Why not move on to R/C ?
10-15-2003, 10:22 AM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Belleville,
MI
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
OSD,
You sure hit on an important point. Many times it seems that misunderstandings breakout due to the nature of this electronic medium. I know some of my humor on other forums has been taken as serious and caused hard feelings, so I try very hard to keep to the facts and only get funny if I know and am known by those I'm addressing. It can be very frustrating, we can't see the facial expressions or hear the intonations and there is much lost in communication without them. This is also a little more difficult than a paper letter inthat we tend not to proof-read and reflect on what we said before we hit the submit button.
In respect to the question asked and the responses here, the question can be legitimate or as many have taken it, a demeaning baiting. I, as a Free Flighter have been asked the same question and been jabbed with the same taunt, but the implication being that I am too poor finacially to "step up" to "real aeromodeling", that's really insulting. I, as others, have simply chosen the type of modeling that fulfills our wants and desires. I fly RC, but it in no way fills the bill and I never leave a session satisfied. Perhaps if I were to compete I would feel differently, but I have no desire to do so. I fly CL Stunt and find it tremendously challenging and satisfying. I do compete and it gives me a purpose and an outlet for my competitive side. I fly Free Flight proficiently in competition and the true expression of my creativeness and competitiveness comes out there. I move laterally from discipline the discipline as I want. For many in the 50's that's the way it was, we all flew as many different types as we could, or at least in my locale the modelers were like that. I would like to say to those that question anothers modeler's choice in discipline that before you ridicule, give it a try, you may be in for a pleasant surprise. There is simply too much fun to be had in our wide ranging hobby to cheat yourself out of any of it. Try it all and then when the question comes up you'll have firsthand answers instead of inflamitory opinions.
You sure hit on an important point. Many times it seems that misunderstandings breakout due to the nature of this electronic medium. I know some of my humor on other forums has been taken as serious and caused hard feelings, so I try very hard to keep to the facts and only get funny if I know and am known by those I'm addressing. It can be very frustrating, we can't see the facial expressions or hear the intonations and there is much lost in communication without them. This is also a little more difficult than a paper letter inthat we tend not to proof-read and reflect on what we said before we hit the submit button.
In respect to the question asked and the responses here, the question can be legitimate or as many have taken it, a demeaning baiting. I, as a Free Flighter have been asked the same question and been jabbed with the same taunt, but the implication being that I am too poor finacially to "step up" to "real aeromodeling", that's really insulting. I, as others, have simply chosen the type of modeling that fulfills our wants and desires. I fly RC, but it in no way fills the bill and I never leave a session satisfied. Perhaps if I were to compete I would feel differently, but I have no desire to do so. I fly CL Stunt and find it tremendously challenging and satisfying. I do compete and it gives me a purpose and an outlet for my competitive side. I fly Free Flight proficiently in competition and the true expression of my creativeness and competitiveness comes out there. I move laterally from discipline the discipline as I want. For many in the 50's that's the way it was, we all flew as many different types as we could, or at least in my locale the modelers were like that. I would like to say to those that question anothers modeler's choice in discipline that before you ridicule, give it a try, you may be in for a pleasant surprise. There is simply too much fun to be had in our wide ranging hobby to cheat yourself out of any of it. Try it all and then when the question comes up you'll have firsthand answers instead of inflamitory opinions.
10-15-2003, 06:32 PM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: no city,
AL
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
... but the implication being that I am too poor finacially to "step up" to "real aeromodeling"...,
Yeah, I can see where finances could come into play.
10-15-2003, 06:54 PM
#54
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Jessie:
You mentioned the rubber. Don't forget that about half the boxes of rubber you buy aren't quite "Up to snuff," and get used for practice only, or thrown away.
Bill.
You mentioned the rubber. Don't forget that about half the boxes of rubber you buy aren't quite "Up to snuff," and get used for practice only, or thrown away.
Bill.
