new balsa airplane builder's site
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Robert Reynolds - 24 Mar 2008 01:44 GMT I moved my balsa airplane building articles to their own website. www.balsaworkbench.com
Sorry for the shameless self promotion, but I'm also setting up a store to unload the mountain of screws and other hardware I have left over from my buyout of the late Tom Runge's RC collection several years ago. I'll be adding tailwheels, spinners, tailwheel brackets, control horns, washers, clevises, and a few other things as I find the time to sort and list everything. Click the Store link on the left menu panel to see what I have listed so far. I also wouldn't mind some feedback from you guys to tell me if the shopping cart buttons are working. I need to make sure I'm doing it right before I try it on my Jensen speaker website.
I'm also planning to add articles on wrinkle-free monokoting and how to install a water rudder that's interchangeable with the tailwheel. I found a nice pond that I may be able to fly the RCM Basic Trainer from, so I'm eager to get that thing in the air, but right now it's sitting in the corner waiting for me to clean all the screws off the building table.
Maybe I should post a photo of the big tub of mixed hardware I've been sorting for the past couple of weeks......
www.balsaworkbench.com
gyrocptr - 24 Mar 2008 22:05 GMT > www.balsaworkbench.com Your site looks like it contains some pretty useful info. A little nitpick-- the article on wing sweepback; the title seems to be a bit confusing; doesn't the sweepback correct/avoid tailheaviness?
Robert Reynolds - 24 Mar 2008 23:50 GMT Thanks. It looks like I had my head on backwards when I wrote that.
> > www.balsaworkbench.com > Your site looks like it contains some pretty useful info. A little > nitpick-- the article on wing sweepback; the title seems to be a bit > confusing; doesn't the sweepback correct/avoid tailheaviness? MJKolodziej - 25 Mar 2008 01:26 GMT > Thanks. It looks like I had my head on backwards when I wrote that. > >> > www.balsaworkbench.com >> Your site looks like it contains some pretty useful info. A little >> nitpick-- the article on wing sweepback; the title seems to be a bit >> confusing; doesn't the sweepback correct/avoid tailheaviness? This is not the group for heavenly tail.
:) mk
starcad - 26 Mar 2008 06:50 GMT Not to be picky but, that image on the front page really needs to b optimized and the size reduced. Takes about 15 seconds to load at cabl speeds
-- starca
H Davis - 26 Mar 2008 16:47 GMT Geez, it took two seconds to load on my bare-bones laptop!
Harlan
> Not to be picky but, that image on the front page really needs to be > optimized and the size reduced. Takes about 15 seconds to load at cable > speeds. Robert Reynolds - 26 Mar 2008 20:03 GMT I'm glad to hear that it wasn't TOO slow. My sister who helps me out with the websites told me to reduce the size of the photo, but I like it too much. I was out flying that airplane when a guy showed up with a fancy camera and started taking pictures. He asked me for my email address, and that evening I received about 20 shots of my planes. I like that particular one because you can see every detail of the construction, and you can see the reflection of almost the entire plane in the bottom of the top wings. I thought it was perfect for a building website, and I don't want to lose those details by degrading it.
Anyway, I figured that if it loads too slow you could simply move along and look at something else. Thanks for the input, and thanks for not yelling at me.
I'm planning to do another article soon for beginners. It will be about the small number of tools that are required for building from scratch.
> Geez, it took two seconds to load on my bare-bones laptop! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> optimized and the size reduced. Takes about 15 seconds to load at cable >> speeds. Jim - 10 Feb 2009 17:35 GMT You need to change cable companies! Loaded instantly here!
> Not to be picky but, that image on the front page really needs to be > optimized and the size reduced. Takes about 15 seconds to load at cable > speeds. Robert Reynolds - 28 Mar 2008 00:17 GMT I went back and increased the quantity of hardware you get for a dollar on my website. I was more involved in writing code the first time around. This time I was thinking more about building airplanes, so now you get a lot of screws for a dollar.
I'll be adding other hardware within a week.
www.balsaworkbench.com
starcad - 11 Jun 2008 02:34 GMT I just checked this site again and wow, I don't know what Robert di but it loads super fast now. Very well organized site in both theme an design. Good Job Robert keep up the great work and keep that sit current as I have it bookmarked
-- starca
Fly'em Boy
Robert Reynolds - 11 Jun 2008 06:41 GMT Thanks!
I'm working on a Telemaster so I can teach my boys to fly. I'd like to take some photos while building and do an article on installing aileron servos in the wings the easy way.
> I just checked this site again and wow, I don't know what Robert did > but it loads super fast now. Very well organized site in both theme and > design. Good Job Robert keep up the great work and keep that site > current as I have it bookmarked. starcad@earthlink.net - 11 Jun 2008 06:54 GMT > Thanks! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > design. Good Job Robert keep up the great work and keep that site > > current as I have it bookmarked. Hey Robert if you get back to this email me at starcad@starcadplans.net If your going to write it I'd like to add it to StarCad Plans.
