ARF problems
01-14-2004 | 10:18 AM
#52
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Corona, CA,
RE: ARF problems
In the jet community, it would appear that the pilots have, what I would characterize on the whole, as superior ability to fly a plane. How many of those in the community fly ARF’s? How many build traditional kits (for lack of a better term)? How many design and build for their own amusement, as opposed to ultimately wanting to kit a plane?
Is modification of ARF’s and kits, i.e. kit bashing, as common as it is in other areas of the hobby?
JR
Is modification of ARF’s and kits, i.e. kit bashing, as common as it is in other areas of the hobby?
JR
01-14-2004 | 12:31 PM
#53
My Feedback: (20)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ft Wayne, IN
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: hanna
Overpowered and what possibly lurks under the covering. Mr. Safety has left the building. Maybe it is the glass house deal. Mike K.
Overpowered and what possibly lurks under the covering. Mr. Safety has left the building. Maybe it is the glass house deal. Mike K.
ORIGINAL: DavidR
Jim,
You are avoiding the question!
Jim,
You are avoiding the question!
ROFLMAO....... you guys are killing me!!!!!!!
Regards
Ben
01-14-2004 | 12:35 PM
#54
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
RE: ARF problems
DavidR (and friends),
The direct answer to "THE" question is that I do just like the jet jocks and stuff the largest power plant under the hood that will fit. However I take care not to get too large an engine because I hate it when the wing air loading is so high the plane cannot be flown in a reasonable manner even more than I dislike it when the plane cannot climb out with some authority. Trees seem to be everywhere! However I generally build the airframe myself and KNOW what its failure mode will be. I don't think I have ever put a larger engine on a model than someone else has done so that helps me avoid being a pioneer. My approach is NOT against any law or rule I can find and I have a significant knowledge of structural engineering and loads which is one more reason I choose NOT to fly the carbon/glass fiber jets. Roger Guinn made some excellent points many seem to have missed.
I have not been avoiding "THE" question, rather I have been avoiding YOU and the rest of the people who just want a flame war as was proved in another thread after I suggested that since you knew more on the subject it made sense for YOU to write some good enforceable rules and your response was to attack my lack of knowledge! Proof of your basic errors (bad assumptions) about the AMA EC have already been posted in several places by others. Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
The direct answer to "THE" question is that I do just like the jet jocks and stuff the largest power plant under the hood that will fit. However I take care not to get too large an engine because I hate it when the wing air loading is so high the plane cannot be flown in a reasonable manner even more than I dislike it when the plane cannot climb out with some authority. Trees seem to be everywhere! However I generally build the airframe myself and KNOW what its failure mode will be. I don't think I have ever put a larger engine on a model than someone else has done so that helps me avoid being a pioneer. My approach is NOT against any law or rule I can find and I have a significant knowledge of structural engineering and loads which is one more reason I choose NOT to fly the carbon/glass fiber jets. Roger Guinn made some excellent points many seem to have missed.
I have not been avoiding "THE" question, rather I have been avoiding YOU and the rest of the people who just want a flame war as was proved in another thread after I suggested that since you knew more on the subject it made sense for YOU to write some good enforceable rules and your response was to attack my lack of knowledge! Proof of your basic errors (bad assumptions) about the AMA EC have already been posted in several places by others. Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
01-14-2004 | 03:01 PM
#56
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: DavidR
No specific AMA rule is being broken. ...snip...Jim stated that he had "exceeded a manufacturers recommended engine size" by doing that and talking about it in an open forum he effectively says that he does not have to follow the manufacturers recommendations for what engine he should have to use. It does not matter that he altered the airframe to increases the strength (who says he did that correctly, maybe he just shifted the failure point to a different part of the structure) he changed and in a potentially detrimental way the airframe.
No specific AMA rule is being broken. ...snip...Jim stated that he had "exceeded a manufacturers recommended engine size" by doing that and talking about it in an open forum he effectively says that he does not have to follow the manufacturers recommendations for what engine he should have to use. It does not matter that he altered the airframe to increases the strength (who says he did that correctly, maybe he just shifted the failure point to a different part of the structure) he changed and in a potentially detrimental way the airframe.
I don't see your point here.
