Letters to the Editor
Model Aviation, 5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Correction
On page 35 of the September Model Aviation, it was stated that Stan Holcomb received the George Aldrich Memorial award at the Vintage Stunt Championships. The award recipient was Stanley Haugarth.
Our apologies for the error. — MA staff
Helping the New Generation
I want to tell you how wonderful I have found Bob Aberle’s series, “From the Ground Up.” Bob has a wonderful knack for knowing what new fliers like myself want to know. Bob’s column is now my first stop when each new issue of Model Aviation arrives.
I especially love the simple photo layouts he uses to help me understand parts and connections that would lose me in a text-only article. The one on installation of radio equipment was just fantastic. In fact, after reading each of Bob’s latest installments, I find I am better prepared to read the rest of each month’s issue.
I am pretty new to RC flying. I joined AMA in February and joined a local club in March. I have been flying since March.
Since I knew so little when I started, but was eager to fly, I selected a ready-to-fly electric package. No radio brands and models to understand, no servos or ESCs to pick, etc. I could focus on flying and leave that stuff until later.
My airplane and I have managed to survive many of the bumps and bruises that learning to fly can inflict. Along the way I have learned about fixing and how things go together. I have soloed and am really enjoying my new hobby.
My next challenge is to build the ARF model that I just received as a Father’s Day gift. This is a big step for me, and Bob’s articles have helped give me the confidence to tackle it.
I may be typical of the new wave of RC hobbyists. Rather than starting with kits, we start at the ready-to-go end. In time we will likely move to the ARF, and perhaps the kit someday. With Bob’s help and the guiding advice from the members of my club, I hope to explore many areas of RC flying and modeling.
So thanks, Bob, for helping the new generation of RC fliers get to the next level.
Ed Anderson Syosset, New York
Power-Supply Problems
I have found a big error in a column by Eloy Marez in the September issue. I am probably only one of several thousand who responded to it. In this article he states that the computer power supply has a red wire that is +12 volts and a yellow wire that is +5 volts. This is for an ATX power supply. Well, the yellow wire is +12 and the red wire is +5.
I got an AT power supply and all I had to do was mount the switch (off/on), add two terminals, put the yellow wire to the red terminal, put the black wire to the black terminal, and cut off all of the unused wires. Outside of the voltages and colors mixed up, the AT was a lot less fooling around.
Pat Ryder Janesville, Wisconsin
Regarding Mr. Ryder’s comments, he refers to an “AT” power supply, the predecessor to the “ATX” which is the subject of my column. It is an “apples and oranges” comparison and has no bearing on the original subject. There are other supplies (NLX and SPX), but the conversion does not apply to them either—only the ATX.
However, there is a discrepancy, in that complete standardization in the computer industry (surprise!) has not yet arrived. I checked my supply, which is wired as described; the sketch of the plug came from a book at the local library. However, a supply that a friend asked me to convert did have the polarity/wire colors reversed. I was told at a local computer-service center that it is not uncommon to see this.
I have come up with a simple nonelectronic, non-technician, no-test-equipment method of determining the correct wire coloring. I would suggest that you send any queries to me and I will E-mail or mail this method to you ASAP.
I would definitely not recommend Mr. Ryder’s connections regarding the AT supply. They are multiple-output devices, and generally it is not a good idea to parallel them, which is what he has done. Obviously his particular AT unit will accept that, but there is a good possibility that ATX and even ATs of other makes will not do so; the results could easily be sparks and smoke.
The column in question refers to the ATX computer power supply—not the AT referred to in the letter. Some differences are to be expected. Some differences in ATX wiring have been discovered, and a simple way of verifying the correct wiring colors is available from me.
Eloy Marez 2626 W. Northwood Santa Ana, CA 92704 [email protected] (714) 540-4935
Not Surprising
In regards to the letter in the September 2003 issue from George McAleer, it is not surprising that picture captions are sometimes at odds with what seems to be the proper designation of the aircraft portrayed. I cite the PT-26 vs. PT-19 discrepancy.
