BMFA A test questions

[scallybert]

Are you really expected to learn a lot of stuff that is irrelevant to the flying you do ?

I mean, 35Meg channels, adjacent channel tests, etc. What channel allocation peg-board scheme does your site use ?

I can see trouble ahead...

[electricsceadu]

yes 35mhz questions are still need to be asked as not all clubs are 2.4ghz only
what happens if you run a fly-in and 10 turn up with 35mhz radio's?

the clubs i fly at have a mix of 2.4 ghz and 35 mhz

[scallybert]

yes 35mhz questions are still need to be asked as not all clubs are 2.4ghz only
what happens if you run a fly-in and 10 turn up with 35mhz radio's?

Surely organising a fly-in is outside the scope of an A Cert exam ?

the clubs i fly at have a mix of 2.4 ghz and 35 mhz

But as a 2.4GHz (only) user, the most I need to do is to stick my peg in the 2.4GHz part of the board. The details of the archaic rituals of 35MHz aren't my concern - are they ?

[Rob O]

You still need to understand how they work Rob

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

[electricsceadu]

Surely organising a fly-in is outside the scope of an A Cert exam ?

But as a 2.4GHz (only) user, the most I need to do is to stick my peg in the 2.4GHz part of the board. The details of the archaic rituals of 35MHz aren't my concern - are they ?

yes
because how would you like it if somebody that didn't use the 35mhz peg board correctly or not know how to do an adjacent channel check crash into your heli whilst out of control due to radio interference

[scallybert]

You still need to understand how they work

I don't disagree with that. An overview is useful, but I don't see the benefit of learning the details of processes (or systems) that I won't have cause to use.

As a follow up, I wouldn't feel comfortable supervising someone using equipment that I had no significant experience of (eg nitro, 35MHz).

[scallybert]

yes
because how would you like it if somebody that didn't use the 35mhz peg board correctly or not know how to do an adjacent channel check crash into your heli whilst out of control due to radio interference

I'm not really seeing that scenario.

[choppertastic]

yes
because how would you like it if somebody that didn't use the 35mhz peg board correctly or not know how to do an adjacent channel check crash into your heli whilst out of control due to radio interference

Even worse a complete failure of the pegboard. several years ago I got shot down because someone didn't use the pegboard properly and took my peg!!!! What really peed me off was it was a brand new raptor 60 on its second weekend out.

[scallybert]

yes
because how would you like it if somebody that didn't use the 35mhz peg board correctly or not know how to do an adjacent channel check crash into your heli whilst out of control due to radio interference

Even worse a complete failure of the pegboard. several years ago I got shot down because someone didn't use the pegboard properly and took my peg!!!! What really peed me off was it was a brand new raptor 60 on its second weekend out.

Bummer of a thing to happen.

However, it doesn't relate to 2.4GHz users not knowing how the 35MHz pegboard works - it was the 35MHz user(s) who got it wrong.

I'm not sure this is an argument for 2.4GHz users being versed in 35MHz procedures.

Hmm, just found an old thread..: http://www.rcheliaddict.co.uk/main-d...ootage-10.html .

I will add that I can happilly accept that safety is everyone's responsibility, and it's good to look out for each other, etc.