"Leeds-Mick via ModelGeeks.com" <u42018@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:812570fa293d3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Beav wrote:
>>It's taken you 12 years to concnve yourself yoou're a mad as a ****ing
>>hatter?
> nope, Ive been, not only aware of, but have actually thouroughly enjoyed
> my
> eccentricities my whole life. I see it as a part of my personal and
> national
> identity. One of those eccentricities, is a penchant for doing stuff
just
> because other people tell me its too dangerous, a waste of time, or not
> worth
> doing, and more often than not, it has been a waste of time, but at the
> moment, time is not an issue, and on occasion, i ve found the new
learned
> perspectives and lessons, have been far more useful somewhere and some
> other
> time later. Occasionally ive had the pleasure of proving people wrong,
and
> i
> find that very very satisfying.
I like your style Mick, even for a York****reman :-)
>>It'll be the first time not a "return to". The MFA was, is and always
will
>>be a total pile of ****e. Even my bin would spit the ****er out.
> you have a most decerning bin!
It accepts all kinds of crap, but it still has standards.
> As i understand it, in its time it flew as
> well if not better than some or most of its rivals.
You understand incorrectly. I've been flying these things helicopter for
over 40 years and the Sprot 500 sits right at the bottom of the **** pile.
Even the other ****y heli's pissed all over the 500. The fixed pitch
version was sluggish, wore out in next to no time (the gears were
"eventually" uprated to address this issue), overheated, were noisy and
the
tail gearboxes failed at every op****tunity. I won't bother mentioning the
collective version.
>A Spitfire was the same
> in its time,
Maybe the Spitfire wasn't the uber plank, but it was never a turd. I know,
I've seen ****y ones and everyone knows you can't polish a turd.
>but no one would consider using that design for its purpose any
> more, because it has been somewhat superceded by technology.
"Technology" and the Sprot 500 are so far apart, they're in different
worlds.
> Technology is
> just the science of tools. You sound young, someone who probably cant
> imagine
> a world without computers, mobile phones, and package holidays to the
> 'Costa
> Del Sol', so you dont have any real perspective on technological
advances.
Hahaha, if only you knew, but thanks anyway. Young I'm CERTAINLY not:-).
Can't you tell by the fact that I can spell and use punctuation?.
Something
that the yoof of today seem unable to accomplish even with speel chuckers.
>If
> these terribly difficult and technologically prehistoric aircraft had
not
> been developed, and flown, you wouldnt have the aircraft available to
you
> today,
Actually I would (did), because I'd already designed and built my own
helicopter LONG before the Sprot 500 was presented to the waiting fools.
> in the same way as if your dad had been a puff, you wouldnt exist.
One of my best pals is the son of a poof. In my day, poof's didn't
advertise
their leanings, they just got married, had kids and ****ed their pals on
the
QT.
>>And he'd be dead right too.
> In your opinion
>>That's a bit like digging up an old whore and shoving 500,000 volts up
her
>>jacksie because "she ****s".
> Hmm, an unusual analogy! A whore would no doubt 'F*ck' quite well,
Why? Whore's generally don't like men and only do the minimum to earn
their
corn. I can't imagine they'd make good ****s at all. A bit like a Sprot
500.
There just to give some basic simulation of what a real heli is like.
>so i
> suppose if thats what i wanted i might consider getting one. Necrophilia
> is
> not my thing, so digging one up wouldnt work for me, and as for the
> voltage,
> Sadism isnt my thing either, but,,,, each to their own i suppose !
Of COURSE you're a sadist. You've got a Sprot 500 and you're going to
"fly"
it (one day)
>
>>rewarding and definitely more likely to succeed.
>>No it's not. The MFA was a lost cause before it was even a casue.
> I disagree
>>You're doomed to disappointment if you think you're going to fly this
>>thng.
>>Waste your time, by all means, but that's exactly what you WILL be
doing.
> Possibly, but it is my time.
Indeed it is, but your original post asked for advice and I gave you the
best advice possible given the machine you're now in command of.
>>The teeter spring is a short length of piano wire that attaches under
the
>>rotor head and contacts with the "see-saw" that IS the rotor head. It's
>>job
>>is to "control" the speed at which the rotor deflection is carried into
>>the
>>rotor mast. It was crap in the 70's and it'll be crap in the Noughties
>>too.
> thats info i can use, thank you.
Techology is my middle name :-)
>>It won't be its final flight, it'll be it's first and only. Why not just
>>rip
>>a few quid up and slot them down the nearest grid and take your time
doing
>>it, coz you'll only be wasting time and money ****ing about with that
POS.
>>
>>Of course, I AM being very restrained.
> Its a bit like doing one of those home learning jobbies. I m learning
> about
> model technology,
But you're not. You're learning about DEAD technology from the early 80's
and it was 10 years out of date back then.
>and cos of my previous experiances, im not starting with
> learning to spell my name correctly. Clearly you arnt someone who
relishes
> a
> challenge,
I've taught more people to fly these things than you could possibly
imagine
and you think I'm afraid of a challenge?. I taught myself to fly first
with
helicopters and radio's that I built myself too. I learned without the
benefit of computers or gyro's and I can STILL fly a heli without either.
When you can say you've done the same, you can tell me about "challenges"
in
this hobby. You'll learn how wrong you are if you hang around long enough
anyway.
> or you find it difficult to accept that there are people who still
> do,
I'm impressed with people who come to me and say "See what I've done, all
on
my own and without asking a single question about how to do it" as opposed
to those who say "I wonder if you can help me do what you did in 1974".
I've
got nothing against ANYONE asking for information, assistance or training,
but please, don't throw that "challenge" word around as if you're the only
one to think they're going to learn how to fly these things. I can tell
you
now, there are THOUSANDS more who failed than there are who succeeded with
the "technology" you've got in a Sprot 500. If you DO learn to fly with
it,
I really WILL be impressed, but you'll need to do it without a gyro.
> and you cant understand why, but, I 'm not afraid to fail, and so i m
not
> afraid to try.
Failure isn't an option. That's what makes a challenge a challenge and not
an attempt.
> You sould try comparing technologies sometime. Drive an old MGBGT,
Having owned one, I don't think I'll bother. THEY were crap too and
they're
STILL crap.
>or a 70's
> 2 stroke triple
A nice little Kwak 750 do you? BTDT.
> if your into bikes. Ask yourself if you find your way around
> without your satelite navigator, using a map and a compass, and see
which
> ones batteries run down first
I don't use satnavs OR maps. I rely on my god-like sense of direction,
which
oddly took me through Holland, Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Norway last
year
with no problems. I even got back home :-)
--
Beav
VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19
|