10-16-2003, 06:34 AM
#55
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
I understand that the makers of Tan-2 were persuaded to manufacture some rubber for modeling. One is Tan Sport. Don't remember the name of the other grade.
George
George
10-16-2003, 06:50 AM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Belleville,
MI
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
George,
FAI Model Supply has the tan rubber madel exclusively for modeling. Tan II is nolonger available because one of the ingredients used in its manufacture has become unobtainable. The Tan Sport rubber is reported by some to be right on parr with the original Tan I which was still pretty good rubber. At any rate, its the only rubber there is that's good enough for competition and its sold around the world. John Clapp is the owner of FAI Model Supply and hes also a Free Flighter who competes in rubber events.
FAI Model Supply has the tan rubber madel exclusively for modeling. Tan II is nolonger available because one of the ingredients used in its manufacture has become unobtainable. The Tan Sport rubber is reported by some to be right on parr with the original Tan I which was still pretty good rubber. At any rate, its the only rubber there is that's good enough for competition and its sold around the world. John Clapp is the owner of FAI Model Supply and hes also a Free Flighter who competes in rubber events.
10-16-2003, 10:22 AM
#59
10-16-2003, 12:46 PM
#60
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,425
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Sigrun, I do believe you were being quite harsh on Stykaas in your first post. By that time we had already determined that his unfortunate tone was unintended, unfortunate and had much to do with his lack of familiarity with English. The tone of his post had been brougt up and dealt with to the satisfaction of all and did not need your harsh words added to the heap. Perhaps if you'd taken the time to read all the posts and look between the lines? (Ooh, I made a pun 
)
Anyway, Strykass, if you're still reading this thread I go along with the others when I say you should look into this aspect of modeling a little more if you can find the time. Control line is obviously not as popular as RC these days but the groups ARE out there. Check into your area a little more and I'm sure you'll find out that there is an active group.
And for the record there is NOTHING IN MODELING that I have ever done that can equal the excitement of control line combat. Even RC combat, as exciting as I imagine it would be, pales by comparison because you don't have the physical aspect of dodging in and around your opponent to avoid the line tangles while trying to gain the advantage. I see CL combat as a modern day sword match model airplane style. Build a profile stunter and just reduce the control throws and keep the balance forward and use that as a trainer. Tune it up as your skills adapt and then try some combat.
Combat is something I come back to now and then and then the brutal amount of building and repairs chases me away for a while. But the adrenaline rush of the arena keeps me coming back....
)Anyway, Strykass, if you're still reading this thread I go along with the others when I say you should look into this aspect of modeling a little more if you can find the time. Control line is obviously not as popular as RC these days but the groups ARE out there. Check into your area a little more and I'm sure you'll find out that there is an active group.
And for the record there is NOTHING IN MODELING that I have ever done that can equal the excitement of control line combat. Even RC combat, as exciting as I imagine it would be, pales by comparison because you don't have the physical aspect of dodging in and around your opponent to avoid the line tangles while trying to gain the advantage. I see CL combat as a modern day sword match model airplane style. Build a profile stunter and just reduce the control throws and keep the balance forward and use that as a trainer. Tune it up as your skills adapt and then try some combat.
Combat is something I come back to now and then and then the brutal amount of building and repairs chases me away for a while. But the adrenaline rush of the arena keeps me coming back....
10-16-2003, 05:35 PM
#61
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dunnunda, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
G'day BM
And I would respond - not at all. As my yet unrequited courtesy and friendly intent clarified clearly in my second post to him.
If you care to re-read the entire thread verbatim yourself, you'll note that my first post in this thread to which you presumably refer was in response to and addressing comments made by shortman. In that post, I made a singular remark, far from inaccurate in regard to the thread header, that "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.".
To wit.
