[NSRCA-discussion] SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?

Del K. Rykert drykert2 at rochester.rr.com
Mon Jan 8 12:27:20 AKST 2007 

It has been taught in the past judging schools, model performance is not a 
judging criteria and impressive performance is not a reason to > a score. 
Score is earned by who precise the maneuver is flown per the rules. Leaving 
bias out is better for the sport.

                 Del
          nsrca - 473

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glenn Hatfield" <randy10926 at comtekmail.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 
SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?


> Strange - I don't remember ever seeing a downgrade for varing speed at any 
> contest I have attended.  Not even for the FAI flyers.
>
>
> --- 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: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:10:29 -0600
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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