News:
2018----><---- T Shirt




  • January 19, 2019, 12:25:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks  (Read 4475 times)

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #50 on: September 30, 2018, 04:34:59 PM »
More kits that can work well:

Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder
SIG 1/2 A Skyray (sheet wing, but works just fine anyway)

Oldies worth consideration if you can find one:

Wee Duper Zilch (PAW 1/2 CC motor would be killer here!)
1/2 A Snapper. (Tee Dee .020 or Atwood/Holland Wasp)
Mini Omega Stunter
Skyfire (foam wing version) Black Widow and plan to refuel)
Cox Me-109
Cox Chipmunk
Cox Spook
Cox other foam wing job who’s name I can’t remember (Mike Pratt design, and a darn good job, too)
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!


Offline John Paris

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 481
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #51 on: September 30, 2018, 07:55:39 PM »
More kits that can work well:

Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder
SIG 1/2 A Skyray (sheet wing, but works just fine anyway)

Oldies worth consideration if you can find one:

Wee Duper Zilch (PAW 1/2 CC motor would be killer here!)
1/2 A Snapper. (Tee Dee .020 or Atwood/Holland Wasp)
Mini Omega Stunter
Skyfire (foam wing version) Black Widow and plan to refuel)
Cox Me-109
Cox Chipmunk
Cox Spook
Cox other foam wing job who’s name I can’t remember (Mike Pratt design, and a darn good job, too)

Larry,
Hyper Viper sound about right?  It is a good flying airplane if there is some pull up front.
John
John Paris
389666

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #52 on: October 01, 2018, 06:13:26 AM »
Yup, thanks!  H^^
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #53 on: October 02, 2018, 05:22:11 AM »
May I ask.....who right now is actually working on the rules for the proposed Brodak event?  Thanks,Skip

Offline Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4767
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #54 on: October 02, 2018, 06:44:22 AM »
I E mailed Will Davis, the CD.  He confirmed that discussion is in progress, but that's about all.

Based on Stunt Hanger interest, there should be at least 20 entries.

I have something in hand, but may need something else depending on how the rules come out. 
It's a Clown with a TeeDee .049.  It will do BOTH the modern and the OTS pattern on less than a ounce of fuel.
Paul Smith

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #55 on: October 16, 2018, 07:50:02 AM »
So, what is the latest news?
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Online Dave Hull

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 540
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #56 on: October 16, 2018, 10:54:30 AM »
Interesting.  I was not aware that Brodak had changed the Baby Clown kit to accommodate beam mounted engines. I built mine a while back, and had to kit-bash the fuselage to mount a Cox Medallion. I kept the same nose length from drive washer to wing LE. But because there is no plastic engine mount in the way, had no issues mounting a tank. The only configuration I think might pose space problems is if you were going to run a Killer Bee type setup with a separate tank but using the plastic engine mount. It might fit, but be sure to measure....

The other significant difference between the kit and the ARF, unless they have changed this as well, is that the kit had a sparless wing. I found it to be plenty strong unless made of stunt mushwood, so the spars would just be excess botheration.

Dave

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #57 on: November 06, 2018, 08:06:47 AM »
Just yesterday ay our field a few of us were discussing this 1/2A Stunt deal. We all kind of agreed that the engine limit should be .061. We thought that 42' maximum line length would work. Also thought that all planes need to have landing gear to ROG and land nicely. We all thought that we should use the full Pampa Stunt Pattern with the 8 minute time limit. We didn't get around to discussing electric powered planes,but IMHO ,why not allow the Brodak 1/2A Electric stuff that is available? We need to get the rules nailed down so we can start building!.....Cheers,Skip

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1666
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #58 on: November 06, 2018, 02:40:54 PM »
Why the line length limit, Skip?
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Offline Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4767
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #59 on: November 07, 2018, 06:51:22 AM »
Who's "we", Skip?

As with other events, the rules will be handed down when the time is right and the cutoff will put somebody on top.

