RC Aircraft

[R.Perry]

You seemed a little more unhappy about it in you first post. And in my mind you still did the right thing. I saw no issue with what they were doing based on what I understood from your first post. But again, if they have been told not to be there, then they were 100% in the wrong.

I didn't intend to come off that way, but I guess it I did. I have a very tight window Sundays for mapping, the cafeteria opens at eleven and I'm given to 10 am to complete the mapping that is done over the active campus. I also want to do the mapping in the best possible light and that means no earlier than 9 am.

As I said, I know nothing about the RC world other than I wouldn't want to be attempting mapping while they were flying.

 

[Phaedrus]

Given they had been previously told not to fly there the catastrophic impact with pole is a sort of karmic justice! I am a little over protective of the RC but am also the first to condemn to outlaws giving the entire hobby a black eye.

This is one of my current favorites. Hard to tell in photo, but the cowl is about 13 inches across. 79 inch span, weighs 20 pounds with a 70cc twin for power. Prop is 22 inches in diameter.

 

[BigAl07]

I am a little over protective of the RC but am also the first to condemn to outlaws giving the entire hobby a black eye.

You just described me to a "T". Anything AVIATION is a passion of mine but R/C aviation is a HUGE passion for me. I'm not exactly sure where I'd be today without growing up in R/C and having the HEROES I did that were my R/C mentors.

This is one of my current favorites. Hard to tell in photo, but the cowl is about 13 inches across. 79 inch span, weighs 20 pounds with a 70cc twin for power. Prop is 22 inches in diameter.View attachment 1264

She's a thing of BEAUTY!! That DA70 is a BEAST of an engine isn't it?

 

[R.Perry]

Given they had been previously told not to fly there the catastrophic impact with pole is a sort of karmic justice! I am a little over protective of the RC but am also the first to condemn to outlaws giving the entire hobby a black eye.

This is one of my current favorites. Hard to tell in photo, but the cowl is about 13 inches across. 79 inch span, weighs 20 pounds with a 70cc twin for power. Prop is 22 inches in diameter.View attachment 1264

Do you let your kids ride in it?

 

[Phaedrus]

It is not actually large for an RC plane any more. This is a 60% Fokker Triplane!!

 

[R.Perry]

Why not just build something you can actually fly and go somewhere? I have had a desire to build a 2/3 scale P51 Mustang, why, I always dreamed of flying a P51. It is my understanding it can be a tricky plane to fly with tremendous P factor (torque of the engine wants to roll the plane, need lots of rudder). Not only that flying tail draggers mean you learn to do the tail dragger toe dance, meaning you are on the rudders or you ground loop it.

 

[Phaedrus]

I've asked that same question more than once. FWIW, RC aircraft that large are not real common. Plus since they weigh over 55 pounds they need a special inspection and approval done by AMA to fly legally. FAA is on board with the Large Model Aircraft program AMA does.

 

[Florida Drone Supply]

Given they had been previously told not to fly there the catastrophic impact with pole is a sort of karmic justice! I am a little over protective of the RC but am also the first to condemn to outlaws giving the entire hobby a black eye.

This is one of my current favorites. Hard to tell in photo, but the cowl is about 13 inches across. 79 inch span, weighs 20 pounds with a 70cc twin for power. Prop is 22 inches in diameter.View attachment 1264

very cool. Looks bigger in the photo than you describe.

 

[Phaedrus]

very cool. Looks bigger in the photo than you describe.

Up close it is fairly large. The numbers are deceiving.

Here it is in the hands of the designer and one of the best RC pilots on Earth

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Florida Drone Supply]

Up close it is fairly large. The numbers are deceiving.

Here it is in the hands of the designer and one of the best RC pilots on Earth

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

....and he makes it look so easy!

 

[R.Perry]

Up close it is fairly large. The numbers are deceiving.

Here it is in the hands of the designer and one of the best RC pilots on Earth

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Hmmmm, why not just get a helicopter? Wouldn't recommend trying that with a real plane.
Obviously the power to weight ratio is way out of wack for realistic flight characteristics.

 

[Phaedrus]

Wayne Handley wanted to try. Came close in his turbo Raven.