Guy (StarCad)
Ed Cregger - 11 Jun 2008 06:54 GMT > Thanks! > > I'm working on a Telemaster so I can teach my boys to fly. I'd like to > take some photos while building and do an article on installing aileron > servos in the wings the easy way. -------------
Believe it or not, Telemasters and scalish Piper Cubs do not make the best trainers for someone starting out perfectly brand new. Yes, you can teach people to fly using these models, but I have taught folks to fly from zero on a Kaos 60. Not the best of choices for a trainer.
What's wrong with the Telemaster and Piper Cub? The vertical stabilizers are too small for optimum basic trainer service and the models are heavily influenced by crosswinds because of it.
Ed Cregger
Robert Reynolds - 11 Jun 2008 21:11 GMT > Believe it or not, Telemasters and scalish Piper Cubs do not make the best > trainers for someone starting out perfectly brand new. Yes, you can teach [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ed Cregger That's a pretty good one. Did you hear the one about the elephant who went to the doctor?
TT_Man - 11 Jun 2008 21:21 GMT > That's a pretty good one. Did you hear the one about the elephant who > went to the doctor? No?..........I'm all ears.... :)
Bob Cowell - 11 Jun 2008 22:27 GMT .
>No?..........I'm all ears.... :) that must make eating VERY inconvenient
Typing must be tough too
Are you a musician? can you play by ear?
Robert Reynolds - 11 Jun 2008 23:58 GMT >> That's a pretty good one. Did you hear the one about the elephant who >> went to the doctor? > > No?..........I'm all ears.... :) Hey, who told you to stick your big nose in?
Ed Cregger - 12 Jun 2008 03:35 GMT >> Believe it or not, Telemasters and scalish Piper Cubs do not make the >> best trainers for someone starting out perfectly brand new. Yes, you can [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > That's a pretty good one. Did you hear the one about the elephant who > went to the doctor? ------------
So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, we're hotshit?
Ed Cregger
Robert Reynolds - 12 Jun 2008 04:11 GMT > So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, we're > hotshit? > > Ed Cregger Ed, I've always thought you were a pretty decent guy. Don't start with the "wet behind the ears" crap.
I knew a guy in Dallas (16 years ago, incidentally) who used to let beginners fly his giant scale Stearman. You could use just about anything as a trainer if you wanted to. I just thought it was funny that one of the most highly revered airplanes isn't a good enough trainer for you.
Tim Wescott - 12 Jun 2008 06:15 GMT >> So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, >> we're hotshit? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Ed, I've always thought you were a pretty decent guy. Don't start with > the "wet behind the ears" crap. When you're young, you can't tell the difference between genius and luck*. The only pilots who can claim real expertise after just ten years of flying are in the military, and they get _intensive_ training -- even their instructors get trained on how to be instructors.
Your comment may have seemed reasonable to you, but from this side of the screen it sure sounded disrespectful.
After having to come in with a shovel to clean up after cocky youngsters a few times, I can understand Ed's attitude.
> I knew a guy in Dallas (16 years ago, incidentally) who used to let > beginners fly his giant scale Stearman. You could use just about > anything as a trainer if you wanted to. I just thought it was funny > that one of the most highly revered airplanes isn't a good enough > trainer for you. Which only makes Ed's point that you can teach someone to fly on just about anything. He _wasn't_ saying you couldn't use a Telemaster, he _was_ saying that it isn't, in his opinion, the best to learn on.
And "highly revered" doesn't necessarily mean "good". It usually does, but just because the whole crowd likes it doesn't mean the whole crowd is right. For that matter, "good at some things" usually doesn't mean "good at all things".
* I should know -- I used to think I was a genius.
 Signature Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com
Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Robert Reynolds - 12 Jun 2008 13:06 GMT > When you're young, you can't tell the difference between genius and > luck*. The only pilots who can claim real expertise after just ten > years of flying are in the military, and they get _intensive_ training > -- even their instructors get trained on how to be instructors. Yeah, I get that. Life's a journey and you're always learning. I just don't understand where the "ten years" comment came from. It seems that some people, upon reaching a certain age, think that everybody else was born yesterday. It's probably a good idea to ask how long somebody has been around before making up a silly number. I don't want to argue about numbers, but ten years is way off.
I know what you mean about highly revered things not always being the best, but to impugn the Telemaster? That just seems ridiculous to me. We can talk about who is rude and who is reasonable, but think about the Telemaster for a moment. It's a legendary airplane.
Six_O'Clock_High - 13 Jun 2008 04:05 GMT >> So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, >> we're hotshit? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > as a trainer if you wanted to. I just thought it was funny that one of > the most highly revered airplanes isn't a good enough trainer for you Oh yes, ANYTHING the owner is willing to risk on a buddy cord can and has been used as a trainer. I used to bang around Sig Kougars a lot (21 of them to be exact) and many beginner got a lesson or two on that because his plane was not ready to fly but he was. I have also given instruction on a Super Sportster 20 and I even let someone buddy box my giant scale Pitts.
