HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Oct 07, 2012, 10:15 PM
Registered User
ISRDAN's Avatar
Joined Jul 2007
286 Posts
Discussion
Discovery plane Crash

Just wanted to be the first to say it.
shouldn't first class be in the back of the plane?
ISRDAN is offline Find More Posts by ISRDAN
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Oct 07, 2012, 11:21 PM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
But when there's turbulence the back of the plane is the bumpiest and they might spill their Chardonnay on their lobster.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 07, 2012, 11:54 PM
Reduce the drama...
rick.benjamin's Avatar
USA, OR, Damascus
Joined Apr 2004
4,043 Posts
R.h.i.p.
F.i.f.o.
rick.benjamin is offline Find More Posts by rick.benjamin
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 01:02 AM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
OK, rank has it's privileges, and first in out. They also take off first, but they are the LAST to land.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 01:18 AM
a.k.a Spec Master
United States, CA, Carlsbad
Joined Jun 2012
223 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISRDAN View Post
Just wanted to be the first to say it.
shouldn't first class be in the back of the plane?
I'd take the low noise level at the front of the plane any day (and the big seat, the drinks and the food that's actually edible). If it crashes I think you are almost toast anyway.

There's something reassuring sitting in the top deck of the Jumbo in the row behind the pilot.

I guess the days of being able to take a shaped charge on the flight so you can cut your own exit hatch in an emergency are well gone. Cutting your way out with a plastic knife is going to take too long.

Mick
tinkering is offline Find More Posts by tinkering
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 01:26 AM
TD- F3K- Slope - What to fly?
Dale Thompson's Avatar
Cupertino CA
Joined Aug 2005
1,487 Posts
But what's up with the short range of the TX/RX?

If they just ran a remote antenna they should have gotten more range than the
short distance they talked about.
Dale Thompson is online now Find More Posts by Dale Thompson
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 01:37 AM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Lakewood, Colorado
Joined Aug 2002
28,219 Posts
They did pretty good considering they're punching a 2.4Ghz signal through a metal shell.
Easy to talk about a remote antenna on the Rx, but not that easy to implement.
If you try to put 2.4Ghz through say 30 feet of RG-58 cable, you're losing at least 10dB
of signal strength. Much higher loss in the tiny coax cables of the average 2.4Ghz Rx.
And then you still have to figure out where to actually run the antenna to get it outside the plane
easily so it's not totally blocked as you move from one side to the other (as they did).

I'd have chosen something like a long range UHF control system (such as we use on FPV planes)
but they were clearly trying to keep the system as simple as possible.

ian
Daemon is offline Find More Posts by Daemon
RCG Plus Member
Old Oct 08, 2012, 01:45 AM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinkering View Post
If it crashes I think you are almost toast anyway.
And if you do first class right you're already toasted so it might not be such a bad way to go.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 10:35 AM
Slopeaholic
Hutch's Avatar
Roseville, California, United States
Joined Mar 2001
3,098 Posts
The plane crashes?!! darnit! I recorded it but haven't had a chance to watch it yet. Thanks for ruining Plane Crash for me guys!

-hutch
Hutch is offline Find More Posts by Hutch
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 11:23 AM
Biting ankles since '53
No Pants Island
Joined Feb 2007
2,944 Posts
Nobody tell him about the snakes...
mr_editor is offline Find More Posts by mr_editor
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 03:31 PM
Registered User
Tick Point's Avatar
Joined Mar 2008
511 Posts
They landed thousands of feet short of the runway and at over twice the rate of descent as planned. Sounds like me!
But really, what's their excuse? Depth perception?

Dave,
not proud of the rc piloting on this one
Tick Point is offline Find More Posts by Tick Point
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 03:42 PM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Lakewood, Colorado
Joined Aug 2002
28,219 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tick Point View Post
They landed thousands of feet short of the runway and at over twice the rate of descent as planned.
Actually their target descent rate was 2000fpm, and they impacted at 1500fpm.
In the context of the short "landing" one of the guys in the case plane made a comment that they
wouldn't have had a problem if they'd had the faster chase plane. My interpretation there
was that they started the initial descent and the 727 started to pull away from the chase plane
(risking loss of control) so all they could do was cut the throttle to slow it down a bit and pretty
much let it drop where they were (short) instead of flying it under power to the runway.

ian
Daemon is offline Find More Posts by Daemon
RCG Plus Member
Old Oct 08, 2012, 04:50 PM
Registered User
slopemeno's Avatar
Joined Jan 2003
6,918 Posts
Dave- all they'd need would be a thicket of telephone poles to ding their LE's to really simulate the slope experience.
slopemeno is offline Find More Posts by slopemeno
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: Goat Rock Threads
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 08, 2012, 10:56 PM
Great, kid! Don't get Cocky!
HahnSolo's Avatar
Joined Sep 2006
515 Posts
Seriously. . . they gambled millions of dollars and four years of prep work on an RC system that was only good for 50 yards?!? Then, to add insult to injury, they ended up using a chase plane that could just BARELY keep up with the 727. Slip out of that 50 yard range and it's all over. This had to be the most egregious newbie error I've ever seen on a project involving numerous scientists / engineers.

I won't even launch my slopers with less than a 75 yard range check. What the hell were they thinking? If 2.4GHz doesn't work, go back to a 72MHz system and use extendable whip antennas on both the Tx and Rx links. Unbelievable. . .

Solo
HahnSolo is offline Find More Posts by HahnSolo
Last edited by HahnSolo; Oct 08, 2012 at 11:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 09, 2012, 11:45 AM
Registered User
United States, CA, Torrance
Joined Oct 2007
19 Posts
I couldn't agree more!
It would be interesting to hear what the explanation to that.

Also, If the range problem was caused by the fact the receiver was mounted inside the plane, why they didn't they just mounted it externally?

This is really unbelievable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HahnSolo View Post
Seriously. . . they gambled millions of dollars and four years of prep work on an RC system that was only good for 50 yards?!? Then, to add insult to injury, they ended up using a chase plane that could just BARELY keep up with the 727. Slip out of that 50 yard range and it's all over. This had to be the most egregious newbie error I've ever seen on a project involving numerous scientists / engineers.

I won't even launch my slopers with less than a 75 yard range check. What the hell were they thinking? If 2.4GHz doesn't work, go back to a 72MHz system and use extendable whip antennas on both the Tx and Rx links. Unbelievable. . .

Solo
alvinho is offline Find More Posts by alvinho
Last edited by alvinho; Oct 11, 2012 at 11:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion ** crashed composite repairs, i can fix your expensive crashed plane xzatx High Performance 1 Feb 23, 2012 10:06 PM
Link ** crashed composite repairs, i can fix your expensive crashed plane xzatx Dynamic Soaring 0 Feb 23, 2012 06:39 PM
Discussion ** crashed composite repairs, i can fix your expensive crashed plane xzatx Sailplane Talk 0 Feb 23, 2012 06:39 PM
Help! CRASHED !! Discovery ST Model Plane Johann1975 South Africa 1 Sep 19, 2011 09:39 PM