Bravedan

Mike, I have sent you a Private Message as this section of the Forum is PUBLIC.

No, sorry, but nothing at all like the Dysan fan, which has LOADS of extremely conventional moving parts, from a bladed fan hidden in the "stand" to a brushless motor and axial fan blades inside the head. The Dysan is in some respects a magicians trick, new technology that really isn't, and is not anything like the scientific advance this technology offers.

The problem with this new "drive" will be getting the power to weight ratio and where have we heard that before with electric flight?

Now, I was beginning to like you and then you mentioned Sk*****er radio gear........(SPIT)  🤣

(Their display team were a "hated competitor" back when Fred Flintstone and I went flying, and WE of course used THE best, Futaba M Series, TEE HEE)

I still use a T7CP 35MHz for Phoenix Simulator operation. With no crystal there's no power drain on the RF so it lasts AGES between charges. I have to say though its menu system is total rubbish and extremely constraining compared to Taranis and Horus!!

I still have my 27MHz "M" Series (two transmitters and a clutch of Rx and a big pile of servos) and with the occasional kick and prod it still works, as do the black and red labelled servos (for alternate direction!!) At the time I was not only flying but also racing 1/12th and 1/8th Stock Cars, 1/8th being all weathers outdoor, down in the dirt and oil, a pretty hard use for any radio. It still survived.

For the record, it is possible to put a FrSky "hack module" inside most transmitters which then sends its RF to much cheaper FrSky receivers. Or one can be externally mounted feeding from the trainer port. Can even be made switchable so FASST use continues till it finally dies. You are still constrained by the original Tx firmware menu system, though I guess you'd find that an advantage. Might be worth considering if you get to need more Rx than you have, or Rx start failing, though I have "spare" FASST receivers, another avenue.

To reinforce Ben, cost is of course not just the Tx but also the cost of the Rx's, but FrSky Rx are very reasonably priced.

Well..............

I'm not sure why you find the 6EX difficult to input, but that in itself is a worry since most (if not now all) transmitters are going to seem more complex initially till you get your head round them.  While FASST is a robust system, it's long obsolete and support is now fast disappearing. I have two 6EX (well actually six but the others are 35MHz!!) and a 10CG, so do have experience and am not just spouting regurgitated internet rubbish!).

As FASST was going obsolete (near five years back!!) I converted to FrSky with a batch 2 early Taranis and bought a FASST Module for it. That module in itself is now long obsolete!

I suggest you think long and hard before committing more money towards FASST good though it "was", as in the scheme of 2.4GHz you are dealing with time expired equipment and TBH anything you buy may well have a very limited service time left.

There are private individuals who try to support obsolete systems. One of the highest regarded is Mike Ridley (no personal experience).

His site and details are here www.modelradioworkshop.co.uk

Personally I'd consider it time to move on, and FrSky the way to go. I use Spektrum, Futaba FlySky, and FrSky so do not have brand myopia.

With Futaba, jittering servos (that are OK on other channels so not the servo) is usually dirt on the relevant Tx potentiometer track. The fix is easy, disconnect the battery, remove the case rear, and give the pot a good spray of contact cleaning fluid from an aerosol tube inserted by the wire exit to wash it out, then work it a few times. Do not power up till all the fluid has evaporated!  My old 35MHz tx get the treatment around annually due their little use.

Your other issue actually sounds more like supply issues, maybe black wire corrosion on the battery power feed wiring, look for corrosion at terminals, "black" copper wire and/or green verdigris.

That is the normal frame effect coinciding with rotation speed! 😉

Watch this spool up.................

I particularly liked the way the pilot eventually decided the launcher was never going to hold it at the right angle and grabbed the tail!!

Great progress, Mike.  I have more chance of running a Marathon than having the time and patience to build one of those!

I have had a reversing pitch prop for about five years, but never put it on a plane as it coincided with me no longer going to Swanley (because of the iggits going there then flying dangerously, it had a netted off pits, they though it was funny to fly through it flat out and were not stopped, also they'd start flying combat or "pylon" with others up with ultralight slow flys and decimate them). SRFC also stopped Indoor Meets as the very large Lancing hall had risen to £120 an hour. Also while I can use Langley's sports hall anytime its not in use it has full netting on all walls so even a light brush spells it being caught and trapped.

I have a suitable plane flying which would easily convert (Piaget), but rarely fly it now as where I fly planes on Mondays (closed group, no vacancies) is too low a ceiling for it to be fun. The most difficult and expensive thing is the motor hollow shaft for the pitch rod.

Well, I have two Horus X12S and an early (Batch 2) Taranis to be accurate. Trevor and Gerard both have Horus 10's.

FrSky long ago joined the "mainstream" manufacturers in terms of sales, though if you mean overpriced overhyped bloatware of course,  they have not! 🤐

My Taranis, being smaller and lighter, carries all the slope models. It has (from just after purchase) a Futaba FASST module to use all my old but extremely reliable receivers.

Vinyl looks good. I was at one time thinking of swapping the front for a water dipped one, but decided not to bother on the grounds I was too lazy to do the work!

One Horus carries a multi-module so can also "do" FHSS, DSM2, DSMX, FlySky, Cheerson, Syma, Hubsan, Eachine, Bayang and a host of others.