If they say .049 or .061 vs a certain weight of electric it will be an all-electric event.  But it will be their event, not ours.
Paul Smith

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #60 on: November 07, 2018, 08:18:40 AM »
The key to specifying electrics is the total work output allowed. A gas motor puts out x amount of power for the given flight time. That is the measure of total work in horsepower-hours, or for electrics Watt-hours.

For electrics, specify a maximum Watt-hour capacity. 11.5 Watt-hours might be about right. That would allow a 1000 mAh 3s or 1500 mAh 2s. That limits the size of possible planes to 1/2A size. About right for a Baby Clown or Baby Flite Streak.

Actually, Andy Borgogna found that he needed a 1375mAh 3s for the Baby Pathfinder. That would be 15.5 Watt-hours. If you want to fly models of that size, go to 15.5 Watt-hour limit.

With a capacity limit, the motor and prop combination are up to the modeler.

I also want to know why specify a maximum line length. Doesn’t seem to be a sensible requirement.
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #61 on: November 07, 2018, 08:59:59 AM »
The "we" was me,Banjock and the Cooks. Just a bunch of guys talkin' about it,not making rules.

Line length came up,but not really a sticking point. Fly what you want.

Regarding the electrics you guys know better than I .Larry, thanks for the info.

My thing is this.....whoever is going to cast the rules (whatever they are) needs to publish them so "we" can get building!......Cheers,Skip

Offline Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4767
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #62 on: November 07, 2018, 10:23:58 AM »
The key to specifying electrics is the total work output allowed. A gas motor puts out x amount of power for the given flight time. That is the measure of total work in horsepower-hours, or for electrics Watt-hours.

For electrics, specify a maximum Watt-hour capacity. 11.5 Watt-hours might be about right. That would allow a 1000 mAh 3s or 1500 mAh 2s. That limits the size of possible planes to 1/2A size. About right for a Baby Clown or Baby Flite Streak.

Actually, Andy Borgogna found that he needed a 1375mAh 3s for the Baby Pathfinder. That would be 15.5 Watt-hours. If you want to fly models of that size, go to 15.5 Watt-hour limit.

With a capacity limit, the motor and prop combination are up to the modeler.

I also want to know why specify a maximum line length. Doesn’t seem to be a sensible requirement.

That's the problem.

In events that mix real engines and motors there have been NO limitations on the motors, but extremely hard line limitations on the engines.
The total weight of the model is NOT a limitation of motor power.
Things such as swept volume, fuel formula, banning pressure systems and tuned pipes hinder to power of engines.
Thus far there have been no such limits applied to motors.

There might be a case that huge engines, like 10 cc and above can compete with motors.
But there is NO fairness whatsoever to justify mixing motors and 15's or 1/2A's.

If you want to create a "small motor" event, have right at it.  But leave 1/2A's and 15's alone.

Paul Smith

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #63 on: November 16, 2018, 10:07:09 AM »
So what airplane do you guys think will be the most popular?

It's not sounding like ill get to use my big mig .061. Why would you make .061  for experts only?

How much fuel does a .049 use for the full pattern?  How about a .061?

Probably a dumb question but would you be able to use that Carl Goldberg string for lines?  If not what kind of lines would you use?
Chris
Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Online Dave Hull

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 540
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #64 on: November 16, 2018, 05:09:53 PM »
Formerly,

The fuel requirement is going to depend a lot on the engine and setup. Running a stock Medallion .049 I use about 0.8 oz. of 25% fuel.

Others have run the TeeDee .049 and said they needed more like 1-1/4 oz. Not sure but I suspect it might have been 35%.

The larger tank for Cox reed engines is 8cc or about 0.027 oz.  I think you can do a pattern in two tanks on a reed engine. I haven't tried it myself but I have pitted for those who have. It works as long as the contest rules allow it.

As far as lines, you are kidding about the original Dacron lines, right? Unless you want a ton of drag (such as for a trainer plane), use either .008" stranded steel cable or 30 lb test Spectra fishing line. The .008 lines perform well, but will not stand any abuse. The Spectra withstands most abuse and works well.

