In article 11945352.555.1331817408515.JavaMail.geo-discussion-
forums@ynlt15, says...

On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 10:27:53 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article 22882974.3759.1331731749391.JavaMail.geo-discussion-
forums@vbtf26, says...

On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 10:56:50 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 20:46:33 -0400, Happy John
wrote:

Down here in SWFL we've actually got an R/C "Air Park" up on the north
end of town. They fly all sorts of stuff there including jets.

They used to be very common at military bases, but not so much anymore.

===

Given the high state of today's technology, there's a lot of potential
for criminality of various sorts with an R/C model.

Not really, Wayne. That's a pretty common misconception among the public, but I've been modeling off and on for 35+ years, and flying RC for the last 12 years. An RC airplane or helicopter's ability to deliver a payload is pretty limited, both in weight and in range. There are far more effective, easier and cheaper ways to accomplish what you're alluding to.

The best use of RC technology for nefarious purposes is video surveillance using a helicopter.

Oh, and High Power Rocketry, and the availability of those motors to the "public" is another one of those hobbies that get a bad rap. Opponents want to shut it down, claiming that they can be used to target an airplane, but that's highly unlikely to be successful. The military experimented with unguided rockets, and they never got close to a hit. Guided of course stand a much better chance, but by the time you've developed the technology, you could also develop
your
own motors, etc. There are obviously far easier methods, as we've seen very clearly over the last few years, unfortunately.

These things are just hobbies that some people with over-active imaginations think might be used for evil. That kind of thinking leads to (has already led to) restricting the RC and Rocketry hobbies. It's completely ridiculous.

/soapbox off/ :-)

I dabbled in R/C planes, but with mixed results! I never really got the
hang of bringing the plane back because everything is backwards then! I
could go outbound nicely, but coming back was hell!

As a learning crutch lots of people just orient the transmitter in the same direction as the plane (like when it's flying away from you) and swivel their head around to look at the plane. That way the stick movements are still natural. After a while you get the hang of it.

More than one "real" pilot has come to the field with a nice, new R/C plane, not a trainer, and thought they'd just fire it up and be flying in no time. Usually won't accept any help or advice, after all they fly the real thing. Then after picking up the pieces they leave and never come back, or swallow their pride and we get them on a trainer plane with a buddy box transmitter. It's so different from sitting in the real thing that it's almost not even helpful being
a pilot. In many ways it's more difficult to fly an R/C plane.

One advantage... R/C pilots get to walk *toward* the scene of the crash! :-)

That's an interesting idea! And I agree in some ways it is more
difficult to fly an R/C plane! I broke the first one I had the first
time I flew it. It isn't intuitive to me at all, because I can't feel
what the plane is doing, I don't know whether it's about to stall, or
what! I was horrible at level flight as well, I was either climbing or
descending!