There are only two issues that non trainer aircraft present and neither is a show stopper. The first, and probably the most important issue is what standard of performance the INSTRUCTOR is willing to teach to and how much on the ball the instructor wishes to stay. I KNOW that when I let that guy get a lesson in on the Pitts, I was paying a lot more attention than when he came back the next week with his trainer. The second issue has to do with the students growth in confidence, abilities, and willingness to try new things. Unstable airframes reduce all of those growth rates significantly and most trainers are much more stable than aerobatic birds. In short and in general, trainers turn out pilots faster than most other airframes but I am not convinced they are better pilots unless the instructor was thorough in demonstrating all facets of flight on the trainer. Most don't.
My $.02 FWIW
Jim Branaum AMA 1428
Tim Wescott - 14 Jun 2008 00:39 GMT >>> So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, >>> we're hotshit? [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Jim Branaum > AMA 1428 From what I've seen (not at my current club, thank goodness!), many _instructors_ don't understand all facets of flight, or do them well. It's not like you get a special license from the FAA to teach model airplane flying, after all.
At my current club we have a couple of good, experienced fliers who like teaching and who do a good job. It's a joy to watch them work.
 Signature Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com
Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Robert Reynolds - 14 Jun 2008 02:34 GMT > From what I've seen (not at my current club, thank goodness!), many > _instructors_ don't understand all facets of flight, or do them well. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > At my current club we have a couple of good, experienced fliers who like > teaching and who do a good job. It's a joy to watch them work. In the 1980s the local old curmudgeon model airplane guru who taught everybody to fly was a retired Air Force colonel who used to fly B-52s. I always thought it was funny to watch the guys in his group land their trainers. They would bring in the plane nose up with power on to allow for a go-around if necessary. It wasn't at all like a GA airplane landing, but it got the job done.
Ed Cregger - 13 Jun 2008 06:02 GMT >> So, now that we have ten years flying experience and an R/C website, >> we're hotshit? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > as a trainer if you wanted to. I just thought it was funny that one of > the most highly revered airplanes isn't a good enough trainer for you. -----------
Bob, you and I have talked in a friendly manner for a long, long time. Lately I have noticed that you are not happy with simply disagreeing with someone and that you seem to feel a need to be disrespectful toward them. I'm a funny guy that way. Speak disrespectfully to me and you'll get it returned in spades. Speak respectfully to me and that too will be returned in spades.
I was simply trying to think of a reason why you seemed to turn hostile toward me. What have I done to deserve such treatment?
Like most folks, I'd rather come here and speak with folks in a respectful manner. We don't have to agree with each other all of the time. It simply isn't required. But we should all be polite to one another. That's just the way that I was raised (Southern Baptist - here, hold this snake for a minute).
I hope that you are getting enough sleep and are not burning the candle at both ends. Take care.
Ed Cregger
Robert Reynolds - 13 Jun 2008 13:16 GMT > Bob, you and I have talked in a friendly manner for a long, long time. > Lately I have noticed that you are not happy with simply disagreeing with [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Ed Cregger First, we've already been over the Bob thing. Should I assume you're trying to insult me? It's Robbie, not Bob. That's OK, maybe you're just trying to be funny.
Second, you don't have to be insulted. Life works better if you always assume the other guy is just trying to be funny.
Let's try it again, the other way. I'm simply talking to somebody about building a Telemaster to teach my boys to fly. You mention that it's not the best trainer, and then I say I think that's funny because who doesn't love a Telemaster? See? it's not so bad. Ha ha. No hard feelings.
Ed Cregger - 13 Jun 2008 16:03 GMT >> Bob, you and I have talked in a friendly manner for a long, long time. >> Lately I have noticed that you are not happy with simply disagreeing with [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > the best trainer, and then I say I think that's funny because who doesn't > love a Telemaster? See? it's not so bad. Ha ha. No hard feelings. -------------
With that, I'm going to say good bye. Frankly, I've had enough of you, whether I knew you before or not. Have a good life.
Ed Cregger
Robert Reynolds - 14 Jun 2008 15:32 GMT > With that, I'm going to say good bye. Frankly, I've had enough of you, > whether I knew you before or not. Have a good life. > > Ed Cregger It was mighty swell of you to give me a chance to redeem myself. Sorry I failed so miserably.
Bob Cowell - 11 Jun 2008 22:33 GMT >Believe it or not, Telemasters and scalish Piper Cubs do not make the best >trainers for someone starting out perfectly brand new. Yes, you can teach [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Ed Cregger I'm with you Ed.
They are pretty good once you get some experience, for the same reasons you note. They make you actually learn to fly.
But for the first flights, the frustration level and amount of stuff to pay attention to makes them a bit overwhelming
For the first flights, I still like to introduce people to my old Midwest Aerostar 40.
AFTER they get a little comfort zone, then they will learn more thoroughly on a Telemaster etc.
MY OPINIONS
YMMV
bob
|
|
|