Author Topic: U-Reely handles at a contest (Read 12638 times)

Rollin Keszler · « **on:** August 22, 2013, 11:58:14 AM »

I have no intention of using one but I recently met one fellow who is just getting into the hobby and despite insistent suggestions, he won't give it up. He's been provided with conventional handles and lines but he loves the idea of simply pacing out 22 or 23 steps and after landing, rolling the lines back up. He admits he never knows exactly how long his lines are for any given flight and he says the weight isn't that bad (compared to what? An anvil?). He wants to learn the Beginner pattern and is considering entering a contest but before he shows up, might the CD prevent him from competing? Should someone distract him while somebody makes off with the blasted thing and throws it in a well? Comments appreciated.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #1 on:** August 22, 2013, 12:04:08 PM »

Quote from: Rollin Keszler on August 22, 2013, 11:58:14 AM

I have no intention of using one but I recently met one fellow who is just getting into the hobby and despite insistent suggestions, he won't give it up. He's been provided with conventional handles and lines but he loves the idea of simply pacing out 22 or 23 steps and after landing, rolling the lines back up. He admits he never knows exactly how long his lines are for any given flight and he says the weight isn't that bad (compared to what? An anvil?). He wants to learn the Beginner pattern and is considering entering a contest but before he shows up, might the CD prevent him from competing? Should someone distract him while somebody makes off with the blasted thing and throws it in a well? Comments appreciated.

The CD could disallow it based on safety, but it's not necessarily illegal for stunt as long as the lines stay in the right length range.

Most CDs I know would disallow it. I certainly would, I have seen the results.

Brett

De Hill · « **Reply #2 on:** August 22, 2013, 12:20:26 PM »

If it passes the pull test it is legal to use.

De Hill

Brett Buck · « **Reply #3 on:** August 22, 2013, 12:36:23 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 22, 2013, 12:20:26 PM

If it passes the pull test it is legal to use.

De Hill

The CD/judges have the absolute right and authority to ban anything on safety reasons, pull test or not.

3. Safety Provisions. The control handle/device, thong, connections, lines and internal control system of the model, up to the point of attachment to the model (e.g., bellcrank or other device) will be in good condition, free of kinks, rust, etc., regardless of whether the equipment has already withstood the pull test. The judges’ opinion will be final in regards to safeness of a model or equipment. Judges shall exert their authority to disqualify a model deemed unsafe for flight. Safety precautions must be adhered to by the contestant while the model is in flight, with unnecessary and/or persistent low flying under 1.20 meters (3.9 feet) being grounds for deduction of points or disqualification. The flier will retain the control handle in his hand at all times during which the model is in motion.

This has been invoked numerous times at many contests, including several times at the NATs (mostly with regard to connectors, like snap-swivels or Luxon slide clips, and occasionally lines). In all cases people pitched in, including the CD who just disallowed it, with acceptable substitutes.

It would be very unfortunate for someone to prepare using a U-Reely, knowing that it would likely get disallowed, and then have to scramble.

Brett

De Hill · « **Reply #4 on:** August 22, 2013, 12:42:49 PM »

OK Brett,

Why are you going to disqualify a U-Reely if it has passed the pull test, and is in good condition?

De Hill

Brett Buck · « **Reply #5 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:22:31 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 22, 2013, 12:42:49 PM

OK Brett,

Why are you going to disqualify a U-Reely if it has passed the pull test, and is in good condition?

De Hill

Because fatigue in the latch, and in the connection of the handle to the reel, can both happen one load cycle after the pull test with no visually obvious problems. I have seen both happen. The reel unlatched, the lines unwound, hit a 5-year-old girl in the head, with her skull receiving a depressed fracture. Second was where the top of the handle portion broke away from the reel section. In that case the airplane just crashed in the circle because the bottom section held on and bent in a bunch of down. In both cases a pull test had been passed.

In either case you don't want to trust someone's life to 60-70-year old plastic. If it *just* caused a crash in the circle, I probably wouldn't concern myself, that's the pilot's choice. I would caution him about it, but if he persisted, fine with me, it's his airplane. But given that in this case the line length could increase inadvertently and go outside the circle, then no way. It's not just me being a hard case, I don't know anyone who would allow it. If we are disallowing Luxon slide connectors, a U-Reely with its known flaws is a no-brainer.

Brett

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #6 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:30:37 PM »

I'm so glad I'm not a CD.

De Hill · « **Reply #7 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:34:34 PM »

After the first run of plastic U-Reelys, a pin was provided that you pushed through the U-reely thereby locking the windup handle so that it can not turn. The U-Reely could not unwind with the pin installed.

If the top of the handle part of the U-Reely breaks, and the top pully cames loose, the down line will tighten and the airplane will dive to the ground.

Do you know what type of plastic that a U-Reely is made from?