Strykaas has made in excess of 460 posts on this forum in English in just 7 months since joining in March, an average in excess of 2 per day every day. And he has presumably read considerably more...in English. He certainly understands how to use angry bee "smileys" along with the usenet derived conventions of "shouting" and "foot stamping" and an acquired rudeness which were inarguably deliberate and demonstratively indicative of considerably greater comprehension of both language and convention than he otherwise cares to let on - and of which you excuse him? Despite his expressed indignation and threat to 'take his ball home and not play on RCU any more', he is still around reading this thread as you are undoubtedly aware - I saw him perusing here again yesterday - as well as participating in other threads. [sm=surprised.gif]
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that one doesn't have to be a potential Mensa candidate to logically determine that his grasp of the English language and convention is sufficiently adequate, and in fact wasn't the culprit of the manner in which he expressed himself in the header or text of the thread to which we now refer despite his belated protestations to the contrary having subsequently picked up on his faux pas. Though English is presumably (?) not his first language and does allow a convenient and face saving "benefit of the doubt" out...which was proffered with a grace considerably more commendable than the reciprocal appreciation.
As I took considerable time at the time to point out accurately, succinctly and yet politely, strykaas's attitude by implication to C/L further expressed in the context of several comments he made during the thread before I commented gave the game away to anyone with an IQ numerically greater than their own shoe size despite his later vociferous extortations of contrary intent when he 'read' the mood. Clearly he gave many others the same impression. You may choose to believe his exhortations if you wish. I don't, but didn't and still don't choose to make issue of it further. In fact to the contrary as my final post to his uncalled for rudeness and indignation makes quite clear. As such and I find your public criticism of my courteously expressed right of reply not only uncalled for, but aimed at totally the wrong target. By way of example, I don't agree with your opinion that I was harsh, but note the courtesy and respect with which I respond addressing the issue non ad hominem?
I contend that I had a right to courteously express my opinion in my post to shortman, and my first post to styrkaas was made in reasonable right of reply in response to his own, as is this.
Au contraire. Unless you are reading an entirely different thread from me, according to English 'as she is spoke' and any definition of logic with which I am familiar, I would contend that you are mistaken.
Need one point out the all too obvious self-irony in that sentence?
What "harsh words" are you referring to specifically? If you are referring to my second post addressed to strykaas, are you suggesting that I shouldn't have reasonable right of reply? In fact if you wish to remonstrate, I suggest you remonstrate his rudeness and behaviour, as in my post I was not only courteous of which given his manner it could be argued he was undeserving, but kept my comments friendly, civil and relevant to the thread rather than replicating strykaas's own indulgance in shouting and a totally unnecessary emotive outburst.
With respect that statement deserves, this is a written medium. Perhaps if you took your own advice? Re-read what I said, in the context I said it, the manner in which I said it, and why I said it...along with the context of my subsequent quite friendly invitational post to strykaas all made abundantly clear.
With which I concur. It's nice to close agreeably on common ground - wouldn't you agree? [8D]
cheers
Sigrun, I do believe you were being quite harsh on Stykaas in your first post.
If you care to re-read the entire thread verbatim yourself, you'll note that my first post in this thread to which you presumably refer was in response to and addressing comments made by shortman. In that post, I made a singular remark, far from inaccurate in regard to the thread header, that "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.".
To wit.
Strykaas has made in excess of 460 posts on this forum in English in just 7 months since joining in March, an average in excess of 2 per day every day. And he has presumably read considerably more...in English. He certainly understands how to use angry bee "smileys" along with the usenet derived conventions of "shouting" and "foot stamping" and an acquired rudeness which were inarguably deliberate and demonstratively indicative of considerably greater comprehension of both language and convention than he otherwise cares to let on - and of which you excuse him? Despite his expressed indignation and threat to 'take his ball home and not play on RCU any more', he is still around reading this thread as you are undoubtedly aware - I saw him perusing here again yesterday - as well as participating in other threads. [sm=surprised.gif]
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that one doesn't have to be a potential Mensa candidate to logically determine that his grasp of the English language and convention is sufficiently adequate, and in fact wasn't the culprit of the manner in which he expressed himself in the header or text of the thread to which we now refer despite his belated protestations to the contrary having subsequently picked up on his faux pas. Though English is presumably (?) not his first language and does allow a convenient and face saving "benefit of the doubt" out...which was proffered with a grace considerably more commendable than the reciprocal appreciation.