1. He didn't break any rule.
2. Where is written that someone has to follow the manufacturers recommendation for what engine to use?
3. Based on many of the arfs I have seen I can't say that they were assembled correctly BY THE MANUFACTURER and didn't require modification by the consumer in order to make them safe.
Is your whole point that Jet guys should be able to put a 23 lb thrust turbine on a 5 lb airframe with 15 lbs of fuel so the plane goes 400 mph? (I know, not real numbers, just trying to understand your point)
01-14-2004 | 03:33 PM
#57
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
RE: ARF problems
The US already has way too many lawyers and laws. R/C modeling should be considered experimental in the same way full scale experimental works - it is largely unregulated and self-policed. R/C pilots should be able to build planes however they want. It is the ESSCENCE of this hobby. I can't think of one time when I built a plane to plans ARF or KIT. There is risk of injury and risk of failure very much like building and flying a full scale plane. WE AS PILOTS should accept that risk or GET OUT OF THE HOBBY.
If I overpower a plane, I accept the risk. I also fly it well away from people when doing things I think might compromise the structure (i.e. 3D, power dives, etc). If it fails in flight due to one of my mods or my abuse I do NOT call the manufacturer and bark at them blaming them for a bad product.
All too often builders insanely overpower their planes (come on, a Saito 100 on a UCD 46??). Some say oh well when it falls apart and they accept the liability themselves, I have respect for these people as they are true 'experimental' pilots. Others call Great Planes and make up some story. These liars blame the manufacturer for failure when the firewall tears away or the wings fold. In the end we all pay for one selfish A**hole who would not take account for his own actions. You don't think GP, H9 just eats these costs do you? Of course not, the costs are built into every plane we buy. These liars are the same people who sue the electic cord makers because their dumb kids chew through electrical cords, so now every manufacturere has to put 5 labels on the cords (in English and Spanish) so those like us who are smart enough to keep their kids and pets away have to deal with it too every time we buy one. These same people sued the companies that make hair dryers, shavers, and other corded appliances so we have to have GCI on everyting... and pay for it. Some companies pay 25% of their entire income in Liability insurance. Man I hate safetycrats. We all should not have to pay for the stupidity of a few.
When is society in general going to realize that any time someone cries liability WE LOSE because some money grubbing lawyer will go after the manufacturer. Its not about safety for the masses, its about money for a few greedy individuals. You dont think manufacturers put all those "idiot labels" on products to make them safer do you.. hell no - they are put on to avoid more lawsuits from morons. We pay more than any other country in the world for liability insurance (i.e. in the cost of our products we buy) but we get NO benefit in return.. only higher prices. If we bring on the liability death grip to this hobby we might as well go play shuffleboard... that is before they take that away too.
We all need to take accountability for our own actions and STOP BLAMING MANUFACTURERS or there will be NONE LEFT.
Many a good company has gone out of business over this, no wonder everything is going to China.
Keep it up and in a few years, that is where we will have to fly to escape the BS.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety "
Ben Franklin
DP
If I overpower a plane, I accept the risk. I also fly it well away from people when doing things I think might compromise the structure (i.e. 3D, power dives, etc). If it fails in flight due to one of my mods or my abuse I do NOT call the manufacturer and bark at them blaming them for a bad product.
All too often builders insanely overpower their planes (come on, a Saito 100 on a UCD 46??). Some say oh well when it falls apart and they accept the liability themselves, I have respect for these people as they are true 'experimental' pilots. Others call Great Planes and make up some story. These liars blame the manufacturer for failure when the firewall tears away or the wings fold. In the end we all pay for one selfish A**hole who would not take account for his own actions. You don't think GP, H9 just eats these costs do you? Of course not, the costs are built into every plane we buy. These liars are the same people who sue the electic cord makers because their dumb kids chew through electrical cords, so now every manufacturere has to put 5 labels on the cords (in English and Spanish) so those like us who are smart enough to keep their kids and pets away have to deal with it too every time we buy one. These same people sued the companies that make hair dryers, shavers, and other corded appliances so we have to have GCI on everyting... and pay for it. Some companies pay 25% of their entire income in Liability insurance. Man I hate safetycrats. We all should not have to pay for the stupidity of a few.