Brett, do you own a U-Reely?

De Hill

Quote from: Brett Buck on August 22, 2013, 01:22:31 PM

Because fatigue in the latch, and in the connection of the handle to the reel, can both happen one load cycle after the pull test with no visually obvious problems. I have seen both happen. The reel unlatched, the lines unwound, hit a 5-year-old girl in the head, with her skull receiving a depressed fracture. Second was where the top of the handle portion broke away from the reel section. In that case the airplane just crashed in the circle because the bottom section held on and bent in a bunch of down. In both cases a pull test had been passed.

In either case you don't want to trust someone's life to 60-70-year old plastic. If it *just* caused a crash in the circle, I probably wouldn't concern myself, that's the pilot's choice. I would caution him about it, but if he persisted, fine with me, it's his airplane. But given that in this case the line length could increase inadvertently and go outside the circle, then no way. It's not just me being a hard case, I don't know anyone who would allow it. If we are disallowing Luxon slide connectors, a U-Reely with its known flaws is a no-brainer.

Brett

55chevr · « **Reply #8 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:37:16 PM »

If equipment is maintained it will pass a pull test. The lines in a U-reely are tied together inside the reel and could be installed as one continuous line. The pin that restricts the handle from turning was on my first handle in the late 50-s. Any handle that is damaged or missing parts could fail. Nothing wrong with a U-reely if it passes pull test.

Joe

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #9 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:43:37 PM »

I own one,, and would NEVER consider using it,, its purely nostalgia,, back in the early 70s,, I flew with one,, it was "maintained well" ,, was new,, and I had it fail on me,, ended up with the plane hitting a tree that used to be outside the circle,, but when the lines slipped it wasnt anymore,,

we are talking a contest,, safety of spectators,, personal property,, and the judges is at stake,,
why on earth would you risk that just to be stubborn,, there is NO advantage to a Ureely,, rolling up the lines on a conventional spool is just as fast,, and it also allows you the opurtunity to inspect the lines,,

Brett Buck · « **Reply #10 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:49:01 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 22, 2013, 01:34:34 PM

Do you know what type of plastic that a U-Reely is made from?

Brett, do you own a U-Reely?

Yes. There are two types of U-reely, the early bakelite types (even more prone to cracking but not all that likely to fail unexpectedly due to fatigue) and the later styrene type.

This is lining up to be another P*ssing contest and I won't play. The answer is that U-Reelys are very likely to get DQed at a contest on Rule 3. Telling someone to go to a contest, use a U-Reely, and then getting DQed is not good advice. Which, I note, was the gist of the original question.

Brett

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #11 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:57:48 PM »

I flew on a U-Reely when I was in Jr. High, but it went away sometime during my HS years. Mine had the pin that locked against the crank handle, and served safely. But like Brett says, old plastic stuff is dangerous...spinners, props and control handles. I sure wouldn't use one, but as a CD, I'd be a bit reluctant to keep an entrant from flying with one if it passes both my visual inspection and the pull test.

It could be proposed to the AMA that the U-Reely be removed from flying status as an emergency safety issue. If Brett feels that strongly against them, I'm sure he knows how to go about getting that done.

Steve

De Hill · « **Reply #12 on:** August 22, 2013, 01:59:16 PM »

Brett,

There are 3 types of U-Reelys; Wooden, Black Bakelite and the later colored plastic variety.

I am sitting here looking at a U-Reely. I am not pissing; I'm telling the truth.

Do you own a U-Reely?

De Hill

PS: How do you know that a U-Reely will be disqualified at a contest? Do you speak for all the Contest Directors in the United States?

Quote from: Brett Buck on August 22, 2013, 01:49:01 PM

Yes. There are two types of U-reely, the early bakelite types (even more prone to cracking but not all that likely to fail unexpectedly due to fatigue) and the later styrene type.

This is lining up to be another P*ssing contest and I won't play. The answer is that U-Reelys are very likely to get DQed at a contest on Rule 3. Telling someone to go to a contest, use a U-Reely, and then getting DQed is not good advice. Which, I note, was the gist of the original question.

Brett

rustler · « **Reply #13 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:05:19 PM »

I believe there is another type of U-Reely incorporating some electric gear for transmitting a current along the lines for some sort of control function? There was one on e-b recently.

Plus - o.k. all this has stopped me feeling sore that they have banned my U-Reely this year (18thou stranded lines) for flying my McCoy 49 Vintage Speed ship!

Had to make a set of single strand. Darn, so far no increase in speed.

