1/7 Scale HMS Victorious R38 - Page 7

Albion · 20-07-2007

Duncan, I can't find a single reference anywhere that says its illegal to fly a rc plane beyond visual range in the US (or the UK for that matter). I see a lot of references to insurance companies, DHS and the FAA not particularly liking it, but nothing prohibiting it. Then again visual range on the Chesapeake Bay is usually 14 miles so I don't think it will ever be a legal issue that I couldn't win, if need be. Electric is good, but I like the deeper resonances of a 4 stroke idled down on final approach. I will look into the Galdiator.

Task Force 57 · 20-07-2007

Hrmm, My thoughts on pilots taking off and landing on their own are mixed due to the problem that has been mentioned previously... namely pilot location on the ship (while flying with as close to 360% visability as possible!). I dont think you can do this safely and keep a clear deck for take offs and landings...and im sure we all agree standing midships on the deck would ruin the whole effect.

The best I can think of is the cat-man forward and lso aft option with the pilots along the port en starboard beams...

With regards Duncans worry, hand overs are not soooo very aukward (I learnt to fly RC with a mate and two controls on same freq.)... but I know Flyer pride will be a major problem. I guess in a perfect world pilots doing the whole thing would be best but lets face it Duncan, On 107ft hull in 1/7th scale its going to be real hard to get the flyers around the ship while in control of a plane while four or five others are doing the same thing and not falling over each other. you might have to bite the bullet and go with flyers on a seperate boat abeam of the carrier with a full view of the flight deck with the lso calling corrections over headphones... or else risk insurance problems (what constitutes visual contact?) and have camera's for en aft the bridge and have monitor screens for use by those who cant see either the bow or stern.

perhaps having two pilots standing in elevator wells with perpex sheilds would do it with perhaps one (or a control officer) in the bridge ? Problem here is this reduces the options for the deck...

AND DEMANDS WORKING BARRIERS UNLESS YOU WANT A RC PLANE WITH PROP SPINNING HITTING YOU SQUARE BETWEEN THE MK1 EYEBALLS.

regards,

Russ

ps... Will try to sort this problem, i have a deck plan for Illustrious in my lap. Give me a While, I will figure this out. Duncan is lucky as helicopters (while right buggers to fly) are a hell of a lot simpler to control from ship, Im trying to work out how much deck you ought to leave for landing on with arrester hook and where the last barrier ought to be to permit the elevator well option... one things for sure the aft elevator well is not going to be viable.

Task Force 57 · 20-07-2007

pps... if your going for a later mod of the Vic then you ought to think Firebrands, Gannets and possible Vampires with pusher props?

Albion · 20-07-2007

When it comes to landing on the ship it is my plan that all visual referencing will be done from the cockpit of the plane while on approach, using the aircraft's remote cameras (all of which are real time). The flyer would be able to sit anywhere on board and by using a laptop with a link to the cameras on board (the plane that is) be able to land the aircraft as though they were sitting in the cockpit. With this in mind, for recovery operations I do not think it necessary that the pilot be on the aft end of the flight deck, or even able to see it. This might all sound a little risky, but its nothing that a thorough training program should not be able to take care of. Besides for safety reasons I most definitely want the deck to be clear of people. It also important to remember that the aircraft that land toward the end of the recovery cycle will not have a clear deck forward, since that area will most probably be full of planes.
And you are right about the barriers, they will need to be functional.

duncan · 22-07-2007

Perhaps wrong choice of words when I said "illegal" to fly oos however AMA (and BMFA) are quite specific on the matter. You cannot see a model aircraft well enough to fly it beyond about 500yards (except a glider straight up). Why would you want the aircraft to fly far from the ship ? Did you browse the UAV site to see the storm raging there regarding this in view of current security fears in US ? Electric power allows even more realistic sounds with real aircraft engine noises played through a speaker system, they include engine start-up whine and cough etc and are proportional, idle to full power roar in synch with throttle position. Deck handling and dispersal after landing, taxi-ing to behind crash barrier ....tricky.

Albion · 22-07-2007

I am having a hard time wraping my mind around electric power. I geuss its due to the saltwater environment, alhtough I imagine there are ways to deal with the problems that would arise from that.
The ability to go long distances from the carrier is just for amusement, its not really necessary. Remember, the plan is that the flying will be done from the cockpit, not the ship.

MartinH-K · 23-07-2007

In carrier ops, the deck marshall gives indications to the pilot as they come in. The deck officer on yours could do the same thing via jacked headphones to the pilot elsewhere. I don't think you need radio coms, a decent multi-channel pa with headphone jacks scattered throughout would do it and cut out on any potential radio black spots. A spring loaded catch net at the end of the landing area would prevent rogue planes hitting the rest of the field... just like on the real thing.

jankers · 24-07-2007

I would keep the communications simple if at all possible, a straight forward PA/speaker system would work if all flyers were aboard and would have the added advantage of allowing everyone to know what was going on at all times.

Being hard-wired it should prove foolproof. radio comms would only be required should the flyers be elsewhere.

J.

Albion · 05-08-2007

A few days ago a fellow on rcgroups.com posted this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FqjWbygAhI
Its a 1/4.6 scale Sea Fury, and extremely impressive. If you watch this video and then compare this rc plane to the video of a 1/7 scale F4U Corsair http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF9_Y0BCuRk, I think the differences between the two sizes of planes is quite obvious. One of the many characteristics I think important in a plane (at least for my purposes) is in flight stability. The "Big Iron" Sea Fury, at 50lbs, doesn't get buffeted around nearly as much as a smaller plane, which is an important trait to consider when selecting a plane to land onboard a ship.
Therefore, I have decided to investigate increasing the scale to 1/5 and using a modular approach to building the ship.

alan2525 · 05-08-2007

If you keep increasing the scale you wont have to worry about where the guys with the R/C gear go on the ship as they'll be able to climb into the aircraft cockpits and fly off without needing radio control!