 

[clolsonus]

Gives me a bit of a headache, but still pretty cool to see in person:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[PatR]

There’s a guy that flies a full scale Edge 540 in airshows that comes close to duplicating some of the RC maneuvers. Sean Tucker is indeed another that employs a few high alpha maneuvers in his routine.

For the record, some of the current multirotor operators come from a long history in fixed wing and rotary RC, which makes it hard for us to understand why some of the current crop of multirotor fliers find maintaining positive control of their aircraft without GPS difficult.

 

[PatR]

Obviously the power to weight ratio is way out of wack for realistic flight characteristics.

Talking about power to weight ratios, the T-38 Talon can go from sea level to 38,000’ in 60 seconds. Not bad for a 60 year old design. Some of the current fighters can do that quicker and get much higher. A lightly loaded 767 has an absolutely awesome climb rate.

 

[Phaedrus]

There’s a guy that flies a full scale Edge 540 in airshows that comes close to duplicating some of the RC maneuvers. Sean Tucker is indeed another that employs a few high alpha maneuvers in his routine.

Sean became close friends with a long time giant scale RC guy. He got to see what an decent 40% RC plane can do up close.

For the record, some of the current multirotor operators come from a long history in fixed wing and rotary RC, which makes it hard for us to understand why some of the current crop of multirotor fliers find maintaining positive control of their aircraft without GPS difficult.

The long time RC guys have a huge leg up on orientation and flying skill. Newer guys are trying to learn so much and they seem to pay the least attention to the flying part. As long as they can fly as far out of sight as they dare and get their drone back using RTH, then they call it good.

And you are right about how many are out there in the sUAS and UAV worlds. I've got old RC buddies who fly for AeroVironment, Northrup/Grumman, Precision Hawk, General Atomics, and so on. Plus a bunch more doing RD and flying for smaller guys. BTW - been meaning to ask you, did you ever come across either Dan Landis or Chip Hyde when you were deployed? Seems they might have been there about the same time as you.

 

[PatR]

Hyde had encountered some “issues” that benched him during the period I was “over there”. Never met Landis but Bill Hemple was using the same hanger I was on my first trip. It was a VERY large hanger and great for foamie flying.

Speaking of General Atomics and looking back, I truly regret turning down a job flying target drones for them in the early ‘90’s. It didn’t pay enough at the time. Had I accepted it would have put me front row center for one of the early Predator crews. Those folks had the best living and operating conditions you could get at the over seas facilities.

 

[Phaedrus]

Hyde had encountered some “issues” that benched him during the period I was “over there”. Never met Landis but Bill Hemple was using the same hanger I was on my first trip. It was a VERY large hanger and great for foamie flying.

Forgot about Bill. I've got a couple of his planes. I met him when he was a little kid inTucson. I went to school there. He's got an RV-7 now that he built. Scoots down to Sorry Vista pretty quick from TUS.

 

[R.Perry]

Talking about power to weight ratios, the T-38 Talon can go from sea level to 38,000’ in 60 seconds. Not bad for a 60 year old design. Some of the current fighters can do that quicker and get much higher. A lightly loaded 767 has an absolutely awesome climb rate.

That is true, the F18 can do a vertical takoff once it rotates. I've seen the Blue Angles do it at the Reno air races. The T38 began it's clime at nearly mach 1, so sure it could get to FL38 pretty fast.
The 767 along with other airlines can only climb at 250 mph below 15000 ft, other wise they can over stress the aircraft.

I suppose my point is nobody in their right mind would go vertical and hang close to the ground even if they had the power. Not only that some of the maneuvers I have seen would have killed the pilot due to excessive G forces.
I can tell you high G forces are painful.

 

[PatR]

I think we can all agree there have been some airshow pilots that might have been viewed as not being in a right mind. The RC community often meets that standard as well, but we can and have had a lot of fu (and spent considerable sums) perfecting our skills to a level where we can consistently fly low level, low speed, high alpha maneuvers on the backside of the power curve without destroying the aircraft. Sure, we have the power needed to fly the prop instead of the wing but we also have airframe designs that assist tremendously with thick airfoils and exaggerated control surfaces. But ultimately success comes down to personal skill and a willingness to wreck a few in the years it takes developing those skills [emoji6]