There seem to be two groups of thought in Control-Line these days:

Those that embrace new technology and find ways to use it.
And those that want to keep things exactly as they were in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

Not putting either down, just saying that some will enjoy it while others will be unhappy about it.

Interesting point, Chuck. I guess I won't be tossing my older equipment.
I think it'll be a while before the Scale guys want anything more than DC input for electronics.
As far as people not wanting any electrics, I remember models with timed and internal mechanically signaled controls and mechanical options way back in the 60's.
Chris...

But wasn't one of Jack's lines just a static do-nothing line?

Jack and I have had a lot of laughs about that. He is  a very good friend and I love his attitude. God bless him.

Didn't Dick Byron fly with Zero lines? In carrier I fly with Zero lines, three to be exact!

Since we are talking about CONTROL LINE models, it seems that by definition the control should come from the lines.  I have no problem with using RF control on sport models, and have considered it myself many times. But for competition, CONTROL LINE is THE defining parameter, not model size, not engine size, not performance, not competition objective, simply the fact that the model is controlled by line(s). Either you accept the challenge of working within that framework or you don't.

My point exactly - well said!

 

I say as long as the elevator is still controlled by the two or one line, let the rest of the functions be controlled how ever the individual wants.   Just as long as it doesn't interfere with the radio control planes.   

My Last 3-line CL scale model was in 1991 and it was converted over to electronic controls very quickly. I have flown with all types, Single channel, DSC (JR radios), converted radios, IR and other systems.

The world of model airplanes has changed drastically in the last ten years, electric power has come of age and glow engines were going for cheap at the last RC auction I was at. If our sport is to survive we need to allow new technology to be used within reason.

I was flying with Virgil Wilbur in southern California at one point in the early 1990's and he did not want to try electronic controls, he said that for 3 years, then one day he decided to give it a try and he told me flat out that he wasn't going to like it but willing to give one model a try. After the maiden flight of that model, he put his handle down and only had one question for me...."how do I convert the rest of models to electronics controls?". Within two weeks had cut every 3rd line and installed electronics in every model he had.

My point is that we can embrace the 2-line control for the bellcrank and elevator, that should not change, but adding any form of controls for the throttle, retracts and other functions does not detract from the sport of Control Line.

Remember the use of electronic controls allows for the use of recievers, electric speed controls and the new brushless electric motors without any mechanical linkages. I flew my Hanger Nine cub with the older astro flight brushed motors for 8 years and use the JR radio for throttle control, it worked great.

Happy landings,

Some people are just die hards.   I still have the system I got from Fred a few years ago.  Just haven't decided what plane to put it in.   Also have the system that Ken Wilson of RC Hobbies in KCK made for me.   

I’ve been flying electronic controls down the lines since 1990.  Fred Cronenwett and I have campaigned models with electronic controls for years, trying to get folks more interested in CL Scale, because that’s what we love.  We did not want to see the sport die out.  I still fly scale very regularly with the Circle Cutters CL club in Chicago. 

Recently I switched to 2.4ghz control for my Piper Cub.  I was thrilled with the results!  The advantages are obvious: 
1.   I can use regular flying lines again, without the need for the thick plastic coating.  This makes the model fly cleaner.
2.   I can still control scale options exactly like I did before with the radio sending the signal down the lines, so all of my current scale planes need only have the receiver changed out, nothing else.

I bought a Park Zone Wildcat (RC model) and installed a belcrank in it and currently fly it 2.4ghz as well.  (Now there’s a switch:  flying what was supposed to be an ‘RC’ model as a CL scale model.)

I can understand wanting to keep certain events ‘pure’ from a nostalgia standpoint.  I think the SAM fliers limit certain technologies in their models.  But electronics in a CL model through the lines or 2.4ghz controlled, in no way give me a crushing advantage over any other fliers’ model.  I know from experience:  Kieth Trostle beat me at the Northwest Regionals in the 90’s with his Martin Baker 3-line model while I flew my Spacewalker with electronic controls.  In the end, it came down to his superb craftsmanship in static and his piloting skills that took the field that day. 

Last fall I put in for a rule change for the 2.4ghz on the next rules cycle regarding Scale Competition.  In my mind, it will only benefit the hobby, giving us just another tool to use to better CL flying.  Scale fliers in general already fly electronic controls; this would do little to affect how we fly.  As for other CL events?  Let them decide how they best want to direct their events.

