[NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...goodforthefutureofthePattern Event?

Sat Jan 6 17:24:22 AKST 2007

More than enough for Sportsman...  900 Watts and 8 lb 6 oz does Sportsman 
sequence with authority.  Might be enough for Intermediate...

I wouldn't expect it to do Masters.  But... I'm not flying Masters.

FHH
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Lockhart" <davel322 at comcast.net>
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...goodforthefutureofthePattern 
Event?

> You won't see "pattern performance" on 1800 watts and 11 lbs (163 watts /
> lb).  The "best" electrics are currently pushing 250 watts / lb (and I 
> have
> flown 300 watt / lb setups) and the "best" glow setups are 275 + watts / 
> lb.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Fred Huber
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 12:56 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...
> goodforthefutureofthePattern Event?
>
> well... I have had a little discussion about the idea of a Pattern Twin 
> with
>
> another local Pattern flyer.
>
> Glow power its a little impractical.  doubles your chances of an engine
> issue.  Adds significant weight for the 2 engine "pods" in the wing 
> leading
> edges (no real advantage to doing push-pull type twin for Pattern)
>
> For electric, the reliability is so high I've been wondering WHEN someoe
> will do it.  you'd have to TRY to flop a stall turn if you have the 
> ability
> to flip a switch activating differential thrust to DRIVE one wing around 
> the
>
> other.  There's a report of someone who has an electric twin who does a 
> 540
> "pinwheel" at the top of a stall turn this way. (I am trying to get a 
> video
> clip of that...)
>
> I have all the stuff to try the experiment, except an appropriate design. 
> 2
> brushless outrunners capable of 900 watts each producing 9.5 lbs thrust 
> each
>
> on 6s LiPo  (19 lbs thrust @ 70 mph pitch speed on an 11 lb plane should
> give good performance...)
>
> FHH
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good
> forthefutureofthePattern Event?
>
>
>>I remain opposed to that as a rule because I find it unnecessary. As I 
>>read
>> the rules, the minimum distance to fly is set by safety and the box. We
>> have
>> too many rules already.
>>
>> I believe my personal flying and enjoyment will be satisfied by flying
>> more.
>> That means more unplanned trips to the field and possibly shorter
>> sessions.
>> I am not purging the 2 meter collection.
>>
>> If the left over Prophecy kits don't sell I may shorten the tail and
>> reconfigure to a 90 size.  I am seeking more fun for me!
>>
>> As I see it, we are flying a three design competition at this time. They
>> are
>> all 2 m, 11 pounds and either electric, 2c or 4c.
>>
>> With the quirky international judging there may be something new crop up.
>>
>> How about a pattern twin?
>>
>> John Ferrell    W8CCW
>> "My Competition is not my enemy"
>> http://DixieNC.US
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Grow Pattern" <pattern4u at comcast.net>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 7:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for
>> thefutureofthePattern Event?
>>
>>
>>> John,
>>>         I thought that you might be interested in this information.
>>>
>>> In the 2005 NSRCA rules change survey (sent out in 2002) I compiled the
>>> following question with the intent of encouraging 60-90 sized completive
>>> airplane development.
>>>
>>> Judging of distances
>>>
>>>
>>> Question-65
>>>
>>> Should we therefore consider and AMA pattern contest rule change that
>>> states
>>> the pilot should make the plane appear to be at the size of a 2-meter
>>> plane
>>> being flown at 150-175 meters.?
>>>
>>> YES = 71        NO = 100          RESULT = NO PROPOSED CHANGE .
>>>
>>> I had been advised that the existing selection-and-intent of the FAI
>>> 150-metres rule was to create a relatively equal ease of visibility for
>>> 2M
>>> airplanes to the judges??  Whether that was true or not I admit to being
>>> very surprised when the idea was rejected so soundly by the survey
>>> respondents.
>>>
>>> I had been thinking that the smaller planes would fare better if they
>>> were
>>> flown in a bit closer. Our rough math had shown that a 60-72" airplane
>>> would
>>> look just about right at 100-110-M.
>>>
>>> What would the difference be for a 2-M airplane and a 1.5-M airplane if
>>> flown at their relative distances?
>>>
>>> I also thought that the budding but slower electric planes of the day
>>> could
>>> use the closer in option and need less extreme (read expensive) power
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Eric.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 4:46 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the
>>> futureofthePattern Event?
>>>
>>>
>>>> There is no need to worry about rules changes at this time.
>>>>
>>>> Those of us dabbling with smaller planes are doing it with the existing
>>>> rules. If winning trophies and satisfying judging problems are at the
>>>> top
>>>> of
>>>> your needs you will probably be best served with whatever is percieved
>>>> as
>>>> the latest & greatest equipment.
>>>>
>>>> I have two boxes of trophies out in the shed. The smaller box is from
>>>> when
>>>> nobody better showed up. The larger box is from events that did not get
>>>> enough attendance to give away the trophies. I don't have strong
>>>> feelings
>>>> about either box!
>>>>
>>>> I just want to fly more and enjoy it more. Right now that appears to be
>>>> with
>>>> a little smaller airplane!
>>>>
>>>> John Ferrell    W8CCW
>>>> "My Competition is not my enemy"
>>>> http://DixieNC.US
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net>
>>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:40 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the future
>>>> ofthePattern Event?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Deano,
>>>>> When you reference " changing the shape of the event ", how deep are
>>>>> you
>>>>> suggesting things go?  Are we losing sight of the fact that we are 
>>>>> part
>>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date: 1/5/2007
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date: 1/5/2007
> 