 |
 | 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 / General / Rockets / October 2007X-Wing Starfighter launch
1/2 scale (21-foot) Polecat Aerospace built X-Wing launh http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=097_1191773371 > 1/2 scale (21-foot) Polecat Aerospace built X-Wing launh > http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=097_1191773371 Dude, your 5 days too late. People here have already argued over it :) Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 On Oct 9, 1:29?pm, ? <td...@foadspammer.com> wrote: > > 1/2 scale (21-foot) Polecat Aerospace built X-Wing launh > >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=097_1191773371 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > TRA#5512 > IEAS#75 Maybe Ted you should READ a post before responding to it... Harold posted a link to a video of the launch of the X-Wing - which appears different than the video posted on YouTube for which a link was posted in the other thread. Would it have made you feel better had Harold posted it in the other thread? Which contains 20 out of 26 posts that were made Sunday and yesterday... and by my math that was ONE and TWO days ago respectively. ;) That said... it's apparent from the video that little (or no) consideration was paid to the resultant bending momment placed on the fins (wings). IMO it's not enough to simply scale up a "model" and expect it to perform the same. Doug > On Oct 9, 1:29?pm, ? <td...@foadspammer.com> wrote: >>> 1/2 scale (21-foot) Polecat Aerospace built X-Wing launh >>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=097_1191773371 >> Dude, your 5 days too late. People here have already argued over it :) >> > Maybe Ted you should READ a post before responding to it... I did READ it. And I responded to it. Welcome to usenet Doug :) > Harold > posted a link to a video of the launch of the X-Wing - which appears > different than the video posted on YouTube for which a link was > posted in the other thread. I did watch the video. Same X-wing, same crash. > Would it have made you feel better had Harold posted it in the other > thread? Which contains 20 out of 26 posts that were made Sunday and > yesterday... and by my math that was ONE and TWO days ago > respectively. ;) Ancient in usenet land. > That said... it's apparent from the video that little (or no) > consideration was paid to the resultant bending momment placed on the > fins (wings). IMO it's not enough to simply scale up a "model" and > expect it to perform the same. Well that's apparent. Personally, I think a smaller and lighter r/c boost glider version would have been more satisfying. I think it could be done. Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 > That said... it's apparent from the video that little (or no) > consideration was paid to the resultant bending momment placed on the > fins (wings). IMO it's not enough to simply scale up a "model" and > expect it to perform the same. Mother Nature appears to share your opinion. >> That said... it's apparent from the video that little (or no) >> consideration was paid to the resultant bending momment placed on the >> fins (wings). IMO it's not enough to simply scale up a "model" and >> expect it to perform the same. > > Mother Nature appears to share your opinion. Check out the youtube video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGvMVn38Eu8 Andy says he expects it to fail. Why he put it on the pad anyway is a real point of discussion! > Check out the youtube video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGvMVn38Eu8 > > Andy says he expects it to fail. Why he put it on the pad anyway is a > real point of discussion! Not a question I've got an answer for... I haven't watched that video, but I've seen some written comments by him in which he said the whole point was to get that liftoff shot. Seems to me you could have gotten that easier and cheaper with photoshop. >>Check out the youtube video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGvMVn38Eu8 >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > whole point was to get that liftoff shot. Seems to me you could have > gotten that easier and cheaper with photoshop. Some sparky motors would have made for a great takeoff shot. Dunno if they're permitted in ROK. Chuck > Check out the youtube video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGvMVn38Eu8 > > Andy says he expects it to fail. Why he put it on the pad anyway is a > real point of discussion! I'll guess he didn't have garage space and/or spousal permission to continue to store such a large contraption, so in-flight destruction was a respectable and entertaining way out of bringing it home. How did their previous large projects fare? Tim This may really explain it :) http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a8d_1192187599 >> Check out the youtube video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGvMVn38Eu8 >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Tim > This may really explain it :) > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> Tim ------ Needed more glue. Looks like the P.O.D. takes many forms. HDS |
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.