As an interesting parting note, I’ve recently tried RC flying.  After watching the other fliers 'ooh' and 'ahh' over realtime telemetry sent back to their radios showing what the onboard voltage was of the onboard flight pack, I had to smile to myself at this vibrant group.  These modelers LOVE every new technological gadget that comes along and embrace it.  RC fliers are constantly pushing the envelope, gaining new members as they do so.  Why can’t we be more like that?  The younger generation of fliers today embrace all things new and electronic.  We want to attract new members and whether we like it or not, the world of electronics will continue to advance.

I love CL flying, and I don’t want to see it fade away.  When folks at the field see my models flying with electronic controls, they get excited and ask how they too can do what I’m doing.  I know that some will folks will long to keep the status quo, and it’s fine that they would disagree with my viewpoint. 

But as for me, I’m for charging forward towards the future. Even with 2.4ghz controls, it’s still a control line model.  And I’ll still be out in the field with my CL handle in hand, radio on my hip, the sun in my face, flying the CL models I love.

OK, so RC's the future and FF and CL are the past.

So go ahead and fly RC and let those who want to live in the past alone.

I have serious doubts that allowing RF control of functions on a CL plane would bring more fliers into the hobby. I like CL and would fly it under any circumstances. That said I don’t have a problem with RF Control Systems. Electrical control through the lines is currently allowed and as many of you have noted, used.  Personally I have only built one plane in the last 2 years that did not use electric control through the lines, (Clancy’s U/Tronics). I don’t really see any difference if the signals are run via hard wire, RF or infrared. As long as they don’t cause interference problems with other fliers, why not?

Some people are just die hards.   I still have the system I got from Fred a few years ago.  Just haven't decided what plane to put it in.   Also have the system that Ken Wilson of RC Hobbies in KCK made for me.   

Hey Doc,

I didn't know you had one of Ken Wilson's original digital C/L Scale control systems.  That was the first of it's kind in the world, and pioneered sending digital signals down insulated control lines to control RC servos.  It was developed by Ken in 1973 after a talk with fellow FAI team member Mike Stott and myself at the '73 Oshkosh Nats.  We debuted the new systems at the '74 Scale World Championships in Lakehurst.  By the '76 WC the Russians had duplicated our system, and before long the rest of the world followed.  In the 1980s I gave my system to Australia Graves, but then shortly after acquired Mike Stott's original system, which I still have.  It should be in the AMA Museum (one of these days).

2.4 is the next logical step IMO. It would allow us to get rid of the insulated lines.  Think of the performance benefits!  It would really be exciting.  With 2.4 on plain lines I could have looped my Zlin!!

Mike

2.4 is the next logical step IMO. It would allow us to get rid of the insulated lines.

It seems to be quite possible to send the signals via normal lines, as discussed in the other thread I linked a couple of days ago.

I have asked Floyd to send me some more info, but it looks as if it is just an encoded on/off signal. For multi-function electric control you need a more complicated waveform. It would be great if Floyd's system would work for that. I use lightly coated lines that I make myself, not the heavy nylon coated fishing lines. It does not take much insulation, but I have not figured out how to eliminate it completly.

What do you coat your lines with?

I'm with Doc on this one. As long as the pitch mode is controlled by lines, the model qualifies as being C/L. Auxilliary functions should be able to be controlled by any safe means. Time to come out of the dark ages and increase participation in C'L scale. The draggy insulated lines are a significant participation deterrent IMHO.

I have two types of electronic control systems that I use with my  CL scale and carrier models, Single channel and the JR radios with DSC  (Direct servo Connection).

All of my models have the traditional CL bellcrank, leadouts and I fly with a 2-line stunt handle. If you ignore the electronic controls the model is a CL scale or carrier model, I just choose to use the electronic controls to move the throttle, flaps, retracts or other features on the model.

Both systems require a waveform that changes the position of the servo. Single channel is very simple in that it has a circuit board, throttle stick and a battery. the single channel system has been called a servo driver and if the lines are shorted out the system will stop working. The lines need to be insulated.