As I took considerable time at the time to point out accurately, succinctly and yet politely, strykaas's attitude by implication to C/L further expressed in the context of several comments he made during the thread before I commented gave the game away to anyone with an IQ numerically greater than their own shoe size despite his later vociferous extortations of contrary intent when he 'read' the mood. Clearly he gave many others the same impression. You may choose to believe his exhortations if you wish. I don't, but didn't and still don't choose to make issue of it further. In fact to the contrary as my final post to his uncalled for rudeness and indignation makes quite clear. As such and I find your public criticism of my courteously expressed right of reply not only uncalled for, but aimed at totally the wrong target. By way of example, I don't agree with your opinion that I was harsh, but note the courtesy and respect with which I respond addressing the issue non ad hominem?
I contend that I had a right to courteously express my opinion in my post to shortman, and my first post to styrkaas was made in reasonable right of reply in response to his own, as is this.
By that time we had already determined that his unfortunate tone was unintended, unfortunate and had much to do with his lack of familiarity with English.
The tone of his post had been brougt up and dealt with to the satisfaction of all and did not need your harsh words added to the heap.
What "harsh words" are you referring to specifically? If you are referring to my second post addressed to strykaas, are you suggesting that I shouldn't have reasonable right of reply? In fact if you wish to remonstrate, I suggest you remonstrate his rudeness and behaviour, as in my post I was not only courteous of which given his manner it could be argued he was undeserving, but kept my comments friendly, civil and relevant to the thread rather than replicating strykaas's own indulgance in shouting and a totally unnecessary emotive outburst.
Perhaps if you'd taken the time to read all the posts and look between the lines? (Ooh, I made a pun )
And for the record there is NOTHING IN MODELING that I have ever done that can equal the excitement of control line combat.
cheers
10-16-2003, 08:09 PM
#62
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,425
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Sigrun, I suppose I should have phrased my reply to you more along the lines of you adding to the response at a late date when it was no longer required. Others had already mentioned his tone and he had already responded that perhaps it wasn't worded that well and had not been intended as an attack. You just happened to be the last of the many and I guess I saw it as not really needed at that point. Especially since it seems to have chased Strykaas away.
And 460 posts or not I gather that English is his second language. It's not often that a second language can be used with the same flair that a native tongue can be weilded. You obviously have a firm command of the English language (or you ate a dictionary ) but I doubt you could be so eloquent in a second language.
In any event he'll have to sink or swim on what he's learned. And if he really did take offense at our posts then he's probably not thick skinned enough to survive the Internet anyway...
At least we agree on the combat thing....
And 460 posts or not I gather that English is his second language. It's not often that a second language can be used with the same flair that a native tongue can be weilded. You obviously have a firm command of the English language (or you ate a dictionary
) but I doubt you could be so eloquent in a second language. In any event he'll have to sink or swim on what he's learned. And if he really did take offense at our posts then he's probably not thick skinned enough to survive the Internet anyway...
At least we agree on the combat thing....
10-17-2003, 05:56 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ruksakinmakiak,
AK
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
George wrote:
You have that right!! Those AMA Cubs are fun, especially when one is flying with a group of Cub Scouts whom he helped build and trim Cubs of their own!! (For any of you involved with a Pack, think Summertime Pack Activity.) I've had the a great deal of unadulterated pleasure building the old Jetco Thermic 18's and losing them OOS!
While I do not consider myself a free flight modeler, I do enjoy it on a small scale. I also attribute my being able to trouble shoot and fix basic trim problems with other types of models to my somewhat limited free flight experience. To me, that discipline may be the most challenging. One has no control whatsoever of the model once it is launched, so it had better be built and trimmed correctly if it is to perform satisfactorily. I might be a primarily free flight modeler if the area here had any relatively level, open areas under 3000' above sea level.
