How do we make this thread more useful  
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 >> Electric Aircraft Universe >> Electric Training >> How do we make this thread more useful
Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
How do we make this thread more useful - 2/28/2008 10:45:51 PM   
ozrcboy



Posts: 1674
Joined: 10/5/2006
From: CanberraACT, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Hi all,

Like a few of you I regularly cruise through the Electric Training forum to see if there are any simple questions I can answer to help get a beginner a little further on their journey to rc eflight.

Probably the thing I notice the most is how infrequently this happens - maybe one or two new posts per day. There is some great sticky info posted here by aejar etc, but I can't help wondering whether this is somehow not giving new flyers what they want, or wehther they just aren't finding their way here. I'm sure that with the collected knowledge pool here just about any question can be tackled (I've got the meaning of life, the universe and everything one covered if it comes up) - No doubt new pilots probably post in the first thread they come across that seems vaguely related. I don't know about most of you - I'm keen to help new pilots, but don't have time to trawl through all the forums just to see if there is someone that my own limited knowledge could assist.

Is there some way we can make this part RCUniverse more useful to people? Would it be better to get more of the new pilots posting here rather than dropping into other threads?

Cheers,
Oz.

_____________________________

ozrcboy
http://www.ozrcflying.com
       Post #: 1

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 3/2/2008 2:11:59 PM   
-pkh-



Posts: 2291
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Emmaus, PA, USA
Status: offline 		I suspect there are few posts here for the following reasons:

1) Most post in the beginner forum under Planes.
2) Many buying the inexpensive beginner park flyers haven't researched the hobby enough to discover RCUniverse, it's just like any other toy to them.

< Message edited by -pkh- -- 3/2/2008 2:12:56 PM >

_____________________________

Paul - Helis: Two Raptor 50V2s, Venture 30CP, Blade CX2
Planes: Twist 150, Twist 60, Tribute 36, GP .40 Mustang

(in reply to ozrcboy)
       Post #: 2

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 3/6/2008 8:51:33 PM   
Swift427



Posts: 482
Joined: 3/15/2007
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Status: offline 		How did our ancestors ever survive before air conditioning and McDonalds.
How did our model airplane predecessors exist and survive before the internet.

There is NO substitute for --

1) Practice, Practice, Practice
2) Rubbing shoulders with other model airplane enthusiasts
3) Reading articles and searching internet rc flying websites.

If there's a problem with the internet it's our insatiability for immediate gratification.

Farmers found the time to stop at the fenceline to visit with the neighbor when horses were employed. Once the tractor came on the scene farmers didn't have time to stop and visit with the neighbor.



_____________________________

Never Give Up, Never Slow Down, Never Grow Old, and Never Ever Die Young

(in reply to ozrcboy)
       Post #: 3

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 3/8/2008 9:04:42 PM   
Swift427



Posts: 482
Joined: 3/15/2007
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ozrcboy,

Like a few of you I regularly cruise through the Electric Training forum to see if there are any simple questions I can answer to help get a beginner a little further on their journey to rc eflight.



OK excuse my seemingly off track reply that was not intended to be demeaning.


One issue that needs ATTENTION that is not so consciously obvious, but possibly a major reason for your concern/post is the following. Because this conundrum is not so obvious it eludes many of us and is not easy to address in 25 words or less. This discussion is not about whether it is better for a beginner to buy a 3-channel or a 4-channel as his first trainer, but rather the general assessment of—3-channel RTF electrics(primarily foamies). Not 3-channel ARFs or 3-channel RR electrics or 3-channel PNP. The easiest/least relatively inexpensive plane for most everyone getting started in this hobby(that can withstand some abuse/crashing) is a 2-channel electric AeroHog foamy or a 3-channel RTF electric foamy from a seemingly endless pipeline of choices to satisfy every appetite and need—OR MAYBE NOT?