When is society in general going to realize that any time someone cries liability WE LOSE because some money grubbing lawyer will go after the manufacturer. Its not about safety for the masses, its about money for a few greedy individuals. You dont think manufacturers put all those "idiot labels" on products to make them safer do you.. hell no - they are put on to avoid more lawsuits from morons. We pay more than any other country in the world for liability insurance (i.e. in the cost of our products we buy) but we get NO benefit in return.. only higher prices. If we bring on the liability death grip to this hobby we might as well go play shuffleboard... that is before they take that away too.
We all need to take accountability for our own actions and STOP BLAMING MANUFACTURERS or there will be NONE LEFT.
Many a good company has gone out of business over this, no wonder everything is going to China.
Keep it up and in a few years, that is where we will have to fly to escape the BS.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety "
Ben Franklin
DP
01-14-2004 | 05:29 PM
#58
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Washington,
DC
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: desertpig
We pay more than any other country in the world for liability insurance (i.e. in the cost of our products we buy) but we get NO benefit in return.. only higher prices.
We pay more than any other country in the world for liability insurance (i.e. in the cost of our products we buy) but we get NO benefit in return.. only higher prices.
And where are these "higher prices"? We have more "stuff" than anyone in the world. We pay less for energy, food, and almost every consumer item you can imagine than anywhere else in the world. I would never say, "America, love it or leave it," but open your eyes man!
01-14-2004 | 06:03 PM
#59
My Feedback: (85)
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum
DavidR (and friends),
The direct answer to "THE" question is that I do just like the jet jocks and stuff the largest power plant under the hood that will fit. However I take care not to get too large an engine because I hate it when the wing air loading is so high the plane cannot be flown in a reasonable manner even more than I dislike it when the plane cannot climb out with some authority. Trees seem to be everywhere! However I generally build the airframe myself and KNOW what its failure mode will be. I don't think I have ever put a larger engine on a model than someone else has done so that helps me avoid being a pioneer. My approach is NOT against any law or rule I can find and I have a significant knowledge of structural engineering and loads which is one more reason I choose NOT to fly the carbon/glass fiber jets. Roger Guinn made some excellent points many seem to have missed.
I have not been avoiding "THE" question, rather I have been avoiding YOU and the rest of the people who just want a flame war as was proved in another thread after I suggested that since you knew more on the subject it made sense for YOU to write some good enforceable rules and your response was to attack my lack of knowledge! Proof of your basic errors (bad assumptions) about the AMA EC have already been posted in several places by others. Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
DavidR (and friends),
The direct answer to "THE" question is that I do just like the jet jocks and stuff the largest power plant under the hood that will fit. However I take care not to get too large an engine because I hate it when the wing air loading is so high the plane cannot be flown in a reasonable manner even more than I dislike it when the plane cannot climb out with some authority. Trees seem to be everywhere! However I generally build the airframe myself and KNOW what its failure mode will be. I don't think I have ever put a larger engine on a model than someone else has done so that helps me avoid being a pioneer. My approach is NOT against any law or rule I can find and I have a significant knowledge of structural engineering and loads which is one more reason I choose NOT to fly the carbon/glass fiber jets. Roger Guinn made some excellent points many seem to have missed.
I have not been avoiding "THE" question, rather I have been avoiding YOU and the rest of the people who just want a flame war as was proved in another thread after I suggested that since you knew more on the subject it made sense for YOU to write some good enforceable rules and your response was to attack my lack of knowledge! Proof of your basic errors (bad assumptions) about the AMA EC have already been posted in several places by others. Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
Jim,
You are showing your ignorance again concerning jets....
With most brands of turbines (KJ-66 based) there isn't hardly ANY weight penalty for going to a larger thrust turbine so the wing loading doesn't get out of control as can happen with prop planes....For example: A JetCat P-80 weighs 2.9 lbs, a P-120 weighs 3.1 lbs, and a P-160 wieghs 3.34 lbs. All of these engines have exactly the same outside diameter. (4.4 inches) As you can see, there is only .44 lbs (7.04 ounces) of weight difference between the 19 lb thrust engine and the 34 lb thrust engine. Seven ounces isn't going to affect our jets wing loadings to any significant degree. Jim, no flame war here---Just correcting you when you are wrong concerning jets....Which seems to be most of the time.. [:@] Since you are admitting a lack of knowledge, why don't you ask questions like J_R and others have done??? Instead, you've made several assumptions based on preconceived notions and have posted them here and elsewhere as fact....Like what you posted above comparing prop engines to turbines in regards to weight vs displacement/thrust. I think that you would be much better received by the jet guys if you would forget what you think you know about jets and just take a step back and listen to us!!!
