 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Helicopters / April 2007larger versions of blade cx?
Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the same blade configuration). Are there technical reasons why a larger version would be troublesome? > Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out > there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the > same blade configuration). Are there technical reasons why a larger > version would be troublesome? probably quite a few like blades hitting, lack of tail authority, unable to fly aerobatics, to big for indoor only >> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out >> there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the >> same blade configuration). Are there technical reasons why a larger >> version would be troublesome? > probably quite a few like blades hitting, Like blades hitting what? lack of tail authority, Why would there be a lack of tail authority? unable > to fly aerobatics, If it's a fixed pitch, then maybe, as oly mild aerobatics wouold be possible. If it was collective, it would be as capable of aero's as any other. to big for indoor only Depends on how big the indoor area is. Having taught people to fly with glo engined heli's inside buildings, I can assure you that size isn't everything.  SignatureBeav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19 >>> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out >>> there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Like blades hitting what? top blades hitting bottom blades or that seems to be the problem on the ones I have seen fly out side unless is dead calm > lack of tail authority, > > Why would there be a lack of tail authority? as you only have diferential torque to control the tail > unable >> to fly aerobatics, its the way the top set of blades is free flying that seems to be the problem only the bottom have any cyclic pitch control, any sudden movements and the blades catch > If it's a fixed pitch, then maybe, as oly mild aerobatics wouold be > possible. If it was collective, it would be as capable of aero's as any > other. I cant see how you could make these collective pitch > to big for indoor only > > Depends on how big the indoor area is. Having taught people to fly with glo > engined heli's inside buildings, I can assure you that size isn't > everything. oh err misses >>>> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli >>>> out there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ones I have seen fly out side unless is dead calm >> lack of tail authority, Colour me a c.nt Funfly. I was thinking about a *completely* diffrent heli, not a counter rotator. SignatureBeav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19 >>>>> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli >>>>> out there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Colour me a c.nt Funfly. I was thinking about a *completely* diffrent heli, > not a counter rotator. no problem I did wonder which one of us was confused :-) and it was not the usual suspect for a change >>>>>> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli >>>>>> out there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > no problem I did wonder which one of us was confused :-) > and it was not the usual suspect for a change Heh, c.nt :) SignatureBeav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19 >> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out >> there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the >> same blade configuration). Are there technical reasons why a larger >> version would be troublesome? > > probably quite a few like blades hitting, lack of tail authority http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ka50.heli.750pix.jpg > unable > to fly aerobatics Same applies for Blade CX. > to big for indoor only But at the same time it would be better for outdoor use. > > Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out > > there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > probably quite a few like blades hitting, lack of tail authority, unable > to fly aerobatics, to big for indoor only Yes, the Housefly or walkera No 53 (Video: http://www.linknety.com/modevideos/demo/zoom.php?id=45) > > Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out > > there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > probably quite a few like blades hitting, lack of tail authority, unable > to fly aerobatics, to big for indoor only Yes, you can check the Walkera No 53 >>> Just wondering why there are larger versions of a blade-cx-type heli out >>> there. Seems that the ease of use would merit a larger version (with the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Yes, you can check the Walkera No 53 not exactly much bigger |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.