Suffice it to say that if all model pilots had a bit of free flight experience they would be better CL or RC pilots as well.
And you can have fun with the AMA Cub for about three bucks.
While I do not consider myself a free flight modeler, I do enjoy it on a small scale. I also attribute my being able to trouble shoot and fix basic trim problems with other types of models to my somewhat limited free flight experience. To me, that discipline may be the most challenging. One has no control whatsoever of the model once it is launched, so it had better be built and trimmed correctly if it is to perform satisfactorily. I might be a primarily free flight modeler if the area here had any relatively level, open areas under 3000' above sea level.
Suffice it to say that if all model pilots had a bit of free flight experience they would be better CL or RC pilots as well.
10-17-2003, 08:10 AM
#65
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Agreed. I've never lived in an area that has sufficient area to learn. I see pictures of guys flying in HUGE fields. I know it's an old plane but I always wanted to make a Ramrod 250.
I'd settle for some decent CL sites nearby, as opposed to finding a ball field that is not being used.
George
I'd settle for some decent CL sites nearby, as opposed to finding a ball field that is not being used.
George
10-17-2003, 12:32 PM
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: no city,
AL
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
I too learned a great deal about trim from FF, Also about the value of accurate building.
To me nothing matches the graceful beauty of a free flight model soaring an a blue sky with a backdrop of fluffy white clouds.
On the other hand chasing through a snake and gater infested marsh can get down right ugly.[:'(]
I have now discovered the pleasures of RC assist. I have only flown old timers RC assist, but would like to try some nostalgia period models as well, Civy boy, Ramrod, Satellite etc. I expect the faster models woul require great caution with rudder to avoid dutch roll, but it should be doable. Any ideas?
To me nothing matches the graceful beauty of a free flight model soaring an a blue sky with a backdrop of fluffy white clouds.
On the other hand chasing through a snake and gater infested marsh can get down right ugly.[:'(]
I have now discovered the pleasures of RC assist. I have only flown old timers RC assist, but would like to try some nostalgia period models as well, Civy boy, Ramrod, Satellite etc. I expect the faster models woul require great caution with rudder to avoid dutch roll, but it should be doable. Any ideas?
10-17-2003, 12:33 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Belleville,
MI
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
OSD,
I attribute my Free Flight experience with the credit for making it so easy for me to move around within the modeling disciplines at will. In the old days allot of the RC models were nomore than Free Flights with some rudimentary controls installed. They pretty much flew themselves while taking some input from the "pilot". Early CL models were also converted FF's.
There is a treasure of things to be learned by making a model fly without any control. Building straight and light are necessary and natural things for a Free Flighter to learn if he's going to be successful. Learning the subtlties of trimming is invalueable as well. Tiny thrust adjustments can result in huge performance improvements, etc.
Not to mention the fact that I never ever tire of seeing the sunshine through a tissued wing overhead.
I attribute my Free Flight experience with the credit for making it so easy for me to move around within the modeling disciplines at will. In the old days allot of the RC models were nomore than Free Flights with some rudimentary controls installed. They pretty much flew themselves while taking some input from the "pilot". Early CL models were also converted FF's.
There is a treasure of things to be learned by making a model fly without any control. Building straight and light are necessary and natural things for a Free Flighter to learn if he's going to be successful. Learning the subtlties of trimming is invalueable as well. Tiny thrust adjustments can result in huge performance improvements, etc.
Not to mention the fact that I never ever tire of seeing the sunshine through a tissued wing overhead.
10-17-2003, 04:16 PM
#68
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dunnunda, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Suffice it to say that if all model pilots had a bit of free flight experience they would be better CL or RC pilots as well.
For many of us, 'Free Flight' undoubtedly was our first flying model experience. It was certainly mine.
'Design', 'construction', 'test-piloting', 'trimming' and 'modification' provided many a halcyon summer afternoon's entertainment in our street. A fierce rivalry erupted among us for duration, distance and height gain 'events'. And it certainly was 'free' flight. All one needed to participate was your own piece of paper.