Kevin
01-14-2004 | 06:26 PM
#60
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
RE: ARF problems
From MIKE in DC It almost sounds like we live in different countries. The benefit is HUGE. We live in a society in which folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them. You may not consider that a benefit, but obviously a lot of people do. It's the difference between injured people ending up on the streets to beg, or being given $40,000 wheel chairs to stay in productive jobs. If you're looking for a harsh world where there is little government regulation, an ineffective court system, and the injured simply end up on the street or being cared by their families forever, there are many many countries to choose from. How can you be so sure you will never be injured by some company's negligence?
MIKE in DC
No wonder you live in DC. If you think for one minute that "everyone" benefits from liability suits you must be a litigator or one who sues. The only ones to benefit are the lawyers and crooked politicos and a few greedy so-called victims. 90% of lawsuits are egregious and frivolous and most of the so-called "victims" were incredibly stupid in the first place. Yeah , let's buy the McDonalds coffee spilling idiot a wheelchair because she was so stupid she put 200 degree boiling hot coffee between her legs.... , in fact, lets pay her $18 Million for it. Come on!
Can you say "TORT REFORM" ??
How can someone blame Ford for tires that were not even made by them? The tires blew due to underinflation - a condition created by the moron operating the vehicle. Ford estimates the cost of every one of their cars / trucks went up by $275 just to pay for the litigation expenses over the firestone ordeal.
This goes on every day, evey year. It is a broken record and sad state for the US.
Some people got hurt. That's life dude. Most of it was due to stupidity. I don't need to pay for it so that a few people (most of them dumb) can be safer. If I slip and fall in a puddle in the middle of wal mart - was it my fault for being too stupid to see it, or was it wal mart's? I think you know my answer. People like you would be suing wal mart.
Its bleeding heart thinking like this that is ruining this country. I suppose you would vote for Hillary.
Tort Law in the country STINKS and it is in bad need of reform.
I have to go now, I think I am going to be sick...
DP
01-14-2004 | 07:04 PM
#61
My Feedback: (20)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ft Wayne, IN
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum
DavidR (and friends),
Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
DavidR (and friends),
Ben and KevinG. seem to be helping you in your self declared war, so I hope the entire jet community is eternally thankful.
Good luck. . . .
No war from this side bud. You drew the first blood my friend when you made the following statement:
ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum
Today I think the turbine crowd represents the most arrogant bunch of well heeled self centered people I have ever had the displeasure to be associated with.
Today I think the turbine crowd represents the most arrogant bunch of well heeled self centered people I have ever had the displeasure to be associated with.
Regards
Ben
01-15-2004 | 01:16 AM
#62
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
RE: ARF problems
Gosh Ben,
I *A*R*E*A*D*Y* said I made an error. Since you have gone out of your way to bait and misquote by taking out of context it is very clear that is unacceptable. Your friends have also made it clear that no errors are ever allowed anyone except turbine flyers.
Exactly what do I have to do? Get off RCU? There ARE other free forums out there and they may be more friendly. What is it you want before you will allow productive discussions?
I *A*R*E*A*D*Y* said I made an error. Since you have gone out of your way to bait and misquote by taking out of context it is very clear that is unacceptable. Your friends have also made it clear that no errors are ever allowed anyone except turbine flyers.
Exactly what do I have to do? Get off RCU? There ARE other free forums out there and they may be more friendly. What is it you want before you will allow productive discussions?
01-15-2004 | 09:25 AM
#63
My Feedback: (20)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ft Wayne, IN
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum
Gosh Ben,
I *A*R*E*A*D*Y* said I made an error.
Gosh Ben,
I *A*R*E*A*D*Y* said I made an error.
JB
We are good again bud!!!. We are now back to DEFCON-3
from DEFCON-1.