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #14 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:11:49 PM »

I have personally witnessed three Ureely failures in the past and the last one was over 30 years ago.
All three failures resulted in fly aways and fortunately no one was injured...one airplane hit a parked car and resulted in over $2000.00 in damage to the car...(a corvette convertible). The owner was mad enough to cause some other damage...(a fat lip), especially after the flier had been repeatedly warned about the pontential for failure with the ureely.
I have been at two contests since then in which Ureelys were not allowed to be used and were banned by the CDs.
Personally I also would not allow the use of one at a contest and would discourage the use of one to anyone I saw using one.
Incidentally just about all plastic has a finite life cycle that ends in embrittlement, especially if exposed to Ultra violet light repeatedly.
Also I would mention that one of the Ureely failures that I witnessed was due to pilot error.
In a seemingly panic mode the pilot simply depressed the release lever and the airplane flew away into a nearby tree...this one also after being repeatedly warned...no one there was very excited about helping the guy retrieve his rekitted airplane from the tree. It was retrieved eventually and the guy left and never came back to that flying field.
None of the above incidents occurred at contests and not many people were around or the potential for injuries would have been much higher.
UReelys may not be officially illegal for contest use but they damXXd well should be!
That's my proffessional opinion as well as my personal opinion.

Randy Cuberly

De Hill · « **Reply #15 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:13:32 PM »

The type of U-Reely with a button switch on the bottom of the handle was used for throttle control. The switch triggered a relay on the airplane that would change the engine speed from high to low. You also wore a battery pack on your belt to supply the electricity that ran down the insulated flying lines and actuated the relay.

This type of U-Reely was called a Remoto.

De Hill

Quote from: rustler on August 22, 2013, 02:05:19 PM

I believe there is another type of U-Reely incorporating some electric gear for transmitting a current along the lines for some sort of control function? There was one on e-b recently.

Plus - o.k. all this has stopped me feeling sore that they have banned my U-Reely this year (18thou stranded lines) for flying my McCoy 49 Vintage Speed ship!
Had to make a set of single strand. Darn, so far no increase in speed.

De Hill · « **Reply #16 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:16:38 PM »

Randy,

In my personal and professional opinion they are legal if they pass the pull test and an external inspection.

I have been a Contest Director for 25 years.

De Hill

Quote from: Randy Cuberly on August 22, 2013, 02:11:49 PM

I have psonally witnessed three Ureely ailures in the pas and the last one was ove30 years ago.
All three failures resulted in fly aways and fortunately no one was injured...one airplane hit a parked car and resulted in over $2000.00 in damage to the car...(a corvette convertible). The owner was mad enough to cause some other damage...(a fat lip), especially after the flier had been repeatedly warned about the pontential for failure with the ureely.
I have been at two contests since them in which Ureelys were not allowed to be used and were banned by the CDs.
Personally I also would not allow the use of one at a contest and would discourage the use of one to anyone I saw using one.
Incidentally just about all plastic has a finite life cycle that ends in embrittlement, especially if exposed to Ultra violet light repeatedly.
Also I would mention that one of the Ureely failures that I witnessed was due to pilot error.
I a seemingly panic mode the pilot simply depressed the release lever and the airplane flew away into a nearby tree...this one also after being repeatedly warned...no one there was very excited about helping the guy retrieve his rekitted airplane from the tree. It was retrieved eventually and the guy left and never came back to that flying field.
None of the above incidents occurred at contests and not many people were around or the potential for injuries would have been much higher.
UReelys may not be officially illegal for contest use but they damXXd well should be!
That's my proffessional opinion as well as my personal opinion.

Randy Cuberly

Rollin Keszler · « **Reply #17 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:19:37 PM »

Yikes-I didn't mean to start too big a deal about this (but things were getting pretty quiet anyway!) and maybe these comments will spur this fellow into using the reely for sport and fun flying away from competition. I'm sure he will soon realize the advantages of this decision. Many thanks to all those posting for their support.

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #18 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:23:27 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 22, 2013, 02:16:38 PM

Randy,

In my personal and professional opinion they are legal if they pass the pull test and an external inspection.

I have been a Contest Director for 25 years.

De Hill

That's wonderful Dee...are you a Registered Proffessional Structural Engineer...I am!

I'm not sure that actually carries any official weight in this pissing contest but the liabilities involved could be enormous.

Randy cuberly

55chevr · « **Reply #19 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:24:34 PM »

I flew combat in contests and every single participant had a U-Reely. Must have been 50 participants. Old technology for sure but it worked and would still work if maintained. Not sure why equipment that passed inspection and pull testing would be disqualified based on the fact that it was designed 60 years ago. I read on this forum 3 months ago where a modern handle made by a very respected manufacturer failed. I didn't hear any outcry about it being removed from competition. I have flown for many years with a U-Reely and if I would still fly with it if it gave better control than what I am using now.

Joe

De Hill · « **Reply #20 on:** August 22, 2013, 02:33:27 PM »

Randy.

