wojtek

My Feedback: (73)

I got a new one now , no more rally racing for me.... Technically that was my wife's Benz, and man was I introuble at home (can husbands get grounded ?? )


Wojtek

MLaCoste

My Feedback: (15)

Okay, then as a US taxpayer, I'm sure you are totally against all the UAV projects too. 60% of the total weight of a 20,000 lb. Darkstar UAV is jet fuel. Let's not forget that a UAV is just a really large EXPENSIVE RC airframe, sometimes flown by guys with less RC experience than your average RC jet pilot. It takes A LOT of experience and skill to pilot a project like the B-52. Where do you think the UAV program got it's roots from? Guys like him that aren't afraid to push the envelope.

I for one, take my hat off to him, his craftsmanship, piloting skills and sence of adventure. Great job!!!

Regards,
Mark

Don Perry

My Feedback: (51)

I agree with some of the above posts.

There is NO SUCH THING AS A CHEAP HOBBY!!

I still fight comments everyday at my field "The DORKS in OKC" about how stupid it is to spend that kind of money on "Toys".

Any way I believe in new cutting edge technology!

As the "Old Farts" can't stand anything new (or better than there stuff) at my field!

LGM Graphix

My Feedback: (22)

It's really quite funny about the money spent on RC jets, on one hand, many people in our club use me and my jets as justification to their wives for buying a new 1.20 4 stroke, and on the other hand, jets may be financially at the top in the RC world, but in the world of "toys" they don't even come close. I have a friend who purchased his new "toy" in the spring of 2003, a brand new Ferrari 360 Modena for a cool $325,000 Canadian dollars. I know a couple people who have their $100,000 dodge Viper for a "toy" and people with anywhere between $40,000 and $100,000 tied up in a boat that they can use 10 times a year.

Hobbies are like any other facet of life, you prioritize the most important things, and put your money into them.
I know many people who don't understand where I can come up with the money for RC jets. Well, I've had some very good deals on jet stuff and my actual investment is pretty low, but beyond that, I don't smoke, I don't drink often, I don't use drugs, and I don't go out every night to movies or dinner or things like that. In Alberta, the average price for a pack of cigarettes is $11, if you smoke a pack a day (like most smokers I know do) that is $4015 a year for cigarettes alone!!! That will darn near get you a Kangaroo and PST600 and those are less likely to kill you!

Yeah, it's expensive, but that doesn't make it stupid, it doesn't make it foolish, it makes it a hobby, something you love to do. So maybe we as RC jet pilots are a little eccentric, I'm ok with that, but I'm certainly not stupid

edit: how come when you spell the word D O D G E without spaces it comes out as dodge?

CJ2002

Gordon flew his B-52 at Wroughton today - sight and sound was awesome or, as us Brits would say.....'the dog's nuts'!

Cheers,

Dick

mair

My Feedback: (2)

From my point of view, I think that these guys are crazy! But I would like to see it fly!!! I would actually like to fly it!!! I know a lot of guy's out at the field I fly at who think we're crazy for spending the money that we do on our jets. But I bet they would trade us places in a heartbeat if they could.

scubyfan

There's already video of it flying on the Wren page.

Paul Turbine Jet Man

There is no way that this B-52 project is stupid

This is stupid. Think of the real B-52’s when they were in action in the wars think of how much they cost Millions $$$$ then think about the amount of destruction they caused Billions $$$$ and then think about the human life that was lost. that is stupid.

This guy has decided to build something that nobody else has ever built before and it works, the self satisfaction he would receive from such a project becoming a success is priceless and all down to earth jet modellers would respect the effort and time he ahs inverted i such a magical aircraft.

I say well done to all involved in this project.

dizza

Your homebuilt couldn't be potentially dangerous? It can't bring harm to anyone?

David

Johng

My Feedback: (4)

Just file schmelf in the pinhead file and move on. Why he feels the need to go to a forum dedicated to such models and then criticize one is beyond me. Must have a short prop on that homebuilt. [sm=devious.gif]

Anyway, I didn't get to see the latest B-52 movies because Wren pulled them. To much bandwidth being taken from their site.

Tarquill

From arrival to ready to start takes 75mins.

Tarquill

Does your homebuilt have 8 turbines??