Regards
Ben
01-15-2004 | 11:51 AM
#65
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Mc Cleary, WA
RE: ARF problems
I have been flying for 15 years. arfs and kits. have yet to see anyone hurt or even hit by an rc aircraft .a damaged car hood because of a dead battery. are we to fly or planes inside a suit of armour? 1000sands of people are killed every year on the hiways and i dont here the public out cry to ban cars. people are killed hunting fishing hang gliding river rafting and all the other activites
that we take part in. sometimes i think some people just want to make rules! and have someone to
blame for everything that goes wrong in there life
THats my look on it LONNIE
that we take part in. sometimes i think some people just want to make rules! and have someone to
blame for everything that goes wrong in there life
THats my look on it LONNIE
01-15-2004 | 12:27 PM
#66
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: East Coast,
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: desertpig
MIKE in DC
No wonder you live in DC. If you think for one minute that "everyone" benefits from liability suits you must be a litigator or one who sues. The only ones to benefit are the lawyers and crooked politicos and a few greedy so-called victims. 90% of lawsuits are egregious and frivolous and most of the so-called "victims" were incredibly stupid in the first place. Yeah , let's buy the McDonalds coffee spilling idiot a wheelchair because she was so stupid she put 200 degree boiling hot coffee between her legs.... , in fact, lets pay her $18 Million for it. Come on!
Can you say "TORT REFORM" ??
How can someone blame Ford for tires that were not even made by them? The tires blew due to underinflation - a condition created by the moron operating the vehicle. Ford estimates the cost of every one of their cars / trucks went up by $275 just to pay for the litigation expenses over the firestone ordeal.
This goes on every day, evey year. It is a broken record and sad state for the US.
Some people got hurt. That's life dude. Most of it was due to stupidity. I don't need to pay for it so that a few people (most of them dumb) can be safer. If I slip and fall in a puddle in the middle of wal mart - was it my fault for being too stupid to see it, or was it wal mart's? I think you know my answer. People like you would be suing wal mart.
Its bleeding heart thinking like this that is ruining this country. I suppose you would vote for Hillary.
Tort Law in the country STINKS and it is in bad need of reform.
I have to go now, I think I am going to be sick...
DP
From MIKE in DC It almost sounds like we live in different countries. The benefit is HUGE. We live in a society in which folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them. You may not consider that a benefit, but obviously a lot of people do. It's the difference between injured people ending up on the streets to beg, or being given $40,000 wheel chairs to stay in productive jobs. If you're looking for a harsh world where there is little government regulation, an ineffective court system, and the injured simply end up on the street or being cared by their families forever, there are many many countries to choose from. How can you be so sure you will never be injured by some company's negligence?
MIKE in DC
No wonder you live in DC. If you think for one minute that "everyone" benefits from liability suits you must be a litigator or one who sues. The only ones to benefit are the lawyers and crooked politicos and a few greedy so-called victims. 90% of lawsuits are egregious and frivolous and most of the so-called "victims" were incredibly stupid in the first place. Yeah , let's buy the McDonalds coffee spilling idiot a wheelchair because she was so stupid she put 200 degree boiling hot coffee between her legs.... , in fact, lets pay her $18 Million for it. Come on!
Can you say "TORT REFORM" ??
How can someone blame Ford for tires that were not even made by them? The tires blew due to underinflation - a condition created by the moron operating the vehicle. Ford estimates the cost of every one of their cars / trucks went up by $275 just to pay for the litigation expenses over the firestone ordeal.
This goes on every day, evey year. It is a broken record and sad state for the US.
Some people got hurt. That's life dude. Most of it was due to stupidity. I don't need to pay for it so that a few people (most of them dumb) can be safer. If I slip and fall in a puddle in the middle of wal mart - was it my fault for being too stupid to see it, or was it wal mart's? I think you know my answer. People like you would be suing wal mart.
Its bleeding heart thinking like this that is ruining this country. I suppose you would vote for Hillary.
Tort Law in the country STINKS and it is in bad need of reform.
I have to go now, I think I am going to be sick...
DP
Taxman
01-15-2004 | 03:38 PM
#68
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
RE: ARF problems
Thanks guys...
I normally don't bring politics up in this forum, but that guy really got my blood boiling.
I am so sick of these liberal types blaming everyone else for their own mistakes or shortcomings..
and then profiting from it at my expense.