I have been an Aircraft Mechanic since I was 17. I was an Autopilot technician in the USAF, Chief instructor at Spartan School of Aeronautics, A Helicopter inspector in Vietnam, and retired from American Airlines. I held an inspection authorization, and gave the oral and practical examinations for the Airframe and Powerplant certificates.

I do believe that I know a little about structures and strength of materials.

De Hill
AMA 1672
Contest Director
Leader member Administration
Leader member Scientific
AMA Fellow

Quote from: Randy Cuberly on August 22, 2013, 02:23:27 PM

That's wonderful Dee...are you a Registered Proffessional Structural Engineer...I am!

I'm not sure that actually carries any official weight in this pissing contest but the liabilities involved could be enormous.

Randy cuberly

Bob Whitely · « **Reply #21 on:** August 22, 2013, 04:48:52 PM »

Hey Guys, Ya'll may want to calm down a little. This is just a discussion and an
answer to the question posed. U'Reelys were ok a long time ago and many used
them. De, no one is doubting your experience and qualifications. With that said
I would also as a CD not allow these handles in any competition. The safety
question trumps any and all opinions such as yours and others that differ from the
norm. Brett arguably knows more about the probability of unwanted malfunctions
than anyone on this subject so I would suggest that all pay attention to what he
has to say. Again I would ban them from any competition, period. That should
really end any more discussion on this subject. RJ

De Hill · « **Reply #22 on:** August 22, 2013, 05:04:25 PM »

Bob,

Sorry, I don't agree with you.
I own hundreds of handles and reels and have studied them. I feel my opinion on this subject is at least as valid as
Brett's.

e author=Bob Whitely link=topic=32525.msg323338#msg323338 date=1377211732]
Hey Guys, Ya'll may want to calm down a little. This is just a discussion and an
answer to the question posed. U'Reelys were ok a long time ago and many used
them. De, no one is doubting your experience and qualifications. With that said
I would also as a CD not allow these handles in any competition. The safety
question trumps any and all opinions such as yours and others that differ from the
norm. Brett arguably knows more about the probability of unwanted malfunctions
than anyone on this subject so I would suggest that all pay attention to what he
has to say. Again I would ban them from any competition, period. That should
really end any more discussion on this subject. RJ
[/quote]

55chevr · « **Reply #23 on:** August 22, 2013, 06:31:03 PM »

I am with De in this discussion. Passes pull test. Passes inspection. Has half the end points. As good a handle as any for the purpose of safety.

Joe

Paul Smith · « **Reply #24 on:** August 22, 2013, 06:44:41 PM »

If the circle is set up for the 70' maximum line length and the U-Reely only has 70' of line an accidental reeling-out would not be a problem. Realistically, why would anybody put more than the legal length on his U-Reely?

After AMA allowed turbojets and eliminated weight limits in RC, why would anybody worry about an old U-Reely handle?

Hoss Cain · « **Reply #25 on:** August 22, 2013, 08:26:30 PM »

Quote from: Motorman on August 22, 2013, 07:01:56 PM

I would never use a handle that had the remote possibility of killing someone. I'd like to see all plastic handles (hot rock, Sullivan) banned. Yes, I own a Un-reely. I've been flying for over 50 years and have seen many control systems fail after passing a good pull test. These planes look tame but, they are deadly when unleashed.

MM

It seems that everyone that has some opposition to some item finds all kind of reasons to BAN that item. Sullivan Hot Rock was my favorite handle within a short time of when I learned to fly CL, some 65-67 years ago. It still is. I had a difficult time locating a couple when I came back to doing a bit of CL some 10 years ago, not for competition, but with the possibility in mind.
In this day and age, almost everything one does or has, is also a possible item to kill someone. BTW I have owned a U-Reely all these years. Used it only a couple times, never liked it, but I still have it.

I well understand discussing the Pros and Cons of any equipment with someone, however I am not into all this extra rule-making to just do away with something that many individuals find to be an instrument that they prefer. Over the past few years as I thought I might like to try some contest flying and I see all the ramrodding here concerning the CL Stunt Rules, and for sure all the ruckus ref. Old-Time stuff, well it is close to the S.O.S. of back in the late '60s through the mid-70s when the big item was the crease in the white slacks and whiteness of the sneakers.

I go with the "Passes Pull-Test" theory, but not all the "Inspection" stuff. I don't care for some CDs that use their event-day power to become a person of significance. I like Paul Smith's approach!

Yes, I still hold a CD which I received in the Spring of 1963.
I have not missed CDing some kind of meet, or event each year since.

bill bischoff · « **Reply #26 on:** August 22, 2013, 09:05:19 PM »

Per CL General par. 3, "Unless prohibited by the rules of the particular event, control handles providing for easy adjustment of line length are permitted provided they are equipped with a positive safety lock."

If you've pull tested and inspected per the rules, as a CD this should cover you.

