"expert" or "advanced" levels? Might be a dumb question...

[long-love-rc]

When I browse MotionRC site, some models are listed for certain skill levels, like "intermediate" and "beginner" etc.

While some models are so attractive, however they are listed for "advanced" or "expert", that makes me wonder which category I belong to. Definitely not beginner, nor expert... more like intermediate, then what is "advanced" exactly?

Is there any definition on "expert" or "advanced" or "intermediate" and so on? Thank you for your explanation.

[Mizer67]

I don't think MRC details what skills fall into each category. Besides, as a species we're not good at honest self-evaluation. Most people tend to overestimate their skill level at, well, anything.

Take driving for example. How many folks would admit they're a bad driver? Yet, how many bad drivers do you see on the road?

Here's a past thread on the topic. Not sure it'll help much as there's not a consensus.

https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/rc-airplanes/miscellaneous-rc-radio-control-topics/1259-what-is-an-intermediate-advanced-user

[long-love-rc]

I don't think MRC details what skills fall into each category. Besides, as a species we're not good at honest self-evaluation. Most people tend to overestimate their skill level at, well, anything.

Take driving for example. How many folks would admit they're a bad driver? Yet, how many bad drivers do you see on the road?

Here's a past thread on the topic. Not sure it'll help much as there's not a consensus.

https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/rc...-advanced-user

Agree, I will humbly classify myself as beginners... this is a great hobby, which makes me aware of how ignorant I am!

[xviper]

Admitting ignorance takes you away from being ignorant. The truly ignorant always think they are not.

[Alpha]

long-love-rc Here is an article in our Knowledgebase that gives a general guideline for our Level rating.


https://www.motionrc.com/blogs/motio...ecommendations

As Mizer said, a lot of this comes down to personal, candid, assessment. We're not competing with anyone else, so it's a personal gauge between you and your own level of skill, comfort, intuition, etc. With surface vehicles like Bancroft boats or a Heng Long tank, the rating is more to give a gauge of the complexity of the model, but ultimately, it's not going to fall from the sky than, say, a 120mph+ jet. In that sense, ratings for airplanes and jets are what I'd encourage you to scrutinize. When in doubt, give the team a call at 224-633-9090 and they'll be able to use their experience and your answers to give a second opinion.

Ultimately, the first priority is safety. Fun, speed, etc come further down the list.

[long-love-rc]

Alpha , thank you. This article is useful, I find myself happily in intermediate class. So seems the BAe Hawk is suitable to try.

[Gringotuerto]

Here is an article in our Knowledgebase that gives a general guideline for our Level rating.

https://www.motionrc.com/blogs/motio...ecommendations

OK, here's my take:

1. Age ranges: Self explanatory. If you need instructions on how to interpret "18 years", then probably you shouldn't be flying planes.

2. Skill levels: Description seems about right.

3. Build times: Achievable by a robot on meth. For humans, multiply by about 8. Part of the time is spent not reading the instructions, doing it wrong, then doing it over. Part is spent watching the football game that you turned on just to have something in the background, but it's third and 8, so let's take a moment to see how it goes. Then after your stupid quarter back gets sacked because of course he does, you have to try to remember what you were doing. Part of the time is spent doing a chore that your wife asks because "you aren't doing anything." But the vast majority is spent looking high and low for that tool that you just had in your hand 30 seconds ago.

[long-love-rc]

OK, here's my take:

1. Age ranges: Self explanatory. If you need instructions on how to interpret "18 years", then probably you shouldn't be flying planes.

2. Skill levels: Description seems about right.

3. Build times: Achievable by a robot on meth. For humans, multiply by about 8. Part of the time is spent not reading the instructions, doing it wrong, then doing it over. Part is spent watching the football game that you turned on just to have something in the background, but it's third and 8, so let's take a moment to see how it goes. Then after your stupid quarter back gets sacked because of course he does, you have to try to remember what you were doing. Part of the time is spent doing a chore that your wife asks because "you aren't doing anything." But the vast majority is spent looking high and low for that tool that you just had in your hand 30 seconds ago.

Very descriptive

My build time is also long: cause I am careful, don't want to rush the process. And never want to tight the same screw twice, I always worry that if I loose the screw, the thread may be damaged. So I "measure twice" and "cut once", that uses more time. Also programming the receiver uses a lot of time usually. It usually needs multiple times of adjusting, each adjusting means a round trip from garage to my desktop PC in another room. I should have used my laptop instead, but I am just lazy ....