The PT-19 as used in this country by the Training Command was a two-place open-cockpit low-wing monoplane powered with a Fairchild inverted six-cylinder engine. The PT-26 was the same airplane used by the Canadian Training Command with the exception that the aircraft needed an enclosed cockpit for weather protection.
Following World War II, trainers were sold for low prices and the PT series was no exception. It is to be noted, however, that some owners of PT-19s added what was called a Rowland canopy, and that made them look as if they were PT-26s.
Now to the PT-23. It was never a Howard product, as the Howard trainer did not meet the requirements for the AAF. The PT-23 was a variation of the PT-19 airframe with a 220-horsepower Continental radial engine.
My PT-23 as well as the PT-23 my cousin has was a Continental-powered two-place open-cockpit low wing. Mine was built by Aeronca, under license, of course.
It was nice to attempt to have Benny Howard as the originator, but alas, it was not so.
David H. Shipton Delavan, Illinois
Model Transport
Transporting models has been referred to a couple of times by Dave Brown as related to airport inspections, etc. Also, I realize that many modelers, when they buy or sell completed models, moan and groan about the cost of shipping and packing. And rightfully so!
I recently sold a model for $180 only to find out (to the horror of the buyer) that it would cost $145 to ship UPS from the East Coast to North Dakota. It was because the box was “Oversize 3” (in their lingo), and thus I would be paying the 150-pound rate for a 30-pound box.
My daughter (who buys and sells on eBay all the time) set out to do some research and came up with some even more horrible numbers from truckers, forwarders, etc. Finally, she latched onto Greyhound. Guess what? The entire box went out to North Dakota for $43 (including $300 insurance—the max) and got there in 2.5 days—way faster than UPS and less than one-third of the cost.
(Continued on page 82)
Letters
Continued from page 9
Of course, they don't deliver to your door; you have to go to the nearest depot to pick up the package. But so what? They have 3,600 depots in the U.S., and for that kind of saving you can drive a few miles. By the way, they notify you upon arrival and most depots are open 24/7.
Perhaps you would like to share this little tidbit of info with other modelers. Maybe there are others, like me, who never even thought about Greyhound. They have a Web site (www.greyhound.com), and you can get an online quote as well as a listing of their depots with addresses and telephone numbers and a schedule of the buses for the route you need.
They do have some package restrictions (on their Web site) due to the size of the hatch on the bus:
- Length max: 68 inches.
- One of the other two dimensions must not exceed 24 inches.
- The third dimension has no restriction.
- Max weight: 100 pounds.
The entire experience was a delight and an enormous relief to the buyer—better service and lower cost.
It led me to wonder if any of this could apply to the problem that Dave Brown wrote about; i.e., modelers traveling with their model boxes to meets. Maybe they could send the box ahead by Greyhound and avoid all the airport hassle and potential excess baggage charges. At Greyhound, no one was concerned as to whether there might be residual fuel in the tank or engine, no sniffers, no dogs, no scanners.
For my money, I think Greyhound is missing an opportunity by not advertising in Model Aviation and other magazines. Perhaps your ad people should get in touch with them.
On an entirely different subject, I recall that when you wrote about redesigning MA sometime last year, you mentioned the popularity of the "tips, hints, techniques" rubric and said something to the effect that it would continue to be a mainstay. I was happy about that as it is one of the sections I look forward to.
Indeed, I have a database of many of these from MA and other magazines that is most helpful when I'm trying to resolve a particular problem. But I noticed that this topic has been dropped since the redesign, and I do regret that and miss it. No doubt there just wasn't space to accommodate everything, but if it was so popular, as you suggested, why drop it? I do hope you plan to resurrect the feature.
Beyond that, I think the magazine is much improved and I do enjoy reading Bob Aberle's series; it's a great way to get newer modelers onboard, but even for us older guys there's always something to learn. Thanks for a fine job.
Mark Neumann Mount Kisco, New York
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
