Thoughts from the workbench of Radical RC. The online retailer of electronics and kits for radio control aircraft. Dave Thacker shares his thoughts and knowledge of electronics, batteries, kit design and overall enjoyment of the hobby.
This had to be the biggest hoot ever at a night fly. Heard the cheering from across the field, went to investigate and found alot of foam crunching fun going on. Had to be 200 spectators. It looked easier than it was, how could these guys miss so often?
Come to SEFF, learn that you can have more fun that you thought you could take. Stretch yourself.
This is cool for real. However, I couldn’t help but imagine what he’d look like if he had a pair of costume store chicken feet. Maybe a beak painted on the nose and some feather leggings? Seriously.
Our newest product shown at Toledo 2012 gets a segment in this event coverage video. Thanks to Ken Issac of Toledo prep was 6 weeks of intensive work for all of us at Radical RC. We had a great show and are thankful for all of you that visited the booth. It’s always a boost to our enthusiasm to be reminded each year how many R/C’rs we get to have an impact on throughout the year. We had a great show and look forward to Toledo 2013. Thanks! Dave
Michael Hancock, host of The Crash Cast has finished a complete build video thread for the Radical RC Mini Intern . First video is embeded below. Below video, find link for the entire build thread catelog.
Find the entire list of video’s Here: All Things Crash. This is the website where you’ll find any files, video’s and etc related to the activities of the The Crash Cast podcast.
I would like to thank Micheal “Crash” Hancock for the high honor and all the work involved with picking the Radical RC RC Mini Intern for the 2012 build along project.
I thought my Slow Stick would be ok, until I got it in the air, and then it looked like a Condor. I’m not the worlds best pilot, yet! But I’ve got maybe a half acre to fly in, if you don’t count the side yard, that is another 1/4 acre. ….I’m looking for something that I can fly in my yard, can you tell me the slow flying characteristics of the Millennium RC Micro SSX Balsa Build Kit?
Catch you later, D.V. Middleburg, Fl
D.V.,
A Slow Stick can fly in a small space also.
It’s easier to fly a Slow Stick in a small area if you incraese the dihedral. I like my wing mounting kit with 1″ rise and 16 degree dihedral best overall. In a tight spot, I might even go with the 20 or 24 degree dihedral. It will let you turn on a dime. Find parts for this here.
Stock they don’t respond to quickly to rudder inputs. If you have the stock 12 degree setup and the plastic wing protector on which cuts your dihedral down to about 8 degrees, you have a real slow turning problem for sure. This means you have to think further ahead which is hard in the beginning.
If you are struggling with the Slow Stick in that area, the Millineum kits which are slightly faster are going to be a little more difficult. The airfoil on them is better for inverted flight and aerobatics but this is at the cost of lower lift. You have to be moving a slightly faster to stay in the air which will make the area feel a little tighter to you. It’s not about space or area, it’s about time. Time between turns and across the field. So before you build that nice balsa model (they are very nice kits) get that Slow Stick in flying trim and master it in the area you have. Then you’ll be ready to enjoy that nice Millineum kit. (Highly reccomened!)
What you really have is 1/2 acre to “land in”. For a small space flight plan, I’m thinking about poping up above the tree line where I have more space to fool around then landing along the longest path available to me on the field when obsticals are considered. Perhaps you have a few too many tree’s. Nothing a good chainsaw won’t correct. 😉
Also, consider the Pico Tiger Moth, it’s about 2/3 the size of the Slow Stick, undercambered. I should have these listed here: GWS-E-ARF. You can fly these in decent gymnasium. They will want little or no wind to fly.
Dave
Ok, all in all I am thinking this is big hoax rivaled only by the Global Warming hoax. However, on alot of levels it is every interesting. If it’s faked, it’s very well done. You can visit his website an do some reading for yourself. Of course he’s not flying right now because he’s taken it appart for some repairs and the weather and yadda yadda yadda. There is also an interesting mention of duck tape. Decide for yourself.