DP
I normally don't bring politics up in this forum, but that guy really got my blood boiling.
I am so sick of these liberal types blaming everyone else for their own mistakes or shortcomings..
and then profiting from it at my expense.
DP
01-15-2004 | 03:53 PM
#69
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
RE: ARF problems
DP,
Good job.
Mike in DC seems to have lost sight of the fact that when folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them...SOMEONE else is PAYING for that compensation.
Good job.
Mike in DC seems to have lost sight of the fact that when folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them...SOMEONE else is PAYING for that compensation.
01-15-2004 | 05:41 PM
#70
My Feedback: (23)
RE: ARF problems
ARF Problems! Alot of ARF's do not use enough or strong enough glue. The problem is that new pilot's don't know enough to correct These shortfalls! Then you have experienced pilots that have the need for speed like myself and power the planes up to where they will perform better. My LT 40 has a Magnum 90 four stroke the Plane is more controlable and predictable and reliable then it was with the LA 40. My F-16 has a Super Tiger Ninety in it! It flys extremly well and is very controllable and lands like a baby. My Giles 202 from Great Planes is powered by an OS 160! Right on specs. Now it's probably over powered for the way the airframe is built. I'll be lucky if it last 100 flight with the way it's cracking and falling apart. I've spent more time repairing structural short comings then it would have taken to build a kit.
If people try to get suit happy and start suing these company's model aviation will get to expensive for any one like Full scale flying has.
All the Manufacture's will have to pack up there tents like Piper and Cessna for the cost of Product liability Insurance. And that will be then end of ARF's and Then Kit's. Then the hobby!
I like High performance Planes, boats, cars, If I didn't I'd watch TV or read a book. This can be a very frustrating hobby but the Adrenialine Rush Keeps us coming back! Mores Law applies. If some is good more is better
If people try to get suit happy and start suing these company's model aviation will get to expensive for any one like Full scale flying has.
All the Manufacture's will have to pack up there tents like Piper and Cessna for the cost of Product liability Insurance. And that will be then end of ARF's and Then Kit's. Then the hobby!
I like High performance Planes, boats, cars, If I didn't I'd watch TV or read a book. This can be a very frustrating hobby but the Adrenialine Rush Keeps us coming back! Mores Law applies. If some is good more is better
01-15-2004 | 06:59 PM
#71
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
RE: ARF problems
Oh Yeah.. that's what this thread was about. ARF Problems !
I have to say, I build most of my planes and those for others, but the the few ARFs I have put together have been quite good.
GP Venus - 9
GP Slow Poke - 10
GP Lancair - 9
GP U-Can-Do 46 - 5 (terrible covering job and weak tail)
GP U-Can-Do 60 - 9
H9 P-51 - 6 (weak firewall, lousy covering and crappy gear, but otherwise excellent flier)
Kankge Monocoupe - 10
Kankge Cap 120 - 10
The Kangke ARFs are truly as good as what I would build.
All others I built from kits.
On any ARF I do a complete structure check, and yes, I have found poor glue joints, weak firewalls, etc. Would any have effected flight if using the recommended engine / throws... probably not.
Beginners only need to look here on RCU for the weaknesses of their particular ARF before they put it together and especially if they plan on overpowering it. I am sure that would end at leat 50% of all early deaths. I know there are some who don't know about this site, but there are a lot who do. Nearly everyone at my field checks here first before they buy anything.
Any time I see a guy bringing a new plane out to fly , we'll all gather around it and do a good thorough preflight. That usually means looking at the radio install, linkages, etc. I have it done on all of my planes and in fact, will not fly until I have had a second opinion. Most people I know have it done on theirs as well. A second set of eyes is always a good thing to prevent tunnel vision, I don't care if you are a beginner or experienced builder like I am. Everyone makes mistakes even assembly line people doing the same thing over and over again in China.