The following observation is from surfing RC websites and my own newbie experiences over the past 11 months—specifically ‘3-channel RTF electrics.’ A world class flight training instructor (first recognized for his signature Knife Edge maneuvers and winner of the 1998 coveted TOC—TournamentOfChampions) doesn’t teach rudder control(except for runway steering) in any of his basic flying lessons included in the FS ONE Simulator. His preference for the three most important channels for any beginner to concentrate on FIRST learning(once in the air or when hand launching) are throttle/elevator/aileron. He introduces his basic lessons by telling the viewers that they need to learn aileron control before rudder control. It’s only in the advanced lessons of 3D (snap rolls, knife edge slides, etc) that this top flight instructor introduces the viewer to rudder control (4-channel).

The reason I didn’t buy a 3-channel RTF SuperCub(even though the LHS thought I should) as my first plane was because it didn’t have ailerons. I thought I could save some money in the long run by buying the Aerobird Swift(3-channel RTF throttle/elevator/aileron) and the Stryker 27C(3-channel t/e/a) even though they are marketed for intermediate pilots. Everyone thinks they’re above average and besides I thought after several flights or after a few months I’d be an intermediate. I bought both planes as much for my son as myself so the generic plain Jane SuperCub didn’t look as appealing as the Aerobird Swift and Stryker. I thought the Stryker would be more enjoyable for my son to fly. He tried the flying the Stryker on the FS One Simulator, but kept crashing and so we decided to just go for the gusto. Well, you can probably guess what happened. A common train of thought among the jet set seems to be—“If you haven’t crashed lately you must be doing something wrong” so I just accepted our unfortunate experience as a part of the learning curve.

Critterhunter has a thread about how to make a bullet proof Stryker, and the official Stryker thread(s) with thousands of replies is a testimony to a prevalent pedal to the metal speed mentality. I find it interesting that Critterhunters latest thread in the FoamyForum is about building a one aileron fixed rudder foamy from scratch. This affordable plane looks to be the ‘perfect aileron trainer’ that has eluded our never-ending quest for a consensus on an affordable aileron electric trainer that can take some abuse and keep on ticking without ticking us off. Here is the link—http://www.qnet.com/~skif/plane.html I can’t help but wonder if this is that elusive electric 3-channel aileron trainer the majority of us should have first crashed, repaired, modified and cut our teeth on before we ever gave in to our burning desire for a Stryker or some other cool colorful looking bird. Enquiring minds would like to know if Critterhunter finally got feedup repairing, modifying, repairing, modifying, … his Stryker to the point that he is now going back to the basics and building the kind of plane that for many a newbie would have been much better than the one that caught their eye or the eye of the person that got them interested in the hobby. Why doesn’t HobbyZone, ParkZone, Hobby-Lobby, or any company in the WholeWideWorld market a RTF 3-channel throttle/elevator/aileron(1or2) electric foamy???

Whether it was me or other contributors to these electric forums many of us jumped in and bought a plane that was probably money that should have been spent on a RTF 3-channel t/e/a electric foamy trainer, except there isn’t a readily available supply, if one even exists. Isn’t this the primary reason why forum after forum we have a continous barrage of newbies and others wondering/opinonating what’s the better 3-channel RTF electric trainer for the money. And even more perplexing/troublesome is the engraining preponderance that 3-channel RTF aileron electrics are only for more advanced pilots and that beginners need to master rudder control before aileron.

What I’m noticing in some of these forum threads is that some are going back to the basics and find more enjoyment flying a plane like an EasyStar after experiencing too many crashes and hours spent repairing and modifying a plane like an Aerobird Swift or Stryker. It’s now apparent to me that a brushless SuperCub with ailerons and a fixed rudder would be a very suitable aileron trainer with the option to someday upgrade it to 4-channel t/e/a/r. Unfortunately, it costs more to manufacture a 3-channel RTF aileron foamy, but the irony is that we all spend/waste money on some of these planes that we later discover was money that could/should have been spent more wisely. And for quality at a reasonable price it will never get any better then—Made In China. So, the argument that it costs more to manufatcure a 3-channel t/e/a/ than a t/e/r doesn't really make sense when you consider that for decades people learned to fly even more expensive 4-channel glow/gas and they didn't use plastic money.