The DSC system is basically a RC unit that has a feature designed for RC pilots to be used in the pit area and directly connects the transmitter to the reciever thru two wires without tranmistting a frecuency. Again the waveform adjusts the width of the waveform to control the position of the servo.

Both systems require the lines to be insulated. I choose to use the nylon coated lines to keep things simple. They are durable and last a very long time. I still have lines that I was flying with 15 years ago.

the 2.4 Ghz will allow lines to be bare wire and greatly simplify the installation and use of the system and improve the performance of the model.

One huge advantage of electronics controls is that the JR radios that I use with DSC have end point adjustment and servo reversing. I can use the end point adjustment to get the idle set just right in a matter of minutes. I did that same thing with my 3-line corsair back in 1990 and it took over 1/2 hour to adjust the pin location in the handle to get it set just right.

There is a darker side to the issue that hasn't surfaced so far in this discussion. Allowing an RF link opens up the potential for some skullduggery. What's to stop someone from setting up a system that uses an auxilliary controller, stationed clandestinly outside the flight circle, to do all of the fancy stuff? Don't think for a moment that this is the first mention of such an idea.

C/L General Rule Paragraph #2 is quite clear. All control inputs whether mechanical or electronic have to go down the lines.

And while on the topic of technology, don't forget that C/L "Fly-By-Wire" technology has been demonstrated. There is no mechanical link between the bellcrank and the elevator.

Does the pitch mode have to direct mechanical connect or can it have electronics involved?  Right now as I read it FIA is direct connect - AMA can have electronics as long as pitch control is through the lines.

Again, only my humble opinion ...
As long as the lines are used to control the pitch, what difference does it make whether the control is mechanical or electronic? The lines cannot just be a tether to keep the aircraft from flying out of the circle. The building and flying skill of the pilot is what counts regardless.

In todays world we have no choice but to embrace technology or be relegated to the ranks of dinosaurs.

Again, only my humble opinion ...
As long as the lines are used to control the pitch, what difference does it make whether the control is mechanical or electronic? The lines cannot just be a tether to keep the aircraft from flying out of the circle. The building and flying skill of the pilot is what counts regardless.

In todays world we have no choice but to embrace technology or be relegated to the ranks of dinosaurs.

Under the current AMA rules I do believe that you could fly the model tethered, say with a twisted insulated pair of wires attached between the model and a chest harness.  You would then fly the model with a direct connect RC flight box that sends the controll down the twisted pair. This would comply with the rule that the lines are used to control pitch - break a line and you crash!  Just think with this set up if the lines go slack line you could fly level until the lines tightened back up.  I have actually considered trying this and showing up at a contest to see what happens.

But above all have fun!!!

PS RF control may be over all cheaper and for the plug and play generation it will be easy!  

Is there a division here, between those who "wanna have fun" and those who want all the worldly fame, fortune and glory of winning a Scale C/L contest?      

I consider the physical connection from hand to elevator an essential part of the Fun in C/L. For the rest, I am all for making it reliable and easy to set up, in whatever way that can be accomplished. YMMV.

The point values of 20 for retracts and 10 for anything else that moves are based on mechanical systems that require a high degree of skill and ingenuity to achieve.

Paul,

Small point of historical accuracy.  As I mentioned earlier, the first use of digital signals down the lines to control R/C servos was in 1974 by Mike Stott and myself.  But there were other non-mechanical ways to actuate scale operations with electrical power down the lines that were tried all through the 1960s, and probably the 1950s.  I never used one, or was around to witness them, but numerous magazine articles and Nats reports of that time mentioned such systems.  None that became common place, like the later digital systems, but they were around.  So you can't say that the point values were based on mechanical systems only.

In fact the point values that you quote are from C/L Sport Scale which didn't exist at the Nats, or in the rule book, until 1977 or '78 (memory slightly foggy on the exact date the sport scale rules were adopted).  So even the use of today's digital controls pre-dates the point values you mentioned. 

Nonetheless I understand your contention.  You want more points for doing it the hard way.  Always difficult to draw the line on that idea?  Where do we stop?  Should I get more points if I cut down my own balsa tree and mill my own sheets.  Should I get more points for building my own engine?  Historically "building it yourself" has a bearing on the static portion of the scale score, but not too much on the flying portion.