As far as the plane, do you care which is most popular? Pick one you like or design/modify one to suit you. If they allow 1cc engines, and if I was going to build a kit, I'd look at the Baby Pathfinder. Easy enough to build and lots of performance. If it is going to be an .049 event, I would go for a Medallion and a kit Baby Clown or Baby Flight Streak if you are in a hurry. If you have some time to build, then there are a lot of other good choices.

Divot Mcslow

PS--The Baby Clown will likely be the most common entry if the event is popular. There are a ton of them out there......

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #65 on: November 16, 2018, 09:54:24 PM »
If you add flaps to the Baby Clown, it becomes a Baby Super Clown.  :D
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Online Dave Hull

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 540
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #66 on: November 16, 2018, 10:42:54 PM »
Larry,

You've flown both:  which do you think flies better, the Baby or the Baby Super?

Divot

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #67 on: November 17, 2018, 06:27:28 AM »
Super,  of course.
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #68 on: November 17, 2018, 10:32:39 AM »


Formerly,





As far as lines, you are kidding about the original Dacron lines, right? Unless you want a ton of drag (such as for a trainer plane),

As far as the plane, do you care which is most popular?

No I actually wasn't kidden about Dracron lines. I don't fly much 1/2a just for amusement. Of the lines I have tried the Dracron were the only ones that had little drag that would let the airplane stunt. Whatever the other ones were I couldn't get the plane to stunt. But thanks for the info,  I will give the Spectra line a try.

What is the normal line length?

I'm using like 29ft ONLY cause that's all I could fit in the backyard.

I do care what the most popular plane might be just for curiosity sake.

The only 1/2a I have that stunts ok has a .061 on it,  so I'll  have to see what I can do to get a .049 to preform.

Chris

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Online Dave Hull

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 540
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #69 on: November 17, 2018, 04:06:23 PM »
Chris,

You have what may be an exception to all the rules:  if your circle is limited to 29' lines, and you are using an .061, you may actually need the extra drag of the lines? But you probably have to compensate with some extra tip weight or offsets. If you drop back to an .049 you probably want to try the Spectra. If you go to longer lines you definitely want to try the Spectra, or the steel cables which I believe would provide maximum performance. What prop are you running on your setup?

I have a Lil Satan on 26' Spectra (30 lb test) lines that has a Black Widow .049 running a Master Airscrew 6x3.  It turns rapid lap times. But it hangs out there pretty good, too. It could use longer lines, but I have not experimented at all yet. (The 26' lines were called out on the plans.)

I fly a Baby Clown with Medallion on .008x42' stranded cable. Engine near peak, it will do all the stunts that I can do--and certainly more. Decent line tension until the wind comes up. The setup will actually do a 4-2 run, but then it doesn't have the authority to do all the maneuvers, and the problem is compounded in the wind.

I fly a SIG Baby Skyray for a trainer on .008x42' stranded steel. Cox Baby Bee with a Cox 6x3 flexible prop. It has a big steel fender washer for tip weight. It makes a great initial flight trainer since the lap times are pretty slow, and will fly in a good breeze without coming in. I find that you are not going to get a brand new trainee to back up to maintain line tension. This combination solves that problem.

Some of the local guys fly .061 stunt planes on about 42'. They scream them out for airspeed and line tension and it lets them do full patterns--at a pretty high speed. Faster than my reflexes, anyway.

So somewhere in the middle of all these there should be a good combination for you.

Best of luck,

Divot McSlow

PS--What I am waiting for are the results of Larry Renger's Foam-fold wing stunt plane setup. The reason is that he has an external tank on a product engine in a stunter. Getting the engine to draw consistently thru the full tank and hold a good setting.....     Anyway, I have a Guillows P-40 kitbash that awaits engine and tank installation.  So far I have a stock Killer Bee backplate and a custom metal tank running small plastic tubing. I worry about the tubing being too restrictive. I think Larry drilled his venturi for more power. I know he had some fueling issues related to plumbing. This type of setup opens up the possibility of a decent reed valve stunt plane that will do the whole pattern using cheap and available parts. What's not to like?

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #70 on: December 19, 2018, 06:53:23 PM »
Yo guys....any word from the powers that be on the rules for this event? I want to start building!

