Teckair

Yep but not at liberty to post on here.

I am not saying there is a design problem here.

I think if there was forward speed the nose wheel would have collapsed and the plane would have flipped. Also I spoke to someone on the spot.

Not a soft landing, a lot of downward force to collapse that wing.

Engine trouble can be caused by things other than the aircraft.

I saw a goat standing on the roof someones late model car at the Emmdale road house one time, I always used to stop there but never at Wilcannia.

I fly them myself they are hard to see 50 metres away when you know where it is and you are standing still. One time I had a near miss with 2 ultralight aircraft in my ultralight going in the opposite direction I did not see them coming until they were level with me, it was just lucky we were not lined up. Some of the so called 'sightings' are nothing short of ridiculous. All that aside I agree there is a looming problem with RC operations.

Unfortunately you are probably right about that. My point exactly, pretty much you would not spot one. How many have you seen by the way? Yes correct if on a collision course they would hit it because they would never be able to see one. I can understand why pilots are concerned about irresponsible drone operators but making up stories which are obviously not true is pointless and probably detrimental to their cause.

Sounds like more BS.

Something like a DJI Phantom could weigh nearly 2 kgs and do heaps of damage, what sort of bird are you thinking of a Pelican?

These sort of stories lack credibility to me that could have been a bird or just made up. Unless the drone was large you would not even see it. I think stories of passenger jets sighting drones is BS and just trying to build a case to have them banned.

I think so, but once you are vertically down it is too late.

In that situation you can roll off the top of the loop and save your ass.

Have they got better altimeters than us with no lag?

I don't think the altimeter would be much use in this case, as you said no room for error, just get it a bit wrong and that's the end of it.

I imagine it would have it was on the evening news I think it was described as a preliminary report. I doubt if the media would have made it up they would not be smart enough to come up with that one. There are a few things I don't get about this event, there has been talk about 'gates' which I understand, these involved airspeed and altitude which I also understood, the bit I am not sure about is how does the pilot know how high he is at the top of the loop? I would have thought you could not rely on the altimeter due to lag? How can that manoeuver be planned over that highway? Shouldn't the lowest allowable height be 500ft?

I have come across a fair few cases of people flying RC where they should not be and tried to explain the rules but they are not interested. All it will take is a mid air and that will get a lot of interest and some serious new rules.

I have most things sorted now except for the FPV, I have one of these http://www.uuustore.com/boscam-fpv-58g-200mw-8ch-audio-video-transmitter-ts351-and-receiver-rc305-2km-range-for-rc-multicopter-p-13.html?zenid=k4fg0ekv1tco0abk21g6jbn8f4 this is supposed to be good for 500 metres and 2 klm with a directional antenna but for me almost no range only about 50 metres. How does a directional antenna work?

If you have insufficient power / speed to climb high enough to go over the top then it does matter.

Actually I thought they said last night he entered the loop at 200ft when it should have been 500ft.

OK sounds great I might give you a call about it.

That was news to me, first I heard of that.

True but I would not recommend it, you would not want to go from a drifter to a Skyfox and quite a few others.

Everybody with any understanding of these things knew it was over weight including RAAus personnel in fact M OS was encouraged to do what he did.

I think they call that mode 2 it is same as mine.