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #27 on:** August 22, 2013, 10:34:17 PM »

Quote from: bill bischoff on August 22, 2013, 09:05:19 PM

Per CL General par. 3, "Unless prohibited by the rules of the particular event, control handles providing for easy adjustment of line length are permitted provided they are equipped with a positive safety lock."

If you've pull tested and inspected per the rules, as a CD this should cover you.

If there is a serious injury or death and the pack of lawyers descend on you a simple rule like that will not protect anyone...There will be a littany of expert testimony that will not agree with the rule and the entire CL community will suffer.

Taking chances like those discussed here, in our modern litigeous society, is just plain stupid.

The discussion here is just concerning sanctioned competition...sport flying on your own...well then you're on your own and not necessarily endangering our whole stunt community.

That's all I intend to say on the subject.

Apparently Brett is wiser than me and gave up some time ago.

Randy Cuberly

Brett Buck · « **Reply #28 on:** August 23, 2013, 01:32:05 AM »

Quote from: Hoss Cain on August 22, 2013, 08:26:30 PM

It seems that everyone that has some opposition to some item finds all kind of reasons to BAN that item. Sullivan Hot Rock was my favorite handle within a short time of when I learned to fly CL, some 65-67 years ago. It still is. I had a difficult time locating a couple when I came back to doing a bit of CL some 10 years ago, not for competition, but with the possibility in mind.\

Just to be entirely clear, a U-Reely IS NOT explicitly banned by any rule. What I think will happen in many cases is that a CD will choose to disallow the use of a U-Reely based on his opinion of the safety, which is not protestable or debatable at a contest. But not all.

In all fairness to beginners who might not know any better, they need to be aware of the issue. I think a U-Reely will not be allowed in most cases, and showing up with one will either result in them having to scramble at the last second to switch to something else, or, have someone show up intentionally trying to cause a scene at a contest somewhere. It certainly would not be allowed at any contest I had any control over, and that would be at *my discretion*, not because the rule book says it is explicitly disallowed.

It's also a terrible handle to try to fly stunt with, but that's entirely up to the pilot.

It might also be argued that it (since it contains non-metallic elements in the load path) would be subject to a "double" pull test as the nylon Yatsenko handles would be. I don't know if it can take 80 lbs or not.

But that's only my opinion (and that of any CDs I have ever discussed this sort of situation with). It is not directly banned, the only justification would be rule 3 which is "judges discretion".

Brett

Brett Buck · « **Reply #29 on:** August 23, 2013, 01:40:14 AM »

Quote from: Randy Cuberly on August 22, 2013, 10:34:17 PM

That's all I intend to say on the subject.

Apparently Brett is wiser than me and gave up some time ago.

Well, maybe not. De started this to try to pick another fight with me, as he has done over and over. I have no idea why he has a problem with me, but he does and takes every possible chance to goad me into an argument. I won't do it any more.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, De included, so if you go to one of his contests I suppose a UReely is A-OK. It's the CD's discretion. I can guarantee that most CD's will not permit it, but if someone wants to go to a contest and risk getting it disallowed 10 minutes before a flight, then it is entirely their business. It would certainly be unfortunate.

Brett

Steve Fitton · « **Reply #30 on:** August 23, 2013, 06:10:18 AM »

Personally I'm glad for the information. Don't own one, don't ever plan to, but if I see one being used I know to look out. U Reelys are *way* before my time but stunt being what it is I am sure loads of people still use them.

De Hill · « **Reply #31 on:** August 23, 2013, 06:36:41 AM »

Evidently disagreeing with Brett is regarded by him as trying to pick a fight. Not so.

I collect handles and have several hundred of them, including a few U-reelys. It would seem that I would know what I am talking about.

If you guys will go back and see my posts on this matter, you will see that I am not goading Brett; I am just disagreeing with him.

Is it a sin to disagree with Brett?

De Hill

Quote from: Brett Buck on August 23, 2013, 01:40:14 AM

Well, maybe not. De started this to try to pick another fight with me, as he has done over and over. I have no idea why he has a problem with me, but he does and takes every possible chance to goad me into an argument. I won't do it any more.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, De included, so if you go to one of his contests I suppose a UReely is A-OK. It's the CD's discretion. I can guarantee that most CD's will not permit it, but if someone wants to go to a contest and risk getting it disallowed 10 minutes before a flight, then it is entirely their business. It would certainly be unfortunate.

Brett

john e. holliday · « **Reply #32 on:** August 23, 2013, 08:30:53 AM »

I know the dust hasn't settle yet, but back in the 50's when my brother started flying with me, he purchased a Cox Reely type handle. Yes it was convenient for him to hook up lines, roll out needed length and lock the reels. Then after flying one of my planes with an E-Z Just handle he immediately went and bought one with a new set of lines. Never used the reely type handle again.

