RPQ-S Flight reference cards

[Cheshirecat]

I have a question about the RPQ-S flight reference cards that hopefully a RPQ-S holder can assist with.

I have a section to complete under "Environmental Operating Limitations" 1. Maximum ceiling height 2.Maximum operating radius, fairly cool with these 2 questions and plan to put down 400ft and 500M as these are the limits within the standard CAA PFAW.

But also have another question, Maximum operating altitude under flight characteristics.
I have not been able to find anything published for the WKM and suspect in reality this would be the Maximum range of the TX before fail safe triggers on loss of signal so probably around 1500-2000M.
I have set the WKM software to limit the altitude to 120M so it will not go above this anyway but unclear if the CAA are looking for the practical limit of 120M or the theoretical limit which i deduce is the range of the TX.

What did others put down for this information?

PS i went with the published maximum wind resistance of 8 m/s for maximum horizontal velocity.


Thanks

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

I've done all this back to front and I'm hoping I won't regret it! I have draft everything in place and my RPQ-s ground school starts a week Monday.

On my cards I put down operating limitations that fit in with CAP 722 and for my NAZA 120m. I would imagine practical limit is the way to go. Does that help? Probably not lol!

How did you find the GS?

 

[PMaughan]

Hi Cheshirecat,
im BNUC but I would think this just refers to the altitude it can operate up to i.e if you're taking off from the top of Ben Nevis you can get up to 4800'ish within the rules. I put mine down as 5000' to cover that hopefully never to happen situation, difficult enough to walk up it without a pile of gear!
Cheers
Pete

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

Ah yes, that's what I meant. Your maximum altitude / air density etc. It's a bigger to find that information out.

 

[PMaughan]

You may want to state it as higher, depends where you're planning on operating.

Pete

 

[Benjamin Kenobi]

I did similar. Find the highest point in the country you want to operate in and then add some more. No sense limiting yourself.

 

[Cheshirecat]

Yep it makes sense about the height of the ground you may be operating from.
I could negate that completely by just putting down 400 Feet AGL instead of AMSL so then it makes no difference as to the elevation of the ground above sea level, especially as the WKM doesn't use barometric pressure to measure height above sea level.

Thanks for the tips i shall go ponder it and see what the assessors make of it.

 

[Cheshirecat]

Hi Buzz

The Ground School is OK, it packs in a fair amount over the 2 days leading up to the exam, it didn't help that i had a band practicing in the room below mine until nearly 10 O'Clock the night before the exam whilst i was trying to revise.
I didn't finish revising until 02:30 the next morning and only woke up 10 Mins before the exam started at 08:30 (boy did the hotel manager get a mouthful the next day)

I enjoyed the course, the trainers were very good and it focuses on airlaw, safety procedures, airmanship etc... as it should. you are expected to absorb it and be able to recite a lot of it in written answers but none of it is rocket science , so i would advise making plenty of notes as they present the material and do 2-3 Hours revision each evening to make it stick.

There were 12 others on the course and i was quite surprised by how many people were operating Phantoms and how little technical knowledge some (didn't have) about their platforms, but most of the room passed the exam.

Good luck....

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

Surely they are looking for maximum operating altitude to be built into that spec.? For example if for that question you put 400'AGL would your multi even be capable of taking off at 4500' above sea level (the probable max height in the UK)...

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

Hi Buzz

The Ground School is OK, it packs in a fair amount over the 2 days leading up to the exam, it didn't help that i had a band practicing in the room below mine until nearly 10 O'Clock the night before the exam whilst i was trying to revise.
I didn't finish revising until 02:30 the next morning and only woke up 10 Mins before the exam started at 08:30 (boy did the hotel manager get a mouthful the next day)

I enjoyed the course, the trainers were very good and it focuses on airlaw, safety procedures, airmanship etc... as it should. you are expected to absorb it and be able to recite a lot of it in written answers but none of it is rocket science , so i would advise making plenty of notes as they present the material and do 2-3 Hours revision each evening to make it stick.

There were 12 others on the course and i was quite surprised by how many people were operating Phantoms and how little technical knowledge some (didn't have) about their platforms, but most of the room passed the exam.

Good luck....

Thanks for the feedback! I've got quite a lot of systems in place and have read almost everything so I fell reasonably well prepared!

I too intend to revise most nights, hopefully I'm ready in a good place regarding background revision but I'll soon find out!

Thanks, Matt.

 

[PMaughan]

Surely they are looking for maximum operating altitude to be built into that spec.? For example if for that question you put 400'AGL would your multi even be capable of taking off at 4500' above sea level (the probable max height in the UK)...

You're right Buzz they are looking for the altitude it can fly at rather than just 400' above agl. Just how you go about finding that out is another question. Lots of variables.

Pete

 

[Cheshirecat]

Hmmm! now you got me thinking again.

As you said putting down anything that claims to be the maximum operating altitude is just a finger in the wind exercise (excuse the pun)
But now i am thinking if Ben put down 5000 Feet and the CAA were happy, why set about reinventing the wheel.

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

That's the approach I'm taking ^ I couldn't get any sense from Aeronavics re: max operating altitude. Droider might know or Eyeball as they were out in Peru at a reasonable altitude?

5000' seem sensible.

 

[MombasaFlash]

I was flying at 6500-7500', usually around 24°C-ish, in Kenya with an S800/WKM/Z15-GH2/6S-1000mah, an S800 EVO/A2/Z15-GH3/6S-1000mah, a Droidworx AD8-HL/MK/AV200/2x 4S-5000mah and a custom X8. Other than reduced flight times they all behaved pretty normally - except the S800 which suddenly went epileptic for no apparent reason for a period ... and then just as inexplicably returned to normal.

I only mention it because the 5000' ceiling is obviously conservative.

 

[Buzz_Roavr]

I was flying at 6500-7500', usually around 24°C-ish, in Kenya with an S800/WKM/Z15-GH2/6S-1000mah, an S800 EVO/A2/Z15-GH3/6S-1000mah, a Droidworx AD8-HL/MK/AV200/2x 4S-5000mah and a custom X8. Other than reduced flight times they all behaved pretty normally - except the S800 which suddenly went epileptic for no apparent reason for a period ... and then just as inexplicably returned to normal.

I only mention it because the 5000' ceiling is obviously conservative.

No, it's really interesting info because max ceiling information and the effects on flight performance is generally not available.

Duration would be the the main issue at proper heights I guess. Thanks.

 

[MombasaFlash]

If one were to mess with prop sizes and pitches the altitudes may well have less impact on flight duration but who the hell has time for that in the working world? So, as a rough indicator, in Europe (at around 170-340' amsl) flight duration is generally 10-13 minutes, in Kenya at 6500' it was more like 8-11 minutes. Having said that, there was still the occasional 13+ minute flight when testing. The fairly conservatively set transmitter timer was further reduced from 9 minutes to six for additional security and I always use individual LiPo beeper alarms anyway.

 

[Mick Koi]

Good thread, i done the RPQs GS 10 days ago, and settling down to begin the FRC's right now! (well after this post!)...