I don’t know if I should call him a Pilot or a Perp, but here is his website: Human Birdwings
Full TED Talk Below:
I wrote previously on the subject of “Confirmation Bias”. Sometimes it is difficult to discover the answer to a technical problem because the person bringing you the problem has a hitch, assumption, or faulty logic step in their diagnostic process. Often people draw conclusions from spotty evidence. For instance a customer shows me a receiver and say’s “This receiver is bad.” I ask: “Why do you think it is bad? The answer almost always comes back something like “I plugged it in and it does not work.” The person is saying from that one test or measurement they have drawn a conclusion. It seems reasonable doesn’t it? But, really it’s pretty silly when you think about all the things that can cause an RX not to respond to a TX. You see, the real and only conclusion you can draw from the customers test is this. “In one trial, the RX produced no apparent response.” That is quite a bit different from “This receiver is bad.” Understanding the difference in those two conclusions is why some people are good at diagnostics and others are not. To be good at figuring out a problem, you are greatly advantaged by not making any assumptions or broad conclusions.
In the case of a receiver, lets go over many measurements and tests that you might perform to decide if it is in fact “Bad”.
1. Has it ever functioned successfully?
2. Does it really match the Transmitter? (is it talking the right language DSMII vs DSMX or PCM vs FM vs AM and etc…)
3. Is it on the same channel? (in the case of non-2.4ghz gear)
4. Besides looking at the stickers, did you actually look at the tags on the TX and RX xtal?
5. Is the shift the same? For example, a positive shift JR TX is never going to drive a negative shift Hitec or Futaba RX.
6. Have you driven the servo you used on the tested RX with a servo tester to make sure it actually wiggles?
7. Have you load tested the battery your driving the RX with to see that it is high enough to actually turn on an RX?
8. Are you using a switch between the battery and RX? Plug the battery in directly so your not actually testing if the switch is good.
9. Can you demonstrate the TX driving another RX to establish that your testing with a working TX? One might complain, “I flew it a week ago!” However, we’re not testing the troubled RX a week ago, we’re testing it now. 😉
10. Have you plugged a voltmeter into an empty servo port to see if there really is voltage finding it’s way to the RX?
11. Is the crystal really fitting tightly in the socket or is it loose and wobbly?
12. Does the TX have the capability of being on for programming without broadcasting?
13. Is the meter on the TX a voltmeter or RF Output indicator? What does it say?
I’m sure a sharp thinker can come up with some more things to consider. Many of the things above we’ve found at one time or another to be the cause of a non-responsive RX. Assume nothing.
Recently we had an A123 RX pack returned by a customer. He said it tested poorly, only a few hundred mah. The customer appeared to be correct, it was testing bad after several charge/discharge cycles on our bench. And, the charger would increase in voltage rapidly when we applied charge current. Strange. However, even after several trials, a good mechanic still hasn’t drawn any conclusion. He may be moving towards condemning the battery but all tests were not complete. He cut the shrink off the pack. The tabs all looked fine. He re soldered the tabs anyway just in case there was an unseen cold joint. Note: He had originally built the pack, but without emotion, he redid his original work anyway. Many people fail at this step because “they couldn’t possibly have done anything wrong.” (yea right!). The pack was cycled again with the same poor result. Now, finding a bad battery pack is rare, exceedingly rare. We know this to be true from many years of experience. So, we keep looking. I examined the pack under magnification (even though it had been re soldered by a respected pro) and all looked good. I looked at the plug under magnification and found a thin transparent film on the plastic shell. The more I looked, the more I saw this film all over the shell. Is this paint? We decided to solder a second lead onto the pack and test again. The pack tested good. What was the problem you wonder? We can only conclude the film on the plug was thin CA the customer had somehow accidentally allowed to come into contact with the plug. It had a high resistance because one or more connector pins was evidently coated in glue. After replacing this plug, the apparently bad battery pack was proven that it was always as good as new.
So, if a battery pack fails a discharge test or an RX fails to respond, is it bad?
To read about The Texas Sharp Shooter Fallacy, check out this wiki link. Reading it is what inspired me to write today’s article. It describes in somewhat technical language a common way to foul up a test.
“Texas Sharpshooter Fallicy” Wiki Link.
Hard to beat a Stick for about any purpose! Dave