Though a quantitative understanding of aerodynamics unquestionably evaded the shrewd minds of us 'nine year olds', we had an qualitative eye for what worked and what didn't. Transferred into an empirically derived and effective flair for 'model aircraft design', this became another self-acquired 'skill'.
More importantly, in a few of us it evoked a spiritual soaring, sparking in our imaginations a dream accompanied by a quenchless desire and enthusiasm which persists to this day. What had we started?!!!
Now on 'the quest', we naturally enough graduated to kitted chuckies. Along the way we experimented with several incarnations of home-made kites made from brown wrapping paper stuck together with flour 'n water glue courtesy of mum's kitchen budget, and which became.....our first 'control-line' experience. [sm=sunsmiley.gif]
As best I recall a rubber powered semi-scale Sopwith Camel and real free flighter featured somewhere as the next challenge shortly thereafter, before the lure of control-line echoing from the nearby park beckoned. One might have thought that sound a bicycle magnet. For whenever that unmistakable din was heard, boys peddling furiously on their coasters converged en masse on the scene to spectate, 'participating' by way of dream proxy in what seemed an affordable and achievable reality. In an age before JR and Futaba, this became our new goal and next stepping stone on the aeromodelling, and for some of us, aviation road.
And to think it was all fired by imagination and a piece of carefully folded paper launched in silent 'free' flight. [sm=idea.gif]
10-17-2003, 05:30 PM
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ruksakinmakiak,
AK
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
From Sigrun:
You Bet. I, however, could never get the duration out of a paper plane that I could out of a purpose built balsa model.
Your mention of kites reminded me of another great flying day. It was during my late teen years when my brother and a good friend and I, whilst at our model aviation mentor's (Scoutmaster's) house, discovered the thrill of combining a perfectly good box kite with a Cox Babe Bee .049. We fashioned a plywood firewall, bolted the engine to it and hot glued the assembly to the interior cross pieces of the kite. We then added a bit of lead to the end of the cross piece opposite the engine's cylinder to try to balance it a bit. The resultant contraption flew very well as a free flight model, climbing in slow circles while rolling very slowly from the torque while the engine ran. After about five minutes' engine run the kite would float gently back to (earth or tree). An absolutely entertaining afternoon, climbing a birch or two notwithstanding, was had by all. It took less time to prepare the craft for flight(?) than it took for me to type this.
Paul
Do paper planes count?
Your mention of kites reminded me of another great flying day. It was during my late teen years when my brother and a good friend and I, whilst at our model aviation mentor's (Scoutmaster's) house, discovered the thrill of combining a perfectly good box kite with a Cox Babe Bee .049. We fashioned a plywood firewall, bolted the engine to it and hot glued the assembly to the interior cross pieces of the kite. We then added a bit of lead to the end of the cross piece opposite the engine's cylinder to try to balance it a bit. The resultant contraption flew very well as a free flight model, climbing in slow circles while rolling very slowly from the torque while the engine ran. After about five minutes' engine run the kite would float gently back to (earth or tree). An absolutely entertaining afternoon, climbing a birch or two notwithstanding, was had by all. It took less time to prepare the craft for flight(?) than it took for me to type this.
Paul
11-04-2003, 03:34 PM
#71
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
This has been a very interesting thread to follow. I too think Sigrun was being a little harsh, I personally took no offense at the tone or substance of Strykaas post. My Dad got me into CL when I was about 9 years old. Since then, through him, I went onto Free flight A,B,C and D ships. I even tried FAI, entered contest (went to the 79? NATS in Riverside,CA) and generally had loads of fun. Still have a couple of AMA records too, Got out of the sport when I started going to collage and into the working years. Now here I am 43 and trying to get back into it, I LOVE IT.