As far as new handle with all the adjustablility designed into them can also cause problems if not checked properly like I didn't do one time. I had a flight on the handle and let another person take a flight. Part way into the flight I noticed he was holding down on the handle and flying level. Seems the bolt for adjusting the neutral on handle had worked loose enough that when he gave control the cable slipped. I now check to make sure every thing is tight now.

55chevr · « **Reply #33 on:** August 23, 2013, 10:46:51 AM »

I am tempted to do destructive tests on handles. I have a couple of U-Reely-s and a couple of EZ-Justs. I only hesitate to do it as I see that everyone appears to have prejudged the case.

Joe

Joseph Lijoi · « **Reply #34 on:** August 23, 2013, 11:53:15 AM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 06:36:41 AM

Evidently disagreeing with Brett is regarded by him as trying to pick a fight. Not so.

I collect handles and have several hundred of them, including a few U-reelys. It would seem that I would know what I am talking about.

If you guys will go back and see my posts on this matter, you will see that I am not goading Brett; I am just disagreeing with him.

Is it a sin to disagree with Brett?

De Hill

Sorry,

Any reasonable person reading this thread will see that you appear to be picking a fight. After an initial response, you asked for further explanation. A pretty horrific incident was described. That should have been the end of the debate. Responses like "that can happen only with the 1958 handle" or "do you own a U-Reely" are nothing but goading or a refusal to accept facts.

The reality is that any sanctioning body would ban a device that has caused serious permanent injury to a spectator.

Joseph Lijoi · « **Reply #35 on:** August 23, 2013, 11:56:06 AM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 06:36:41 AM

Evidently disagreeing with Brett is regarded by him as trying to pick a fight. Not so.

I collect handles and have several hundred of them, including a few U-reelys. It would seem that I would know what I am talking about.

If you guys will go back and see my posts on this matter, you will see that I am not goading Brett; I am just disagreeing with him.

Is it a sin to disagree with Brett?

De Hill

Sorry,

Any reasonable person reading this thread will see that you appear to be picking a fight. After an initial response, you asked for further explanation. A pretty horrific incident was described. That should have been the end of the debate. Responses like "that can happen only with the 1958 handle" or "do you own a U-Reely" are nothing but goading or a refusal to accept facts.

The reality is that any sanctioning body would ban a device that has caused serious permanent injury to a spectator.

De Hill · « **Reply #36 on:** August 23, 2013, 12:01:37 PM »

Brett,

You have stated that I take every possible chance to goad you into an argument. That sounds like I goad you frequently.

That statement is not true.

When is the last time you and I disagreed on something?

De Hill

Quote from: Brett Buck on August 23, 2013, 01:40:14 AM

Well, maybe not. De started this to try to pick another fight with me, as he has done over and over. I have no idea why he has a problem with me, but he does and takes every possible chance to goad me into an argument. I won't do it any more.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, De included, so if you go to one of his contests I suppose a UReely is A-OK. It's the CD's discretion. I can guarantee that most CD's will not permit it, but if someone wants to go to a contest and risk getting it disallowed 10 minutes before a flight, then it is entirely their business. It would certainly be unfortunate.

Brett

De Hill · « **Reply #37 on:** August 23, 2013, 12:06:16 PM »

I couldn't find anything I posted regarding a 1958 handle.

If you are going to explain why a handle is unsafe, wouldn't it be nice if you actually had one to look at and explain what was wrong?

De Hill

Quote from: Joseph Lijoi on August 23, 2013, 11:56:06 AM

Sorry,

Any reasonable person reading this thread will see that you appear to be picking a fight. After an initial response, you asked for further explanation. A pretty horrific incident was described. That should have been the end of the debate. Responses like "that can happen only with the 1958 handle" or "do you own a U-Reely" are nothing but goading or a refusal to accept facts.

The reality is that any sanctioning body would ban a device that has caused serious permanent injury to a spectator.

Trostle · « **Reply #38 on:** August 23, 2013, 02:18:42 PM »

Ok, I will add another reason why any ED should be reluntant to allow a U-Reely in competition besides the risk/safety factor, which in the end trumps all other reasoning, even if the thing with its lines passes the pull test.

Per the rule, "Pull test shall be performed immediately before each flight." That is clear enough. However, with a U-Reely, there can be no guarantee that the line length is not changed (intentional or not) between the pull test and the actual flight. If the line length is changed, that is essentially the same as using a different set of lines requiring another pull test. Or, it is possible that the line length is changed in flight (intentional or not) during flight, thereby invalidating the pull test by using a set of different length lines as those that previously passed the pull test.

In short, if there is any concern for safety as has amply been presented herein, why this is even a question really is beyond the boundaries of reason, regardless of individual experience in structural analysis, or strength of materials knowledge, or size of handle collections.