Mike Gretz

The handle the pilot is holding is still doing elevation/pitch of the model, right?   I admire someone with the determination and talent/skill to do the electronics.   Also isn't there an event in Scale for those that want to compete or get their feet wet in scale competition?   Plus why is it that some people are against inovation and progress?   

So...

What is the point of tethering an R/C model?

Win-win,

EXCEPT - People who have built models that comply with honest Control LKine rules.

EXCEPT - People who have invested time and money in businesses based on complying with the rules.

Fortunately, this lunacy will have to clear one, and maybe several Contest Boards to get into The Rule Book.  The is the biggest and dumbest idea since lowering the age limits on Junior & Senior, which instantly destroyed both age groups.

-------------------

So the cost of a CL scale model goes up $300 and we're all still equal.  Where's the Win-Win in that?

If everybody wanted the newest thing, everybody would just buy RC park flyers and let Free Flight and Control Line vanish. 

The ongoing existance of the above is evidence that sport is not like business or war.  You don't need the newest thing to survive.  Archery and horse racing are still alive as sports, for the same reasons as FF and CL.

I'll raise the issue again: What is the point of using U-Control to tether a model and run everything else via an RF link?

This is not new technology. The R/C guys use this stuff all the time.

Is it just because some folks want to see their model fly in circles? Is it just because some folks want only to associate with others who call themselves control line fliers?

There is a great deal to be said for using the rule book to manage technology and keep C/L separate and distinct from R/C.

Hi John,

I believe the John's point is coming from a traditionalist point of view.  Nothing "we" can actually do is going to ever increase C/L to the popularity it once had.  It will forever more be a niche hobby.  There are just too many factors that have changed over the past 40-50 years, and I do believe that the majority of newcomers will be in the class of fairly mature men who find a bit of attraction in doing something different.  I can honestly see no way to attract large numbers of young people, no matter what is done through "innovations".  The Government might make certain aspects of R/C flying more and more difficult, and some C/L fliers might be picked up through that in the future, but "flight" is no longer the consuming curiosity it once was to people of my, and earlier, generations.  Heck, a person can sit down on the computer and "FLY" an R/C airplane with no more expenditure than getting the simulator.  That, in and of itself, would be much more attractive to the younger generations than actually having a model and going out and flying.

Control line is unique, always will be, and in an event like Scale, it is traditionally an event that relies on the lines to control the model, hence "control line".  Not just in the matter of flight elevation changes, but total control.  Removing the "total" part through the use of radio frequencies that do not rely on the lines for transference no doubt will enhance the "flyability" of a model airplane.  But electronic control has been done through the lines for decades.  Does anyone actually believe that this "new" technology will actually make the amount of new participants explode, or even greatly increase?  I can see no real evidence of that.  Simple technology changes in an ever shrinking hobby cannot cause the return of C/L as it once was, IMHO.  Of course it will serve the needs of those who are competing in the event today, but will it increase the number of new contestants?  There was once a sense of accomplishment through problem solving, and other innate qualities, which seems to be rapidly disappearing in our society.  I observed this in a career spanning more than 30 years in higher education.  Simply making the flying of a C/L Scale model easier is not the total answer to increasing participation in C/L Scale.  But then increasing participation might not even factor into the equation of this proposal at all.

Bill

Bob,
I don't understand your question. Is it
A. Why fly CL?
or
B. Why Fly CL with Electric Controls
or
C. None of the above.

Not A. or C. Sort of B.

My issue is specifically with allowing an RF link for control functions on a C/L model. This also is uniquely germane to Scale competition. First, there was FF Scale. Some truely magnificant models were built but flying them was a real challange. Next came C/L, which provided a better means of making a successful flight. Although, as we have seen that might not always be the case.
Finally, we have R/C Scale. It started with rather basic planes but has evolved into some really fine examples of the Scale builders art.

At this point I see the boundary between C/L and R/C Scale as being pretty fuzzy. It is not uncommon to see the same kits flown in both facets. A lot of the support technology is the same. My point is, that, by allowing direct radio control of the model or some functions of the model there is no longer any difference between C/L Scale and R/C Scale. Some have commented that it hinges on using a control handle to fly the plane for 10 laps. So what. With the big planes being flown that is pretty much a no brainer these days.

From what I see, R/C has become the preeminent platform for Scale.

John,

Perhaps.

