Author: Dave Gee
Edition: Model Aviation - 2010/11
Page Numbers: 101,102,103
,
,

Safety Comes First

Dave Gee | [email protected]

CamCap turns heads—into camera mounts

The age of video is upon us, and our little flying machines look great in digital movies. It's getting easy and inexpensive to use a video camera to film a model in flight. Even I have tried it—since I want to be on TV but am not fool enough to sign onto a reality show. Search YouTube for "StukaDave" to see my videos.

Bob Schumann sent a photo of his CamCap, a low-tech way to use a high-tech device. Bob wanted to film his model in the air but had a hard time multitasking flying with camera work.

He wrote: "I got one of these $25 cameras and a freebie hat, cut a hole in the brim that would accommodate the camera body, and had a self-following mount for the minicam. The results turned out great! Not often does a 5-minute solution work as well as this did."

The camera is always on the airplane, since he keeps his eyes where they should be during an RC flight. Brilliant! Bob wanted me to give fair warning to young, hip modelers who might have a problem with his automatic in-flight tracking system: it only works when the ball cap is worn with the bill in front, dude.

The dark side of online videos

There is a dark side to this wave of online-posted aeromodeling videos. Many of us have heard of people who have done a dumb thing with a model, but now they can compound that poor judgment by posting footage of the foolish act for all to see.

Our hobby is in a tough spot right now. Aviation laws are changing to accommodate various types of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS). Our models are in danger of being reclassified in ways that could literally outlaw our hobby. AMA has some capable people lobbying and negotiating with the government. It does not help to have someone post a video of an RC helicopter or airplane shooting rockets or dropping pyrotechnics. We want to publicize the truth about our models: that they are fun, educational, wholesome, and neat.

Nonmodelers might get the wrong idea if a sensational news story breaks about some possible evil misuse of our hobby. You can imagine what might happen. During the brief news frenzy, all of those dumb videos will be found and shown, and the call will go out to "do something" about the "RC terror" crisis. Some media outlets are hungrier for sensational stories than cold, hard facts. They specialize in blowing things out of proportion. When they get done with us, we'll be running model trains and reminiscing about the good old days of RC flight.

There is plenty of fun to be had with our models without risking such a disaster. Remember, nobody has to get hurt to cause this mess. Just a video of a model dropping or shooting things (in violation of the AMA Safety Code) could do it. I'm not convinced by those who tell me they do this stuff while flying in the middle of the desert, miles from anything. Sorry, but dumb is dumb wherever it happens, and videotaping it kills the isolation factor.

Safer ways to get a thrill

Our sport has some terrific ways to get a thrill, if you have the skill and desire. We have events such as RC and CL Combat for those who like a little destruction, and we even have AMA-approved activities such as paintball shoot-down. Those who want to fly "on the edge" can easily do so without risking our whole hobby.

I don't need to seek out excitement that way, since most of my flights involve violent destruction when I try to land. One of this month's photos shows young Layton Briggs manning a .50-caliber machine gun on a restored Huey helicopter. Just as one should not mix small boys and automatic weapons, our models should not be seen carrying weapons and releasing ammunition.

Let me calm down a little and switch to a calmer subject.

Cheap, clever solutions at the field

James Driver showed me a jazzy work stand he made for his DW foamie. He can tinker with the Park 400 motor while his airplane rests in a fancy French pastry box, customized with a slot cut down the middle to fit the model. I love a simple, cheap solution. And James said that the baked goods were delicious.

Tony Naccarato was at the field that day, too. Check out the photo of him landing his electric-powered ParkZone T-28. Note the nice view of the back of his head, while the cameraman (me) cowers in a safe spot.

Tony and I have similar RC flying styles, except that he is way better at it. We can both put our models into an inverted flat spin, but he knows this other maneuver called "recovering," which still stumps me. If I were landing this airplane instead of Tony, the model would soon be on the repair table undergoing surgery. I recently mentioned Pete Basone's fuselage-repair job, done with aerosol-can foam, which worked okay on the model in question.

Foam materials and adhesives

Daniel McCary wrote to remind me that our models are made from a variety of foams, some of which react poorly with certain glues and especially with the chemicals in spray-can products. He repeated the wise old advice of testing glue, paint, or filler on a scrap piece of foam first, to avoid transforming your expensive aircraft into a puddle of goo.

Daniel has had good results on EPS- and Depron-foam models using Gorilla Glue mixed with a tiny bit of water. Gorilla makes an excellent CA product, too. The company donated a supply of it for the FF area at the AMA Expo and made a bunch of new customers. Although it is not foam-rated, I have successfully used it for repairs many times. Always test first.

Many pilots these days start with a foam RTF instead of building a kit. This gets them into the air immediately. But when a repair is needed, they have to learn on the job. Foam models can often be repaired with tape, glue, and a reinforcing material such as wire, balsa, or carbon fiber.

Balance after repair

New pilots might not realize that such a repair will change the weight of the component so much that a full rebalance might be needed. Your freshly repaired airplane might end up with one wing much heavier than the other. You'll find out what a bother that can be in flight. A bit of ballast on the undamaged wing might save you from making a second repair.

2.4 GHz radios and FCC approval

There was a discussion at the last AMA Safety Committee meeting about a serious issue: the marketing of 2.4 GHz radio systems that are not approved by the FCC. These systems sometimes have serious problems with range and reliability, so range-testing is more important than ever.

Such radios come into the country freely and are distributed by well-respected companies as well as some fly-by-night outfits. Worse yet, some of these "bandit" RC systems have counterfeit FCC stickers on them. I wouldn't know the difference; would you?

A cheap receiver with limited range might not ever be a problem in a small indoor model that never goes far from the pilot, but there could be trouble in a larger, more powerful gas aircraft. Should these radios be allowed at sanctioned events? How about for regular sport-flying?

There was also mention of some state-of-the-art European radios that are brought over for international competitions. Not FCC approved, but top quality. Who should be responsible for determining which is which and for inspecting the components? It's a pickle. Stay tuned for more developments. There may be a solution for this issue, but it hasn't been found yet. If you have any suggestions, I would be pleased to pass them along.

AMA resources and reader contributions

Some AMA members have the idea that there is a massive technical staff in Muncie, testing and then storing samples of every hobby product that comes out. Nope! There are some very experienced AMA people who do their best to solve problems, but they depend on reports and information from members.

I'm in the same boat. Since I can't be everywhere, I am grateful to readers who e-mail and write to me about issues and incidents that belong in this column. Please consider sharing your close-call story, and if I'm wrong about something, tell me so. It wouldn't be the first or last time!

A note on terminology

Modeling legend Bob Schlosberg wrote to kid me about a previous column in which I claimed that England had eliminated accidents involving propellers by calling them "airscrews." Bob said that he had been taken in for a moment, wondering how the British flew models using only an airscrew instead of a propeller.

To clarify: the English still have accidents where people stick their hands in the whirly things on the front of their models, but there hasn't been a propeller strike there since the Eighth Air Force went home.

Sources

Dave Gee Box 7081 Van Nuys, CA 91409

Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.