, even though I have never mastered it. If I just do U/C several times a year it stays exciting.

Course you can fly R.C close to the ground too! Without the feedback it is somewhat harder to do. Also it can get expensive after a while!

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 6

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 6:44:19 PM   
gcb



Posts: 2383
Joined: 10/24/2002
From: Port Ewen, NY, USA
Status: offline
Sure you can get the same rush with RC. Just point your plane at the ground and pull out inverted at five feet after as close to a five foot radius as you can get.

Actually, models is models. You can get a rush by making a HL glider stay up a few seconds longer than before.

George

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 7

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 6:58:59 PM   
Sport_Pilot



Posts: 7639
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: Acworth, GA, USA
Status: online
quote:

You can get a rush by making a HL glider stay up a few seconds longer than before.


It's intresting, but far from a rush.

(in reply to gcb)
       Post #: 8

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 7:20:32 PM   
NitroWoman



Posts: 327
Joined: 6/30/2002
From: Venus, USA
Status: offline
I don't know why some people think Controline is somehow inferior and it is such a step up to R/C. I fly both and I love both. They are equally rewarding but in different ways. I'm not going to repeat all the previous replies but I do agree with all of them. Go to the Nats sometime and wander over to the C/L combat circles. Take a look at the spectators and you will notice an awful lot of R/Cer's standing there with their mouths open in awe. Just remember, it's all good, and it's all fun.

< Message edited by NitroWoman -- 9/25/2003 7:21:38 PM >


_____________________________

Nitromethane...My Testosterone Substitute.
If you can read, Thank a Teacher. If you can read English, Thank a Veteran.

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 9

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 8:05:43 PM   
R8893


 

Posts: 395
Joined: 10/19/2002
From: Cincinnati, OH,
Status: offline
I also fly both R/C and C/L. I have fun with both although in the last year I have had more fun with C/L because I have challenged myself to learn the complete stunt pattern. I did not push to improve my R/C flying this year. I wish I was good enough at modeling to fly free-flight! That is a real challenge for those of us who build and trim our own models. I've been doing C/L for over 40 years and R/C for 30. I'm more interested in the competition side of C/L and there are many more contests to attend within a reasonable driving distance(Scale and stunt). R/C better fulfills the social aspects of the hobby due to there being so many more participants. They are both all about airplanes; the expanded horizon gives more opportunity to have a good time.

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 10

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 9:32:47 PM   
Strykaas



Posts: 4087
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Paris, FRANCE
Status: offline
Ok, I did not mean U/C was inferior to R/C. But I think these are two different things and moving in 3D is essential for me. Pattern flying, ... adds a lot to the thing. Managin more than ten channels on one single aircraft make it even more real... Seaplanes ...etc etc...
Even if I do not have any force feedback, I still quite understand what's going on in my aircraft, and that's very close to flying a real aircraft.

Not bashing U/C, definitely : just have fun !

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 11

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/25/2003 11:18:58 PM   
William Robison



Posts: 20269
Joined: 11/10/2002
From: Mary Esther, Florida, FL, USA
Status: offline
At the "Brass Tacks" level, it's apples and oranges.

Some enjoy one, some enjoy the other, and a lot of us enjoy both.

The R/C'ers have to admit c/l doesn't need anywhere nearly so much space.

But then there are the "Park Fliers."

Bill.


_____________________________

Real Airplanes have Two Engines
AMA 25139 - More than 40 years.

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 12

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/26/2003 12:09:47 AM   
GrnBrt



Posts: 6992
Joined: 12/5/2001
From: Everett, WA, USA
Status: offline
Some of my fondest memories are from my U/C days, and that goes way back!! I flew stunt and combat and yes it was a rush big time. In combat I flew a Voodoo and they were new on the market, now that dates me, and the engine was a torpedo .35. The one person I could never beat was Jack Stafford, yes he was in U/C before R/C and he would show no mercy, ah the memories!!!!


_____________________________

Art Grabow SR
Senior forum Manager

US Army Special forces, mess with the best, die like the rest!

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 13

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/26/2003 2:09:07 AM   
Clean



Posts: 990
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Parkville, MO, USA
Status: offline
When I finally got a job in High school, after which I had money to start flying something other than the Cox plastic jobbies and Free Flight airplanes, I started with RC airplanes. Later I graduated to Control Line airplanes. Now I fly everything, FF, RC and Control line from sport ships to pattern, scale and Combat. I've got a cute little asymetrical 1/2a powered ff helicopter that has given me more joy than most of the other aircraft I have. And as far as RC is concerend, I am Mr Clean of RCCA Combat fame. Yup, world famous in Missouri anyways, I've done it all and still do.

But I've swapped back to flying control line for the last couple years. I actually wouldn't have gone back to RC if I hadn't moved to a town where the people who were flying CL were so spread out we never got to fly together. It's just not the same. RC IS too much like a video game. I can get more thrill out of flying a simulator and thanks to my SPAD connections rebuilding is just about as fast as a simulator RC combat made sport flying just about pointless and not exciting. I do fly off water once or twice a year, that's kinda fun. But really it's just an excuse to go hang out with my buddies. When I fly CL, I work at the pattern, or I help others get up and going or give check rides to kids in the park. Nothing I ever did in RC is as fun as getting up in a mass fly of more than 5 people in the CL circle, now THAT's fun. I must admit that if I lived closer to a good slope it might be hard for me to choose between slope flying or CL, but eventually my love for those little engines would win me over. I love the smell of castor or the perfumed smell of synthetic oil. Gotta love throwing your airplane over the edge and flying till the batteries go down too, hmmmm.

This is like asking someone why they don't move off Golf and move up to Tennis. No, this is like asking someone why they don't move up from Steeple chase to Polo, yeah, both of the them use horses just like both RC and CL use airplanes. The airplane is really just a coincidence, the two have many other differences.

(in reply to GrnBrt)
       Post #: 14

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/26/2003 2:33:25 AM   
Jim Thomerson



Posts: 2792
Joined: 10/9/2002
From: Austin, TX, USA
Status: offline
I've flown power freeflight and hand launch glder competitively, have done CL racing and am now flying CL stunt. RC has never interested me. I have had a couple of buddy box flights. I'm thinking I would like to do some sport freeflight someday and it would be nice if they would come back to me, so I may take up RC at the parkflyer level someday.

Jim

(in reply to Strykaas)
       Post #: 15

RE: Why not move on to R/C ? - 9/26/2003 3:58:26 AM   
Clean



Posts: 990
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Parkville, MO, USA
Status: offline
I want to build a bigger OT FF, haven't picked one out yet. But I have several Torp 19's, 29 or 35's that I want to put on one and let rip. Problem is around here I'll probably never see it again. Too much scrub brush, the whole state is nothing but scrub. Still, I've always gotten my Charybdis back. I suppose I could put a single channel rudder on, but that just doesn't seem like cricket.

I have flown my mini starduster with .010 power, got a 5 minute flight on it, straight as a string. Seems my trim fell off and the sucker just went straight ahead. Thank heavens I remembered to light the DT fuse!

(in reply to Jim Thomerson)