The SPAD concept and the simplicity of Critterhunters commonsense homebuilt aileron plane(about as inexpensive as it get) is one of those ironies that are simply too practical. It’s a sad commentary on the world of RTF electrics that there isn’t a relatively inexpensive 3-channel RTF aileron foamy trainer available in every LHS in America. It’s also a sad commentary on our own haste makes waste rush for the Glitz&Gusto. Flying model airplanes(made in China) and all the technology that comes with it doesn’t have to cost an arm and a leg. If most of us were to take an inventory of all the money we’ve spent and go back and spend it again we’d be able to buy a plane that we probably now only dream about someday owning.


_____________________________

Never Give Up, Never Slow Down, Never Grow Old, and Never Ever Die Young

(in reply to -pkh-)
       Post #: 4

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 3/12/2008 3:30:36 AM   
ozrcboy



Posts: 1674
Joined: 10/5/2006
From: CanberraACT, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Hi Swift,

Thanks for your contribution.

You seem strongly focussed on the idea of providing a simple tough trainer like AET RTF to cut through the plethora and complexity of RTF 3 channel RET planes. To me that seems a little like - yes, there are too many small cars to choose from - just buy a motorbike instead. Which I guess also means I don't accept your proposition that beginners, if they are learning by themselves, are better of with an AET bird - even a robust/easy to fly/easy to repair one.

When you are taught to fly a real aircraft you are taught to fly it with the most important controls relative to its design. Because real aircraft cost a lot of money they don't tend to build fly by rudder ones, but in model aviation building rudder only planes is not only possible, but simpler and cheaper than aileron planes. A fixed wing with no moving surfaces is easier to construct. Further, by putting control surfaces further from the likely points of impact you make the aircraft more robust. These concerns with respect to robustness are also less important with real aircraft - it is simply best to work from the assumption that crashing real planes is very bad and should be avoided at all costs.

When you learn to fly a real plane you have an instructor sitting next to you - they take over if things go bad. In general orientation is easer, but real planes take hundreds of feet to recover from stalls, they fly at frightening speeds (stall speed on a 162 is 50knots IIRC - about 100km/hr) - I'm not saying there are no parallels with RC flying, but you need to be conscious that they aren't the same thing for a number of reasons.

The predominant reasons that beginners are steered (no pun intended) towards rudder planes is a combination of robustness, but more importantly, what happens to the aircraft when it rolls past 90 degrees. At 5 metres altitude if you put an RET into a high banked turn when it stall turns you will still recover in time with nothing more than up elevator - a natural reaction for the beginner. When you put an AET past 90 degrees roll the beginner's natural elevator input just starts making the plane perform tight descending circles (if it's well past 90 they might even pull straight to the ground). By the time it has completed half a circuit they have lost orientation and the plane is headed for the ground.

Likewise if you lose airspeed in a high banked turn and stall - the RET naturally falls into a stall turn. The AET maintains orientation and points it's nose at the ground - think quick.

No one here (I think) recommends RETs because 1) beginners need to do their time before they have fun, or 2) to weed out those that don't have enough money, or 3) think it is important you know how to fly on the rudder. They recommend RETs because they are the easiest way for a person to learn to fly by themselves. A well made RET doesn't handle that differently in the air to an AET (you even set rudder up on the normal aileron stick), until you get into those critical situations where the wings come past 90 degrees - and that is why the RET is recommended - because it naturally gets itself out of those situations, while the AET needs to be flown out of the situation.

As for buying that perfect plane with all the money we waste on other planes - perhaps we have here the genesis of the actual problem. Many people when they enter the hobby try to buy the plane they want to fly eventually first. As you say, everyone thinks they are above average, wants a plane that is beyond their abilities, and gets into trouble. Sadly many of them don't stick around - a shame for all of us. Some however, start working their way backwards towards where they should have started. I'm not trying to be unkind, and I've read through your multiple posts in a couple of different places here at RCU where I lurk, but I'm going to suggest you are currently in that working back phase.

The reason there aren't more RTF aileron trainers out there is, I believe, because there isn't a market for them. Those that started on an RTF RET are going to either try and use their electronics from their previous plane for the aileron trainer, or buy a major radio setup. From this perspective there are plenty of good aileron trainers out there - the GWS estarter and the Multiplex Minimag both come to mind. Those that bought a more advance plane - say a PZ P51 are either out of the hobby, one of those exceptionally gifted people who do pick it up without a problem, or they have more or less gone back to the beginning after getting some advice (often after spending hundred on repairs).

