| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot.  Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. I don't know why you two can't get along. It's not as if either one of you is a Harry Krause type. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:10:31 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. I don't know why you two can't get along. It's not as if either one of you is a Harry Krause type. I'm trying to answer his questions as best I can. I'm thinking the RC aircraft he flew was his neighbor's quadcopter. That would explain all the questions he had about flying an RC airplane. -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On 2/18/2015 11:19 AM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:10:31 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote: On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. I don't know why you two can't get along. It's not as if either one of you is a Harry Krause type. I'm trying to answer his questions as best I can. I'm thinking the RC aircraft he flew was his neighbor's quadcopter. That would explain all the questions he had about flying an RC airplane. And you would be wrong. Again. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/18/2015 11:19 AM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:10:31 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote: On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. I don't know why you two can't get along. It's not as if either one of you is a Harry Krause type. I'm trying to answer his questions as best I can. I'm thinking the RC aircraft he flew was his neighbor's quadcopter. That would explain all the questions he had about flying an RC airplane. And you would be wrong. Again. Well, if you've flown an RC airplane, why all the questions about take offs, landings, taxiing, pre-flight checks, etc. Seems like you'd know the answers. I notice you didn't respond to the answers I gave you. But that's pretty much your MO, isn't it? -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On 2/18/2015 2:58 PM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/18/2015 11:19 AM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:10:31 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote: On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. I don't know why you two can't get along. It's not as if either one of you is a Harry Krause type. I'm trying to answer his questions as best I can. I'm thinking the RC aircraft he flew was his neighbor's quadcopter. That would explain all the questions he had about flying an RC airplane. And you would be wrong. Again. Well, if you've flown an RC airplane, why all the questions about take offs, landings, taxiing, pre-flight checks, etc. Seems like you'd know the answers. I notice you didn't respond to the answers I gave you. But that's pretty much your MO, isn't it? If you want I will say something about countersteering and you both can come after me.... but the two of you need to knock it off. |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. For Christ's sake John, we are talking about model replicas of small, recreational aircraft, not a F/A-18. I am not interested in your silly arguments and comparisons. If you enjoy flying your RC airplane ... have a ball. BTW ... in response to someone else's comment ... I pursued and got my ticket years before I had much extra $$ to spend. It was a dream I had since I was a little kid and I am very glad to have accomplished it even though it turns out it was not something I wanted to stay heavily involved in. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:44:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/18/2015 8:19 AM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:47:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 6:30 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:46:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/17/2015 12:44 PM, Abit Loco wrote: On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:35:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/16/2015 8:18 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:08:10 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 2/16/2015 6:31 PM, wrote: On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:25:26 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote: The big difference between simulators/real airplanes and RC airplanes - in sims or real planes, the nose of the plane is in front of you. With an RC plane, at least part of the time, the nose is pointed at you. That means the left and right controls are reversed. This, I believe, is what causes the most problems, at least for me. Another related difference is that pilots in a real plane has a seat of the pants, first person view. Not so with RC. Something that helps newbies to RC is that when the airplane is flying towards you and the controls are reversed, your can turn your body so the transmitter is faced the same way as the plane, but look back over your shoulder at the plane. That way the stick moves to the right, the plane moves to the right. It's a crutch, but with some more stick time it'll come naturally. I don't think there's much at all in common comparing RC flying and flying a real airplane. Speed scale is totally different. Turns and maneuvers are not anything close to being realistic to flying an airplane. I see it as a fun hobby for many but to compare it to actually flying an airplane it isn't even close. If you think about it, it's very similar. The same rules apply, the aircraft reacts the same way. RC planes can do things that real planes can't, but they also suffer from