Now, if someone wants to use a U-Reely with his CL airplane in his cow pasture behind the barn at his ranch in NW Idaho, power to him.

Keith

De Hill · « **Reply #39 on:** August 23, 2013, 02:46:49 PM »

Keith,

I think that you missed the post about the U-Reely locking pin. That prevents the reel from unrolling.

Also if you wonder if the line length has changed, it's no problem to mark the lines where they exit the U-Reely with nail polish.
(a lot of guys mark their up line connection with nail polish, someone would have some) Then you can tell if the lines have moved.

Also, if a guy wants to use a U-Reely, he can contact the Contest Director prior to the contest and ask permission to use one.

De Hill

Quote from: Trostle on August 23, 2013, 02:18:42 PM

Ok, I will add another reason why any ED should be reluntant to allow a U-Reely in competition besides the risk/safety factor, which in the end trumps all other reasoning, even if the thing with its lines passes the pull test.

Per the rule, "Pull test shall be performed immediately before each flight." That is clear enough. However, with a U-Reely, there can be no guarantee that the line length is not changed (intentional or not) between the pull test and the actual flight. If the line length is changed, that is essentially the same as using a different set of lines requiring another pull test. Or, it is possible that the line length is changed in flight (intentional or not) during flight, thereby invalidating the pull test by using a set of different length lines as those that previously passed the pull test.

In short, if there is any concern for safety as has amply been presented herein, why this is even a question really is beyond the boundaries of reason, regardless of individual experience in structural analysis, or strength of materials knowledge, or size of handle collections.

Now, if someone wants to use a U-Reely with his CL airplane in his cow pasture behind the barn at his ranch in NW Idaho, power to him.

Keith

Joseph Lijoi · « **Reply #40 on:** August 23, 2013, 04:12:25 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 12:06:16 PM

I couldn't find anything I posted regarding a 1958 handle.

If you are going to explain why a handle is unsafe, wouldn't it be nice if you actually had one to look at and explain what was wrong?

De Hill

The 1958 comment was a tongue in cheek comment in reference to your "After the first run of plastic U-Reelys...." post where you describe the evolution of the handle. Apparently you agree that this first run of plastic U-Reelys is unsafe and the possibility exists that the line length can change in flight due to a failure of the handle. The CD will be required to know which U-reely would be safe, in other words the February 19XX through December19XX Ureelys are unsafe............never mind.

I don't need to see the handle. This is a veiled insult as to say that I don't know what I am talking about because I don't have a U-Reely. Also the delivery of that statement is cynical and patronizing. This is a tactic that you have employed with others on this thread. This is known as goading.. It works well on AM talk radio.

The concept of a handle that provides the potential for variable line length when the flight envelope is at head height is a pretty scary design concept, and the events described here on this thread confirm that this concept should be a cause for concern.

The guy who started this thread was simply asking if he should allow the use of the handle. This question must be based on some experience or things that he has heard. Based on the general experience of the community the prudent advice given was not to let the guy use the handle at the contest, but to give him plenty of warning to prepare. This is good advice.

I don't mean any harm or intend to insult Jim Walker or anything but I guess that story about the little kid getting hit by the plane really got to me.

De Hill · « **Reply #41 on:** August 23, 2013, 05:14:22 PM »

Joseph,

You are welcome to your opinion.

I have noticed you attack at least one other on this board who disagreed with Brett.

It's fine by me, if it makes you happy.

De Hill

Quote from: Joseph Lijoi on August 23, 2013, 04:12:25 PM

The 1958 comment was a tongue in cheek comment in reference to your "After the first run of plastic U-Reelys...." post where you describe the evolution of the handle. Apparently you agree that this first run of plastic U-Reelys is unsafe and the possibility exists that the line length can change in flight due to a failure of the handle. The CD will be required to know which U-reely would be safe, in other words the February 19XX through December19XX Ureelys are unsafe............never mind.

I don't need to see the handle. This is a veiled insult as to say that I don't know what I am talking about because I don't have a U-Reely. Also the delivery of that statement is cynical and patronizing. This is a tactic that you have employed with others on this thread. This is known as goading.. It works well on AM talk radio.

The concept of a handle that provides the potential for variable line length when the flight envelope is at head height is a pretty scary design concept, and the events described here on this thread confirm that this concept should be a cause for concern.

The guy who started this thread was simply asking if he should allow the use of the handle. This question must be based on some experience or things that he has heard. Based on the general experience of the community the prudent advice given was not to let the guy use the handle at the contest, but to give him plenty of warning to prepare. This is good advice.

I don't mean any harm or intend to insult Jim Walker or anything but I guess that story about the little kid getting hit by the plane really got to me.

Joseph Lijoi · « **Reply #42 on:** August 23, 2013, 05:19:15 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 05:14:22 PM

Joseph,

You are welcome to your opinion.