CJ2002

Try:

http://www.peterdawson.co.uk/bigbuff.html

for some more good pictures!

dptp9lf

You must not be true R/Cer if make a comparison to full-size aircraft... it's not about size... it's about craftsmanship, interests, etc. The builder may rather have a full-size "Buff" but I doubt it.

LGM Graphix

My Feedback: (22)

He's just jealous since that guy's got a bigger one than he does...........

um, airplane that is

David Gladwin

Perhaps I can add my opinion. This B52 is a remarkable technical achievement and my sincere congratulations to Gordon and to Wren. If he wishes to spend his money on it thats entirely his affair, we will have the pleasure of watching it for free and if it is anything like his Victor it will be incredibly realistic, for me it was quite eerie to watch the model Victor in flight having flown the real thing in the RAF.

As for safety issue this model is being overseen by the LMA and the CAA so that issue is well in hand, the UK CAA is actually quite an experienced organisation, overseeing airworthiness and operational standards of everything upto and including the 747 and Concorde so I am sure they can manage a model B52 ! Frankly I would far rather be in the vicinity of this model when it is being flown than near some of the "hotshots" flying their ill prepared jets flown with a total lack of airmanship. I look forward to seeing it fly.

Warmest congratulations, Gordon and the Wren team !

Regards, David Gladwin.

mikehannah

Having watched this thread with interest since it started, I can sum up David Gladwins comments in one simple phrase.

The voice of reason and common sense. !!!

And I, like David Gladwin just want to be there when it is flying. I also want to be there when Dave Matthews big Grey Cloud take to the air.
To see both of them in the air would be a mind blowing sight and one I would happily travel the length of Britian to see.

Both of these gentleman have pushed the boundaries of modelling that little bit further and like any advancement we the modeller will one day see the benefit.

If we stayed with the safe, the accepted and the ordinary, man kind would not have seen what was over the next hill and would not have advanced out of the caves.

I just wish I had their guts. [8D] and a third of their skill.

I await the flak

Mike

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

Mike,
No flack here. It's a great accomplishment and something I'd love to see in person. Unfortunately I'm not going to the UK any time soon so I'll have to view it in mags and on the WEB. Hope someone will make a video available.
I think it would almost be impossible to do something like that here in the US. Anyone trying such a project would have to answer to the FAA, Homeland Security and any number of other Federal agencies. I'd love to be a fly on the wall listening to a modeler explaining to the FEDS why he's building a 300#, 21', turbine powered model of a bomber. I'm sure such a project would never get off the ground over here. Pun intended.
BRG,
Jon

Paul Turbine Jet Man

To Mike !!!

I agree with you, if nobody tried new things we would have a very boring and unsophisticated world.

To JON
I live in Australia and we don’t have these serious (gide lines) or rules to govern our favourite hobby. Thus i pity those who live in the USA, how are being prevented from making what they want, how they want. To me it sounds like the FAA are being a bit unreasonable, when you consider how safe this sport really is. I mean look at everyday driving there are thousands of deaths every [:-] year and there doesn’t seem to be weight rules with cars!! Reduce weight in cars = less impact forces est. So i think that the rules on model jets are way to strict and should be reviewed and made more user friendly.

That’s just my 2 cents

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

Hi Paul,
After 9/11, all the rules changed here in the US. One of the main goals of any terrorist orgainization is to fundementally change the way people live their lives. IMHO, they've been at least partially succesfull.
It's a shame that my grandchildren (3) will never know the America that I grew up in when I was their age.
And now for the bad news: it's only going to get worse.
BRG,
Jon

Jackjet

My Feedback: (1)

Just DO it.

Jackjet

Jackjet

My Feedback: (1)

8178

My Feedback: (17)

I think the B-52 is awesome!

renegade pilot

Hi Paul,
Just to correct your thinking slightly. In Australia we also have weight limits governing radio controlled models. Currently the weight limit is 25kg, about the same as the USA. The situation is exactly the same in that you can build a model up to 150kg before it requires licensing as a UAV under federal regulations, however, any model over 25kg will not be covered under MAAA insurance. In addition any model over 7kg but below 25kg must be inspected by a heavy model inspector during construction and then be issued with a permit to fly. I am not sure but I think this is even more restrictive than the States.
Hope this clarifies.

Russell.

Paul Turbine Jet Man

I stand corrected then about the rules her, my bad lol, but i still feel sorry for the US after 9/11 life over there must be very diffrent [&o]

At least you still alowed to fly your RC jets