the fact that they don't fly quite the same way. Said another way, the air molecules are still the same size, while the wings and control surfaces of RC planes are far smaller. That's why truly scale RC planes don't tend to fly very well. Good RC pilots can fly very realistically. I saw a jet done up in Fed-Ex colors being flown slowly and with coordinated turns. It looked very real, except for the size, although it was still large with about a 10 foot wingspan. But while you may have not meant it, your attitude is common with "real" pilots. They think of RC planes as toys. And they crash them when they first try to fly them, thinking that if they can fly the real thing, they can fly the toy. They cannot. Real pilots hope to walk away from a crash. RC pilots walk towards it! I wasn't knocking RC flying. I know a lot of people enjoy it. I also know a lot of people who think it's similar to actual flying (which it isn't). As you point out the scale is totally different, the power to weight ratio is different and the control surfaces behave differently. I've tried a couple once in flight. You're right. I can land an airplane but I'd crash an RC if I tried applying my flying instincts and control. Back when I was flying I used to play with whatever the current version of Microsoft Flight Simulator was at the time. I had the yoke and pedal controller set up. It was not exactly like flying but was pretty close in many ways, especially how the wing surfaces reacted in the simulator. Even more realistic when you added in a little "weather" and turbulence. I think that was much closer to the "feel" of actually flying than a RC plane can ever be. Flight simulators such as Microsoft's have very, very little resemblance to RC flying. You keep saying its not similar to actual flying. How do the control surfaces behave differently? What is the power to weight ration of the 'real' airplanes to which you refer? Do RC airplanes have a lot more power to weight? Less? Here are the motor specs for my motor: Power 15 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 950Kv Key Features Equivalent to a 15-size glow engine for sport and scale airplanes weighing 36–56 oz (1020–1590 g) Ideal for 3D airplanes weighing 32–40 oz (910–1135 g) Ideal for models requiring up to 575 watts of power High-torque, direct-drive alternative to inrunner brushless motors Includes mount, prop adapters and mounting hardware External rotor design—5mm shaft can easily be reversed for alternative motor installations Slotted 14-pole outrunner design High-quality construction with ball bearings and hardened steel shaft Here are my airplane specs: Apprentice S 15e RTF with SAFE Product Specifications Wingspan: 59.0 in (1500mm) Overall Length: 42.5 in (1080mm) Wing Area: 515 sq. in. (33.2 sq. dm.) Flying Weight: 49.0 oz (1390 g) Motor Size: 15-size brushless outrunner Radio: Spektrum DX5e transmitter (included) CG (center of gravity): 3-1/8 in (79.0mm) back from the leading edge of wing Prop Size: 11 x 8 Speed Control : 30-amp brushless (installed) Recommended Battery: 11.1V 3S 3200mAh LiPo (included) Flaps: No Retracts: No Control Throw (Ailerons): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Elevator): Low: 0.71 in (18mm); High: 0.91 in (23mm) Control Throw (Rudder): Low: 1.10 in (28mm); High: 1.35 in (35mm) How does one compare the 'power to weight' ratio? RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. A real airplane requires taking weight, temperature, altitude and air density as factors. With RC flying, none of those issues matter much. Try flying a real airplane. Then you are qualified to judge and compare. If I tried to climb vertically with the Apprentice, I'd be in a stall very quickly. if the power is up it will do a loop, but not climb like the 3D planes discussed earlier. It's absolutely true that I don't worry much about temperature and air density as factors. Weight and its distribution are important, as is altitude. Too high and I've violated FCC regs and/or lost sight of the aircraft. A real F/A-18 will probably climb faster than any of the scale RC aircraft and is probably much faster. I've never seen any RC aircraft that could climb at 50,000 feet/min or fly 1000 mph, and that would include a scale RC F/A-18. But, maybe you have. A little sensitive about your newly found hobby, aren't you? Do my comments about an F/A-18 sound sensitive? Or was that just the best rebuttal you could come up with? You were the one telling us what real airplanes could not do. For Christ's sake John, we are talking about model replicas of small, recreational aircraft, not a F/A-18. I am not interested in your silly arguments and comparisons. If you enjoy flying your RC airplane ... have a ball. BTW ... in response to someone else's comment ... I pursued and got my ticket years before I had much extra $$ to spend. It was a dream I had since I was a little kid and I am very glad to have accomplished it even though it turns out it was not something I wanted to stay heavily involved in. Sorry, Richard, but you're the one who made the bull**** statement: " RC planes can climb faster than any comparable "real" airplane. How fast can you climb? Pretty much like a rocket. A real airplane doesn't climb like that and to try it would result in a stall very quickly. " I simply responded to it. -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
|
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| For the RC, feet on the ground pilots.. | General | |||
| Bush admin. overpaid banks in HIS bailout. | General | |||
| Auto pilots | General | |||
| Navy announces new Kerry Class aircraft carrier! | Cruising | |||
Hybrid Mode
