[NSRCA-discussion] SmallModels...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?
Ron Van Putte
vanputte at cox.net
Mon Jan 8 10:39:03 AKST 2007
On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:10 PM, Fred Huber wrote:
> 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.
Hmmm. Sounds like the judges need a refresher course.
Ron Van Putte
>
> ----- 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