The only time I did not do a good preflight I lost a plane. Invariably, there is always some little thing we miss when we go over stuff ourselves, especially when we are anxious to get a new bird in the air. I missed a servo horn screw on the aileron and rudder servos. Don't ask me how! It took off fine, but then a horn separated in flight. The plane banked hard right. No response. Before I could cut the engine, it pounded in at full speed. There is not one day I don't think about that loss when putting a new model in the air. Had I preflighted it, I am sure another set of eyes would have easily caught it. When I was bringing the bag of bones back to the ramada one guy noticed that there was no screw in one servo horn (horn was still attached) and one of the horns on another servo was totally missing but the spline was not damaged. Sure enough the aileron horn fell off. 3 months of work and $600 put in on the maiden flight. Even the engine was destroyed (hit the runway dead on) Lesson learned.
Stupidity and impatience is what causes accidents, its not all the fault of beginners and ARF-only fliers. Some of the most competent builders I know started on ARFs.
I have seen many more horribly built kits come apart in flight than ARFs. In fact, in the past 2 years I cannot say I have seen a single ARF fall apart under normal flight loads.
I saw one turbine plane come apart (uncontrolled dive and too much elevator) and one insanely overpowered 3D plane flutter itself to pieces at full throttle and high speed). Both the result of not using common sense.
DP
I have to say, I build most of my planes and those for others, but the the few ARFs I have put together have been quite good.
GP Venus - 9
GP Slow Poke - 10
GP Lancair - 9
GP U-Can-Do 46 - 5 (terrible covering job and weak tail)
GP U-Can-Do 60 - 9
H9 P-51 - 6 (weak firewall, lousy covering and crappy gear, but otherwise excellent flier)
Kankge Monocoupe - 10
Kankge Cap 120 - 10
The Kangke ARFs are truly as good as what I would build.
All others I built from kits.
On any ARF I do a complete structure check, and yes, I have found poor glue joints, weak firewalls, etc. Would any have effected flight if using the recommended engine / throws... probably not.
Beginners only need to look here on RCU for the weaknesses of their particular ARF before they put it together and especially if they plan on overpowering it. I am sure that would end at leat 50% of all early deaths. I know there are some who don't know about this site, but there are a lot who do. Nearly everyone at my field checks here first before they buy anything.
Any time I see a guy bringing a new plane out to fly , we'll all gather around it and do a good thorough preflight. That usually means looking at the radio install, linkages, etc. I have it done on all of my planes and in fact, will not fly until I have had a second opinion. Most people I know have it done on theirs as well. A second set of eyes is always a good thing to prevent tunnel vision, I don't care if you are a beginner or experienced builder like I am. Everyone makes mistakes even assembly line people doing the same thing over and over again in China.
The only time I did not do a good preflight I lost a plane. Invariably, there is always some little thing we miss when we go over stuff ourselves, especially when we are anxious to get a new bird in the air. I missed a servo horn screw on the aileron and rudder servos. Don't ask me how! It took off fine, but then a horn separated in flight. The plane banked hard right. No response. Before I could cut the engine, it pounded in at full speed. There is not one day I don't think about that loss when putting a new model in the air. Had I preflighted it, I am sure another set of eyes would have easily caught it. When I was bringing the bag of bones back to the ramada one guy noticed that there was no screw in one servo horn (horn was still attached) and one of the horns on another servo was totally missing but the spline was not damaged. Sure enough the aileron horn fell off. 3 months of work and $600 put in on the maiden flight. Even the engine was destroyed (hit the runway dead on) Lesson learned.
Stupidity and impatience is what causes accidents, its not all the fault of beginners and ARF-only fliers. Some of the most competent builders I know started on ARFs.
I have seen many more horribly built kits come apart in flight than ARFs. In fact, in the past 2 years I cannot say I have seen a single ARF fall apart under normal flight loads.
I saw one turbine plane come apart (uncontrolled dive and too much elevator) and one insanely overpowered 3D plane flutter itself to pieces at full throttle and high speed). Both the result of not using common sense.
DP
01-16-2004 | 01:10 PM
#72
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Washington,
DC
RE: ARF problems
ORIGINAL: P-51B
Mike in DC seems to have lost sight of the fact that when folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them...SOMEONE else is PAYING for that compensation.
Mike in DC seems to have lost sight of the fact that when folks are compensated for almost anything bad that happens to them...SOMEONE else is PAYING for that compensation.
(Actually, I enjoyed DP's spirited argument, and his ability to avoid personal attacks. Well, I'm not sure about the Hilary comment...)