And, please, don't take any of my comments wrong. I mean no disrespect.

I've always held the opinion that FF, C/L, & R/C present unique challenges and have marveled at the skill and dedication of those that have figured out how to make things work. As an engineer and student of history, I am also keenly aware that technology will be served.

So, as far as the salient point of this discussion, the majority will of the stakeholders shall prevail. As is proper.

Bob

I am one who is not convinced that radio control of C/L Scale models is a good change, in that it obsoletes a lot of existing scale models which is not ever a good thing in itself. But since i have not flown Scale for years, I will leave most of that discussion to the Scale guys, or get into it when I start building my own scale model. However, any change to the C/L General rules should not immediately allow 2.4 gHz radios for all events. This means the C/L General rules proposal should include words something like, "Control by 2.4 gHz radio is permitted only in the manner and to the extent specifically identified in the rules for the event involved." Then Scale can decide what it wants, and the other events can decide if they want to include radios and to what extent.
For Speed, for example, if R/C is permitted, I would have the needle valve controlled by radio by the pitman, so no more bad runs due to a faulty needle setting. Same with Carrier and Racing? And for Carrier, it might be nice to have flaps controlled by radio giving me a different flap setting upwind and downwind. (Are flaps "elevation control? Any rule that restricts the radio from providing elevation control has to fine that.) I could do this with a U-tronics unit and insulated lines, but the added work and hassle of the insulated lines have prevented me from doing that. Make it too easy, and maybe I would do it. And if I am really successful, then everything else will be obsolete, and more competitors will quit rather than make the change in all their stuff to remain fully competitive.
So my point here is not to stop 2.4 gHz use in control line, particularly in Scale, but rather to encourage serious consideration of what it means for each event. And to make sure that that consideration is done by those with an interest in the event. A C/L General proposal that imposes allowing 2.4 gHz radios on all events is a real problem and should be avoided. Otherwise, all the C/L event contest boards would be well advised to vote against the proposal.

Pete

It would certainly put everybody with a 3-line or insulated 2-line system at a crippling disadvantage.

While not disallowing existing equipment, it would continue to permit traditional Control Line modelers to contribute their entry fees, pad the entry list, and take a beating.

-------------------
Quoted from the SCALE section of The Rule Book:

"1. General: All AMA regulations (see sections titled Sanctioned Competitions, Records, Selection of Champions, General, Control Line General and Scale General) shall be applicable, except as specified below."

So this idea will need to clear quite a few boards to become effective.  Getting RC past the combined CLCB's will be quite a piece of work.

I also thought that is what we were discussing. And I thought CL general applies to scale. It that not correct?

However, at this time there is no proposal on the AMA site for allowing 2.4Ghz radio that I can find, only a mention of it being done in the MA SCALE column

John
There is section under the competition tab on the AMA site which lists currently submitted proposals. I did not see one for 2.4Ghz anywhere. Perhaps it is still being processed? Replica is the Scale newsletter. More info on scale on the NASA scale site. http://www.nasascale.org/
JV

There are two proposals that have not been posted yet on the AMA web site

#1 - Don Burke's addresses 2.4 Ghz for CL general

#2 - Grant Hiestand's addresses 2.4 Ghz for CL scale only

If #1 was to pass then #2 would not be required, but If #1 is not adopted, then #2 could be voted on by the Scale community and only affect the CL scale models.

I hope the proposals get posted on the AMA web site soon.

Land Softly

Grant,
Well said. People usually worry that technological changes will somehow always be better, but with models it usually is the better modeler that wins.
John

One final comment, see attached

Clancy,
I'd love to know the details of your poly painted lines. I'd like to build a Raven Acro model and use down the line but the insulation made any stunts seem kinda clumsy and I was looking for precision. This sounds like the missing link for my plan.
Chris...

Chris,

Clancy tipped me off about the polyurethane coating at Brodak’s last year. I built a set of lines shortly after returning home. I used them all last year and have several flights already this year. Since then I’ve built two other sets.

 I check the lines with an ohm meter while rolled up on the reel. No shorts so far. I’ll probably coat them again this year just to be on the safe side. Water based poly dries in a couple of hours. I simply string them up in the yard between two small tee shaped poles. Dip a rag in the paint and wipe down the lines.


John