[NSRCA-discussion] SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
rcpattern at stx.rr.com
rcpattern at stx.rr.com
Mon Jan 8 10:31:01 AKST 2007
Small deviations in speed can be done and not noticed. I have yet to
see an airplane go up at the same speed it comes down. It might look
similar, but put a data recorder in the plane and you'll see
otherwise. If a plane is underpowered, fly the entire sequence a
little faster for momentum. This sequence does not require any more
power to get through it than the previous. The two inside loops
require as much power as the vertical upline.
Arch
----- Original Message -----
From: Fred Huber <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
Date: Monday, January 8, 2007 2:12 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> OK... make noticeable speed variations doing your maneuvers in
> your
> sequence.... watch your score.
>
> If you vary your speed... you're gonna get downgrades. Prove it
> wrong by
> varying speed but doing the maneuver the correct shape and getting
> a 10. It
> will not happen.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Del K. Rykert" <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
> To: <randy10926 at comtekmail.com>; "NSRCA Mailing List"
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:37 PM
> Subject: Re:
> [NSRCA-discussion]SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
>
>
> > Its not..
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Glenn Hatfield" <randy10926 at comtekmail.com>
> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:38 AM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
> > SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >
> >
> >> Since when is constant speed a judging criteria?
> >>
> >> --- fhhuber at clearwire.net wrote:
> >>
> >> From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
> >> SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 21:54:15 -0600
> >>
> >> these packs are $250 a set... Larger ($300 to $500 a set)
> brings model
> >> weight up requiring larger motor (lets spend another $250 to
> $400) and
> >> you
> >> end up at 1.5 KW before it will perform with the added weight.
> So that
> >> is
> >> not an option.
> >>
> >> CONSTANT SPEED is a judging criteria. So unlimited vertical is a
> >> requirement for a vertical up-line.... unless you want to be
> downgraded>> for
> >> losing speed.
> >>
> >> Stall turn you can slow down on the way up... you have to or
> its not a
> >> stall-turn, its a wingover = 0'd the maneuver.
> >>
> >> If you have inadequate power for the up-line a tighter pull
> will kill
> >> speed
> >> due to higher G forces... counterproductive. And sticking 5
> ft of
> >> up-line
> >> at 1/4 normal loop radius then pushing isn't going to score
> well even if
> >> line length is not a judging factor.
> >>
> >> This is reality from actually flying the model.
> >>
> >> Sure, the 14X6 will give some more static thrust compared to
> the
> >> 13X6.5...
> >> and lose airspeed... which equates to not handling wind.
> >>
> >> It all adds up to... what WOULD work for the old Sportsman
> WON'T do the
> >> new
> >> sequence.
> >>
> >> And I note you didn't comment on the glow power model's need
> for a change
> >> from a .60 2-stroke to a .91 4-stroke for MARGINAL ability to
> do the
> >> up-line
> >> when the .61 was JUST FINE for the old sequence.
> >>
> >> These are planes I have actually flown. Results that have been
> proven.>>
> >> The new Sportsman sequence needs more power:weight (static
> thrust, to get
> >> vertical ascent capability as the main factor requiring more
> power) than
> >> the
> >> old sequence.
> >>
> >> Someone's going to pop up saying that a .61 2-stroke can make
> more BHP
> >> than
> >> a .91 4-stroke... Sure... if you want to run the 2-stroke
> spinning a
> >> small
> >> prop as fast as the engine will turn. Measure static thrust
> with props
> >> you'd
> >> actually fly Pattern with. USEABLE power from the .91 is
> superior... and
> >> the 4-stroke with stock muffler weighs less than the 2- stroke
> with stock
> >> muffler. The .91 wins.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Ken Thompson" <mrandmrst at comcast.net>
> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:41 PM
> >> Subject: Re:
> >> [NSRCA-discussion]SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >>
> >>
> >>> Fred,
> >>>
> >>> At the risk of seeming argumentative, I don't entirely agree
> with your
> >>> statements. I'm relatively new to flying, especially Pattern,
> but there
> >>> are
> >>> a few things I've learned in my 3 years of competition.
> >>>
> >>> In doing a stall turn, you want to run out of forward motion
> at the top,
> >>> not
> >>> necessarily power. It's possible you may be trying to extend
> your lines
> >>> too
> >>> far.
> >>>
> >>> As for the vertical upline, carry more speed into the
> maneuver, tighten
> >>> your
> >>> radii a little, shorten your line and you should have enough
> "oomph" to
> >>> carry over the top.
> >>>
> >>> Again, not to be argumentative, however, a 1.5:1 power to
> weight would
> >>> give
> >>> you unlimited vertical. I would be extremely surprised if
> that kind of
> >>> power would be necessary to carry a clean upline of 375 to
> 400 ft.,
> >>> which
> >>> should be considered a very respectable elevation to make your
> >>> transition
> >>> to
> >>> level flight.
> >>>
> >>> As for the Quest, a very nice plane I might add, you might
> want to try a
> >>> 14
> >>> x 6, if available. The larger disk while maintaining the
> lower pitch,
> >>> has
> >>> always helped me increase my vertical abilities. As for not
> being able
> >>> to
> >>> finish 2 sequences on 1 charge, larger packs are in order.
> >>>
> >>> Ken Thompson
> >>> D6 Newbie
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 8:47 PM
> >>> Subject: Re:
> >>> [NSRCA-discussion]SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> The stall turn you can run out of power at the top and still
> complete>>>> it.