Agreed, but the as viewed shade of a painted metal cowl was often quite different to the painted doped fabric, especially after a hot engine and exhaust system close to the panel had existed for a few hours running. We often over strive to get matches that actually did not exist in reality. It was war, they were not building concours.

Often the fabric painted over quickly matted more that the metal.

An example is all the best looking "bare metal"  finished models have differing shades/textures on panel to panel finishes. Subtle but definitely not a match. Then add scale effect.

It's like I pointed out today while looking at several real fabric covered planes, the "rib tape" serrations are actually so small that at a club size model scale they would NOT be visible AT ALL, certainly not the pinking shears finish often used!

There was a huge argument that raged for weeks years ago on a Tram forum as to if the shade of dark green Corgi had used was correct. Eventually a fitter for Blackpool came on and stated bluntly in best "Lancastrian" that they used whatever dark green Woolworths or the local suppliers had that week!!  I have sanded down 1920-1930 bus panels, buses always in the same company and the differing shades have to be seen to be believed. Part patching was normal.

Nice. You could always pick one where the cowl was a different colour, and use an acrylic aerosol. Or in halfords find a suitable matching red from the big range of shades.

Hi Mike,

Lots of effort gone into that SE5A.

Not that easy to see from your picture, but it looks like you have loomed the aerial (at least one) in with other wiring.  This not ideal.

The silver end section of the wire aerial is the actual signal receiving part, and this at minimum should be located as far away from wiring, battery, or anything else metal or carrying signal/voltage. Also the wiring not pulled so the receiver exit wiring is pulled tight. Something moves and it pulls apart!

Looks as though you have maybe correctly located the aerials 90 degrees to each other, but that is essential, too.  Pic 11 I think refers.

Also, your motor to ESC wiring looks to be against the balance weights so the cable will vibrate against the corner edge of the weight, possibly wearing through the soft insulation and short.

Only near $12 dollars written off for them, they could add it to the trillions someone took around 9/11 and still not notice,  but for us a little more serious? Do they still do Lease/Lend??  😀

Thanks Peter......booking in!!

Am I correct in assuming this is the same visit that we did before, last year or so?

Unfortunate naming as the first time around the Typhoon was also technically outgunned by the Tempest, but which was more successful and lasted better?

They also did a SE5A and a couple of others inc Spacewalker, but may have dropped or just OOS, quick search did not turn them up.

SE5A flew very well, balsa with just paper roundels so not as cosmetic as the Model Aces one. I note they now do a 400mm balsa frame Zero but that is unlikely to be OK Indoor!!

I maidened an SE5A for Clive in our group and it flew excellently. Have also flown the TRIPLANE and that flew well but didn't like right hand turns much (allegedly quite scale then!!)

A little less fiddly and quite a bit less fiddly, depending on model chosen, are the micro range of balsa planes available from Banggood.

While I have not built any, those I fly with have, and they have on occasion successfully tested their robustness to beyond that reasonable to ask for(!). I have flown/trimmed a couple and they do fly well in a none too large sports hall.

https://www.banggood.com/Flea-Balsawood-358MM-Wingspan-Micro-RC-Airplane-Newton-Kit-With-Power-System-p-1122905.html

https://www.banggood.com/Tiger-Moth-K10-400mm-Wingspan-Micro-RC-Balsa-Wood-Laser-Cut-RC-Airplane-Building-Kit-p-1237225.html

https://www.banggood.com/Mini-Camel-Fighter-380mm-Wingspan-Balsa-Wood-Laser-Cut-RC-Airplane-Kit-p-1267512.html

https://www.banggood.com/Fokker-E3-480mm-Wingspan-Balsa-Wood-Laser-Cut-RC-Airplane-KIT-p-1266615.html

Banggood also sell receiver bricks with servos for budget costs.

Micro Aces really have got the printed finish off to a Tee, haven't they Don!

I "put up" with the Ares products as I simply do not have the time for better. I keep looking though!!

One day................................................  SIGH

What gets me is that a drone/UAV under control going over 400 feet high is regarded as the devil incarnate and the pilot should be locked up, yet these get "isn't it wonderful" press reports for getting right up past the highest airliners under no control at all.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-44536052

When operating from Fickleshole, presumably likewise Sevenoaks, and from slopes like "The Trundle" and Shoreham Mill Hill, the 400' / 120 Metre height restriction will continue to apply, though in the case of Mill Hill a 50' over top of hill limit by agreement with ATC overrides.

What is not made fully clear (yet) are matters such as minimum distances from airport for ANY UAV flight, and given its only about six weeks off implementation, it's cutting it fine to get the word out.  On paper and from stated intent, CAMFC is (just) outside the proposed distance limit.

Gerard and I discussed this, but for wider reading.

The material FrSky use is a silicone sealer electrical product, designed to be high resistance and fully moisture resistant.  While Hot Glue may do the job, its electrical properties are harder to be certain of, especially its conductivity in damp conditions. It might also make removal difficult.

I have used Aquarium Silicone successfully (as its easy to get hold of), and at least its water resistance is ensured!!

However, the CORRECT stuff is:-

https://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/silicone-sealants/0555588/