Okay - my apologies for such a long post - I didn't have time to write a short one. Also apologies if the language seems strong or confrontational - I wanted you to know why I disagree with you, but don't want it to be personal.

All the best with your RC adventures. If you wish to discuss I'm always here lurking somewhere.

Cheers,
Oz.

_____________________________

ozrcboy
http://www.ozrcflying.com

(in reply to Swift427)
       Post #: 5

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 3/12/2008 6:54:08 PM   
Swift427



Posts: 482
Joined: 3/15/2007
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Status: offline 		There are several ways I could respond to your aptly expressed relevant reply. Some of your reply was comparing apples to oranges, but that is a big reason why there is--how do I say it other than the differing viewpoints with respect to this hobby from the mindset and wallet of a flyer that learned via a club instructor and a buddy box--to--the minset and wallet of a parkflyer having first learned via Airhogs, other 2C toy planes and a 3C r/e/t plane all by himself.

I am going to post the following on another RC website as if I were a 15 year old as I believe this is a very valid approach. Having said that you and others may still reply a little differently, and that is OK as you offer additional insight into the reasoning behind your reply to a younger self-instructed enthusiast. What would be your best suggestive encouragement in a KIS 33 words or less reply? However, don't feel as if you have to stop at 33 words for the purposes of this thread by Ozrcboy.

Post TITLE - 3c aleron plane

Post CONTENTS -
no dad to help build 3C foam flyer
mom to busy
4c aleron more $$$$$$$$
3c aleron less $$$$
3c aerobird swift is Z3
3C stryker is $$$$$$$$
already have helicopter
already fly 3c rudder
learn to fly by myself
field in backyard
what is available
toyrus walmart radioshack hobbystore inet





_____________________________

Never Give Up, Never Slow Down, Never Grow Old, and Never Ever Die Young

(in reply to ozrcboy)
       Post #: 6

RE: How do we make this thread more useful - 4/7/2008 12:21:40 AM   
saucerguy


 

Posts: 460
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: , WA, USA
Status: offline 		The largest obstical those new to this hobby have to overcome is simply to understand the terminology. I remember from my own experiences, where I had to simply skip words in order to read through the entire post, then come back and ask what they meant by CA, TX, RX, ESC, etc. etc. etc. it was really frustrating and even though there are always threads where people post the meanings of these, we really should dumb it down when you are in the beginners section, knowing full well, the message must be clear for the laymen that has never heard of any of the lingo to understand.

When I post stuff designed for the new pilot, I'll interject throughout it with an explanation of the meanings, TX "transmitter" for example, I can then continue to write TX afterwards, hoping the new pilot not only learned from the article, they learned some of the lingo as well which will aid them while they read more advanced stuff. This is the very reason many ignore the boards, go by an RTF "ready to fly" plane and sometimes they make good choices, many other times, they'll just hit the LHS "local hobby shop" and ask for advice there, we all know not all LHS are the same.

Something else that's important is not to argue when giving advice, there is nothing more confusing to a new pilot that has a question, only to find the experts insisting upon contradicting perspectives. We really should step back, for example, if the guy asks what the best glue to use to repair a foamie, don't debate the subatomic structure of foam safe CA "super glue" having denser molecular properties then hot glue, because all these guys want to do for now is make a simple repair and go flying again, they'll choose just how anal retentive they want to be afterwards.

(in reply to Swift427)
       Post #: 7

Page:   [1]
All Forums >> Electric Aircraft Universe >> Electric Training >> How do we make this thread more useful
Page: [1]





Jump to:


Google 



Search | Marketplace | Event Calendar | Local Clubs | Magazine | Product Ratings | New Products | Discussion Forums

Photo Gallery | Member Video Posts | RCU Video Gallery | Instructor Search | Field|Track|Marina Search

Advertisers | Hobby Vendor Resources | Rate Manufacturers | Sign In/Sign Up

SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America

Kaango.com Classifieds

1.969RCU1