> >>>> (you NEED to run out of power at the top)
> >>>>
> >>>> The vertical up line you have to make a sustained straight up
> line at
> >>>> constant speed and then have the "omph" left to make the same
> raius
> >>>> push
> >>>> to
> >>>> get back level as the radius used to pull into the up line.
> >>>>
> >>>> 1:1 power:weight would do the old Sportsman. You need 1.5:1
> to do that
> >>>> up
> >>>> line and have the power to wind compensate.
> >>>>
> >>>> A Golberg Tiger 60 with a .61 2-stroke in the nose could to
> the old
> >>>> Sportman
> >>>> sequence. (with just problems due to wanting to roll with
> rudder input)
> >>>> With a .91 4-stroke.. (which gives a significant improvement in
> >>>> up-lines)
> >>>> It would be marginal at best.
> >>>>
> >>>> My Quest 3D e-powered was fine for the old Sportsman sequence
> using>>>> 13X6.5
> >>>> at 800 watts. For the new sequence I had to prop-up to 14X8,
> drawing>>>> 900
> >>>> watts. (fortunately the motor, battery and ESC are rated for
> that) I
> >>>> simply COULD NOT do the up line with the 13X6.5.
> >>>> I put the E-powered Quest together specificly to fly
> sportsman, aiming
> >>>> at
> >>>> 2
> >>>> rounds per battery charge. I now can't count on having the
> power to
> >>>> complete the second round. (longer sequence AND more power
> required to
> >>>> do
> >>>> it.)
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: "Ken Thompson" <mrandmrst at comcast.net>
> >>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 7:03 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re:
> >>>> [NSRCA-
> discussion]SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Fred,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why is that vertical upline any harder to complete than the
> old stall
> >>>>> turn?
> >>>>> They both end at the same elevation...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
> >>>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:20 AM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
> >>>>> SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I STILL think that the new Sportsman sequence is a mistake.
> Vertical>>>>>> up-line
> >>>>>> requires too much airplane performance and THAT is going to
> keep some
> >>>>>> potential beginners from competing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> FHH
> >>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>> From: "Mike Hester" <kerlock at comcast.net>
> >>>>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:06 AM
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small
> >>>>>> Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That is because people are looking fo a magic fix that I
> am utterly,
> >>>>>>> totally, absolutely convinced does not exist.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am also absolutely utterly convinced that messing with
> the rules
> >>>>>>> too
> >>>>>>> much
> >>>>>>> over airframes in ANY class right now will ultimately have the
> >>>>>>> opposite
> >>>>>>> effect of what people are trying to accomplish.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You guys know as well as I do that a major part of the
> draw in
> >>>>>>> pattern
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>> the planes themselves to a lot of people. Not all, but a
> substantial>>>>>>> number.
> >>>>>>> In the sportsman class, if a guy has the ambition to
> secure a 2
> >>>>>>> meter
> >>>>>>> plane,
> >>>>>>> history shows (around here anyway) that you're MUCH more
> likely to
> >>>>>>> see
> >>>>>>> him
> >>>>>>> next year in intermediate. The guy with the Kaos.....more
> likely,>>>>>>> not.
> >>>>>>> It's
> >>>>>>> not because of cost, that is an excuse. Remove that
> excuse, they'll
> >>>>>>> just
> >>>>>>> find another. And now you've screwed the guy who WOULD
> have been
> >>>>>>> around
> >>>>>>> next
> >>>>>>> year....
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So let me get this straight....if you want to fly a 2
> meter plane
> >>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>> OS
> >>>>>>> or YS160, you would have to fly advanced? Jeez, that's not
> a good
> >>>>>>> idea.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> When I started, my first contest, I knew I was going to do
> it. I
> >>>>>>> scratch
> >>>>>>> built a 2 meter plane and went for it. I wasn't the only
> one, most
> >>>>>>> others
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> sportsman also had 2 meter planes. One actually had bought
> a world
> >>>>>>> team
> >>>>>>> member's plane and was flying it....pretty well I might
> add...and I
> >>>>>>> have
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> say that even through masters and many years, that season
> was some
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> best competition I have ever had. And we're still here. It
> produced>>>>>>> myself,
> >>>>>>> AC Glenn, Bryan Kennedy, Steve Homenda to name a few.
> Steve was the
> >>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>> one
> >>>>>>> who wasn't flying a 2 meter plane, he was flying a 40
> sized Arresti
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> whipping everyone's tail with it. Oddly enough, he didn't get
> >>>>>>> deterred
> >>>>>>> by
> >>>>>>> the big bad evil 2 meters.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is no magic change to the rules that's going to
> bring
> >>>>>>> newcomers
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> droves. You get creative, do what you can, and you make
> the best of
> >>>>>>> what
> >>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>> get. We're not driving people away in droves like some
> people seem
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> think.
> >>>>>>> If we are, it certainly isn't the rules regarding the size
> of the
> >>>>>>> planes
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> cost. Maybe, just maybe it has more to do with a lot of the
> >>>>>>> negativity?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That's just my opinion, I could be wrong....but I'm pretty
> sure I'm
> >>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>> =)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -M
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> 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: 268.16.7/618 - Release
> Date:>>>>>>> 1/6/2007
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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: 268.16.7/618 - Release Date:
> >>>>> 1/6/2007
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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: 268.16.7/618 - Release
> Date: 1/6/2007
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 268.16.7/619 - Release Date:
> 1/7/2007>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list