When I wanted to get back into it, I originally wanted to do something with my kids, but Dad's got the bug and the kids seem more interested in other things. I thought about going RC, but the cost involved seemed just too prohibitive. I've never flown RC so have no basis to make any judgement, just not going to be in the cards due to the costs. I can build a scratch built, own design CL .35 stunt for just around $40-$50, (not counting engine) where most of the RC planes are well over $100. plus radio equipment.
My Dad is 70 and is still involved with Model Airplanes, he works with the kids in San Jose, CA getting them building indoor Delta Darts and Penny Planes. He has been very interested in my renewed interest in CL, may even dust off his combat and stunt models for a go. Strykaas I hope you come back and at least try CL, it is a great deal of fun, well worth the effort and can be done for a really small investment.
When I wanted to get back into it, I originally wanted to do something with my kids, but Dad's got the bug and the kids seem more interested in other things. I thought about going RC, but the cost involved seemed just too prohibitive. I've never flown RC so have no basis to make any judgement, just not going to be in the cards due to the costs. I can build a scratch built, own design CL .35 stunt for just around $40-$50, (not counting engine) where most of the RC planes are well over $100. plus radio equipment.
My Dad is 70 and is still involved with Model Airplanes, he works with the kids in San Jose, CA getting them building indoor Delta Darts and Penny Planes. He has been very interested in my renewed interest in CL, may even dust off his combat and stunt models for a go. Strykaas I hope you come back and at least try CL, it is a great deal of fun, well worth the effort and can be done for a really small investment.
11-05-2003, 01:38 AM
#72
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
I'll have to add my two cents here.
Similar to Mr. Clean's experience, since I've experienced CL Combat, flying one up in a circle is now boring to me, and I don't miss not doing it too much. I DO miss going to contests, though, and flying Combat.
As for RC Combat.. I haven't tried it yet, and I imagine it's plenty exciting, but there is a major difference between RC Combat and CL Combat. The former consists of 5-6 people, each trying to take a nip at the nearest streamer that comes nearby. The latter is intensely, physically, man-to-man - it's you, or the other guy, one will win, the other will lose. My favorite analogy is that RC Combat is much like a bar fight. You see someone come by, you take a swing at him, and try to avoid getting hit by someone else taking a swing at you. CL Combat is more like a knife fight, one on one. One blink, one mistake.. and you're dead! (This applies more to AMA Fast Combat, of course.. Speed Limit and other "non-kill" combat is perhaps a one-to-one fight with forks.)
Similar to Mr. Clean's experience, since I've experienced CL Combat, flying one up in a circle is now boring to me, and I don't miss not doing it too much. I DO miss going to contests, though, and flying Combat.
As for RC Combat.. I haven't tried it yet, and I imagine it's plenty exciting, but there is a major difference between RC Combat and CL Combat. The former consists of 5-6 people, each trying to take a nip at the nearest streamer that comes nearby. The latter is intensely, physically, man-to-man - it's you, or the other guy, one will win, the other will lose. My favorite analogy is that RC Combat is much like a bar fight. You see someone come by, you take a swing at him, and try to avoid getting hit by someone else taking a swing at you. CL Combat is more like a knife fight, one on one. One blink, one mistake.. and you're dead! (This applies more to AMA Fast Combat, of course.. Speed Limit and other "non-kill" combat is perhaps a one-to-one fight with forks.)
11-05-2003, 08:54 AM
#73
Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: orlando, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
Funny how the world turns eh? Used to be you had a big engine in a big plane to hauls around the electronics to control an actuator powered by a rubber band to move 1 control surface.
Now we can have 3 axis control powered by lightweight batteries and fly a plane powered by a rubber band.
What will we see in the next 10 years?
Now we can have 3 axis control powered by lightweight batteries and fly a plane powered by a rubber band.
What will we see in the next 10 years?
11-26-2003, 09:42 PM
#75
Senior Member
RE: Why not move on to R/C ?
When you first fly CL you will get dizzy. The first couple or three flights you need an instructor in the circle with you to take over flying the airplane when you start getting dizzy. After a while you get over it. Also, once you learn to fly maneuvers, that helps.
Jim
Jim