http://www.poweruptoys.com/
While I couldn't care less, some will gloriously upset themselves no end over the proper classification of these toys.
http://www.poweruptoys.com/
While I couldn't care less, some will gloriously upset themselves no end over the proper classification of these toys.
PLEASE stop it.
That is exactly the same as this according to the FAA:
Hardly the first legal lolcow out there. Do you know anything about copyright law?
I never knew them sumbitches were that big.
^Just so you know, that's a Global Hawk, not the smaller but sort of similar looking Reaper or Predator.
Yea I read Global Hawk on the Grumman building 
.
Just did a little digging. They weigh over 30,000 pounds and ended up costing $222 million each.
Call it whatever you want but I call it awesome. I've been flying RC stuff for the past 30 years and the past 10 have been the best. No more messy, noisy, finicky nitro engines. No more glitchy radios. Just cheaper and better electrics that go through generational improvements every few months. I know this wasn't the point behind the original post but I'm not going down that rabbit hole.
Wayslow wrote: Call it whatever you want but I call it awesome. I've been flying RC stuff for the past 30 years and the past 10 have been the best. No more messy, noisy, finicky nitro engines. No more glitchy radios. Just cheaper and better electrics that go through generational improvements every few months.
I couldn't agree more. I started with the Cox 0.49 engines on tether planes. It is incredible what we can do now, and how easily and neatly and cheaply we can do it.
Was flying a little indoor nano quadrocopter the other day, equipped with all sorts of automatic stabilization. It was nothing to fly it around the shop without hitting anything. Just...wow!
foxtrapper wrote: http://www.poweruptoys.com/ While I couldn't care less, some will gloriously upset themselves no end over the proper classification of these toys.
This one appears to be both at the same time.
And looks very entertaining.
In reply to foxtrapper:
I still prefer nitro engines for planes.....
yamaha wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: I still prefer nitro engines for planes.....
He's a witch!
1988RedT2 wrote:yamaha wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: I still prefer nitro engines for planes.....He's a witch!
Burn him!
Oh never mind, the hot motor will take care of that eventually.
In reply to kazoospec:
Probably, but I enjoy the sound aspect of R/C aerobatics. The last biplane I had packed a .91 2 stroke....
FYI, the unofficial nickname of the Global Hawk is "Dong" or "Dildo."
I think its in our best interest to keep nukes and air-to-air missles off things like the Global Hawk. That thing is Skynet.
In reply to Appleseed:
looks like a "rabbit" to me.
You should see one, sans wings, getting loaded into a C-17. Heh heh heh.
You'll need to log in to post.
