On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:16:06 -0500, Abit Loco
wrote:

Since I've never flown a real airplane, I can't argue your 'turns and maneuvers'
statement. I know that if I bank my airplane using the ailerons and don't give it
some up elevator, it will head for the dirt. Perhaps you could tell us what the big
differences are.

===

In a real plane you initiate a turn by briefly banking the plane with
the ailerons and giving it a momentary touch of rudder in the desired
direction. The plane will stay banked and continue to turn until you
reverse the process. And yes, you do need to pull back on the stick or
yoke a bit to maintain altitude. Does a model behave the same way?

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:45:30 -0500, KC wrote:

I have seen them with a live screen so you can fly with a cockpit point
of view on your controller... Not sure how fast it updates for real time
but the one I saw was a quad copter so it was not as fast...

===

I've never flown a quad copter but I am absolutely sure that it is
nothing like flying a fixed wing aircraft - model or real.

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:20:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I still go down and fly two or three times a year. My medical expired
long ago, so I always go up with an instructor. I usually just fly the
pattern several times, practicing landings, then get bored and go home.

===

To me the best part of flying in a small plane is sight seeing on a
nice day. You're close enough that you could fly out over the Cape
and on to Nantucket or the Vineyard. I used to have friends in
Stamford, CT who would sometimes fly out to Nantucket for Sunday
brunch on a nice winter day.

Abit Loco wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:03:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/17/2015 6:11 PM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:47:49 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

I'm not sure it's a good idea to encourage Johnny to try real flying.
If he has half the problems with a real plane as he does with his toy
versions....Lord help the local folk.

You have to admit, it's kind of fun watching Krause and Eriksson 'gang up' on Herring
over something so ridiculous.

What a laugh!


Ganging up?

I told you that I am not knocking your RC flying hobby. It's fun for many.

You are the one who is trying to convince me and others that flying a RC
airplane is similar to real flying.

There are similarities. Period. That's all anyone here has said.

I think that ingrained pilot arrogance is rearing its ugly head.

Done for today. Sleep well.

I flew u controls as a kid, wanted RC but was not in my budget. I do not
have a pilots license but have flown with a pilot in some cool airplanes.
Besides a 172. The Ucontrol is an example of very much quicker response
than a real airplane. Someways is harder to fly a model airplane because
of the very quick response characteristic and the fact you are not at
5000'.

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:11:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The more I think about it the more the differences become obvious.

When starting your take off roll, how do you "steer" the RC? Or do you?
When landing, how do you correct for crosswinds? Dipped wing or slip?
What's your pre-flight like. What's a "run up". Magneto check limits?
What's your landing pattern procedures?
How do you stop the plane when you land?
How do you control direction of the plane when taxiing?

Those are but a few very basic issues of "real" flying that I don't
think the average RC pilot deals with.

===

With all due respect, I'd argue that those are mostly procedural
differences that are not related to flight and control surface
dynamics.

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:34:16 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Don't need to. Not interested in getting a 'real' pilot's license. I have a hard
enough time with RC planes - as do a lot of 'real' pilots, and I'm not talking piper
cub guys.



This just gets funnier and funnier.

===

Why the heck are you in this discussion?

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 23:12:38 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:00:07 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Try "the hood". The hood is a device that you wear that limits your
field of view to the inside of the airplane only. All you can see is
the instruments. Your instructor will take control of the airplane and
put it in an unusual attitude meaning it may be banked over and
descending or in a banked climb nearing stall. He'll then say, "Your
plane" and you learn to recover using instruments only with no ground
reference. When you are in a banked turn, you can't tell by the seat
of your pants. The airplane could be standing on one wing tip and you
wouldn't know other than by instruments.


That is the kind of thing that might have brought down the plane in
the Java sea.

===

Also the sort of thing that brought down young Kennedy off the coast
of Marthas Vineyard. He was not instrumented rated but approached MV
in the dark on a hazy night. They theorize that he became disoriented
and put the plane into a stall/spin that he didn't know how to recover
from.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:11:53 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The more I think about it the more the differences become obvious.

When starting your take off roll, how do you "steer" the RC? Or do you?
When landing, how do you correct for crosswinds? Dipped wing or slip?
What's your pre-flight like. What's a "run up". Magneto check limits?
What's your landing pattern procedures?
How do you stop the plane when you land?
How do you control direction of the plane when taxiing?

Those are but a few very basic issues of "real" flying that I don't
think the average RC pilot deals with.

===

With all due respect, I'd argue that those are mostly procedural
differences that are not related to flight and control surface
dynamics.

I think there are some major differences in handling. Both the control
surfaces and polar moments.

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 23:49:35 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:41:57 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

What the heck would you know about driving a *real* boat through a
ferocious inlet? Really.

Maybe he took a 16' boat out of Deale
That can be exciting on a windy day.

===

I think the biggest boat that harry has actually owned was the 24 ft
Parker. Not a bad boat for the Chesapeake on a moderately calm day
but not my choice for going offshore any distance. Apparently the
fuel burn on the 24 was too much for him as I recall.

On 2/17/2015 11:27 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 23:12:38 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:00:07 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Try "the hood". The hood is a device that you wear that limits your
field of view to the inside of the airplane only. All you can see is
the instruments. Your instructor will take control of the airplane and
put it in an unusual attitude meaning it may be banked over and
descending or in a banked climb nearing stall. He'll then say, "Your
plane" and you learn to recover using instruments only with no ground
reference. When you are in a banked turn, you can't tell by the seat
of your pants. The airplane could be standing on one wing tip and you
wouldn't know other than by instruments.


That is the kind of thing that might have brought down the plane in
the Java sea.

===

Also the sort of thing that brought down young Kennedy off the coast
of Marthas Vineyard. He was not instrumented rated but approached MV
in the dark on a hazy night. They theorize that he became disoriented
and put the plane into a stall/spin that he didn't know how to recover
from.



I think so also. Very easy to become disoriented with no ground
reference and not able to understand what your instruments are telling
you. It can happen very quickly in fog or clouds that come up
unexpectedly. It's the whole purpose of "hood work" when taking flight
instruction which, BTW, is part of the lesson plan for a simple VFR rating.