I have noticed you attack at least one other on this board who disagreed with Brett.

It's fine by me, if it makes you happy.

De Hill

Stick to the subject.

De Hill · « **Reply #43 on:** August 23, 2013, 05:20:44 PM »

I have enjoyed this discussion. I haven't enjoyed being accused by Brett of "taking every possible chance to goad me into an argument."

Prove it Brett, it's not true.

I don't lie.

Please post the number of times I have picked a fight with you. Please post the threads that these fights are located on so that everybody can see.

I'll bet you don't, Brett.

De Hill

quote author=Brett Buck link=topic=32525.msg323388#msg323388 date=1377243614]
Well, maybe not. De started this to try to pick another fight with me, as he has done over and over. I have no idea why he has a problem with me, but he does and takes every possible chance to goad me into an argument. I won't do it any more.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, De included, so if you go to one of his contests I suppose a UReely is A-OK. It's the CD's discretion. I can guarantee that most CD's will not permit it, but if someone wants to go to a contest and risk getting it disallowed 10 minutes before a flight, then it is entirely their business. It would certainly be unfortunate.

Brett
[/quote]

BillLee · « **Reply #44 on:** August 23, 2013, 06:13:02 PM »

Not taking either side in this pissing contest, apparently all have failed to read ALL of the AMA rules. There is one section that is aimed directly at the U-Reely:

3. Size and Type of Control Handle. The “control handle” is that portion of the control system which is
physically grasped by the pilot for controlling the model. Rigid portions of the the control handle shall not
extend more than six inches (6) beyond the hand of the operator except in cases where control is
accomplished by means of twisting a line, in which case the maximum extension shall be no more than 30
inches. Flexible handle extensions or line connectors shall not extend more than twelve (12) inches beyond
the hand of the operator except in cases where control is accomplished by means of twisting a line, in
which case the maximum extension shall be no more than thirty (30) inches. Control handle, including
flexible extensions, may be constructed of any material. Unless prohibited by the rules of the particular
event, control handles providing for easy adjustment of line length are permitted provided they are
equipped with a positive safety lock. Lines may be stored between flights, but lengths must be measured
before each official flight. Altering line length after official measurement is cause for disqualification.

Highlighting and font color is mine for emphasis.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #45 on:** August 23, 2013, 06:42:04 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 05:20:44 PM

I have enjoyed this discussion. I haven't enjoyed being accused by Brett of "taking every possible chance to goad me into an argument."

Prove it Brett, it's not true.

I don't lie.

Please post the number of times I have picked a fight with you. Please post the threads that these fights are located on so that everybody can see.

I'll bet you don't, Brett.

You are right, because that is in fact exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.

Brett

De Hill · « **Reply #46 on:** August 23, 2013, 07:21:01 PM »

Brett, you can't answer because you can't find any evidence of all the many times that I am supposed to have picked a fight with you.

They don't exist, Brett. You have no proof, you are wrong, and you won't admit it.

I guess if anyone disagrees with you, they are picking a fight with you.

You have accused me of repeatably picking a fight with you.

That is a lie.

De Hill

Quote from: Brett Buck on August 23, 2013, 06:42:04 PM

You are right, because that is in fact exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.

Brett

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #47 on:** August 23, 2013, 08:22:01 PM »

Quote from: De Hill on August 23, 2013, 07:21:01 PM

Brett, you can't answer because you can't find any evidence of all the many times that I am supposed to have picked a fight with you.

They don't exist, Brett. You have no proof, you are wrong, and you won't admit it.

I guess if anyone disagrees with you, they are picking a fight with you.

You have accused me of repeatably picking a fight with you.

That is a lie.

De Hill

De I'll go one step further and agree with Brett and also mention that you have also picked fights with me on technical at least three times on this and the other forum.

Which raises the question: What the Hell is the matter with you? Can't you just have a discussion without repeatedly attacking those who disagree with you?

Now that really is all I have to say so don't bother lecturing me because I'm not going to look at this thread again.

Randy Cuberly!

De Hill · « **Reply #48 on:** August 23, 2013, 08:25:39 PM »

Randy,

If I disagree with you, it is picking a fight?

If I ask how or why something would fail is that picking a fight?

Whatever;

You may misunderstand me, but at least you aren't lying about me.

De Hill

PS: Where on the other forum did I attack you?

Quote from: Randy Cuberly on August 23, 2013, 08:22:01 PM

De I'll go one step further and agree with Brett and also mention that you have also picked fights with me on technical at least three times on this and the other forum.

Which raises the question: What the Hell is the matter with you? Can't you just have a discussion without repeatedly attacking those who disagree with you?

Now that really is all I have to say so don't bother lecturing me because I'm not going to look at this thread again.

Randy Cuberly!