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #71 on: December 20, 2018, 07:45:22 AM »
Yo guys....any word from the powers that be on the rules for this event? I want to start building!
If you build it they will come!
Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Offline James Holford

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1366
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #72 on: December 20, 2018, 07:53:23 AM »
If you build it they will come!
Jim Morrison visited you in a dream? With a half naked Indian?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Jamie Holford
Baton Rouge Bi-Liners
Lafayette, La
AMA #1126767

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #73 on: December 20, 2018, 09:07:03 AM »
Jim Morrison visited you in a dream? With a half naked Indian?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Ummmm no.

But if Skip builds it they will come tell him it's illegal to use  ;D
Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Offline James Holford

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1366
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #74 on: December 20, 2018, 09:13:31 AM »
Ummmm no.

But if Skip builds it they will come tell him it's illegal to use  ;D
Haha

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Jamie Holford
Baton Rouge Bi-Liners
Lafayette, La
AMA #1126767

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #75 on: December 20, 2018, 09:54:03 AM »
Of course, the AJ model WAS the Firebaby! Larry's design was, I think, the Sky Dancer.

Nope, Sky Sport. The Skydancer was a 2 channel Rocket boosted glider. Skyrider a 020 powered soaring glider, Skystreak a forward swept flying wing 1/2 A stunter, Skyslash a forward engine boost glider, Skyfire a foam wing 1/2 A stunter, Skyblaster a 2 channel canard rocket boosted glider.

 Needless to say, I have a hard timekeeping them straight. Possibly missed one or two.  :D
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Online 944_Jim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #76 on: December 20, 2018, 05:01:17 PM »

Currently I fly .008*40’ lines, but a foot shorter would be better.

Mr. Larry,
I'm confused...or really quite chicken (probably the latter). On my Scientific Profile P-40, with JH venturi AP .061, I'm afraid to loop it. Maybe my CG is too far forward, but I feel like any 90deg turns take up a lot of sky. I wouldn't say the plane basically pancakes coming out of wing overs, maybe "mushes out" would be accurate. I hoped making longer lines would give me more vertical to play with. So I read with interest that you want to SHORTEN your lines. Please explain why shorter could be better. For the sake of discussion we can leave out "diagnosing cancer by telephone" with regard to the P-40 CG.
Thanks in advance,

« Last Edit: December 20, 2018, 06:17:04 PM by 944_Jim »

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1426
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #77 on: December 20, 2018, 06:09:14 PM »
Yo guys....any word from the powers that be on the rules for this event? I want to start building!

talked to Will Davis one of the CD's at Brodaks .  the rules will be very simple and almost finished

Basically engines up to .061 any air frame that will ROG . still working on what to do about the reedy's tank wise

any line length ,don't know line size yet. will be on Thursday after ringmaster on the paved circle. RAD


they are also talking about one lap between manuvers
rad racer

Offline Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4767
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #78 on: December 20, 2018, 08:27:55 PM »
Reedies (Black Widow & Golden Bee) are a moot point vs .061's.   Even if they make three pit stops they won't stand up against modern .061".
Paul Smith

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #79 on: December 20, 2018, 08:41:03 PM »
Mr. Larry,
I'm confused...or really quite chicken (probably the latter). On my Scientific Profile P-40, with JH venturi AP .061, I'm afraid to loop it. Maybe my CG is too far forward, but I feel like any 90deg turns take up a lot of sky. I wouldn't say the plane basically pancakes coming out of wing overs, maybe "mushes out" would be accurate. I hoped making longer lines would give me more vertical to play with. So I read with interest that you want to SHORTEN your lines. Please explain why shorter could be better. For the sake of discussion we can leave out "diagnosing cancer by telephone" with regard to the P-40 CG.
Thanks in advance,

The line length depends on the actual airplane. If you are shy on power, you can retain more control on shorter lines. Also light planes don’t pull as hard in overheads. There is no hard and fast rule as far as I know. Try different lines and see what works for your particular plane.

As far as cg is concerned, if the plane drops out of the sky when the engine quits, it is nose heavy. If it floats and is hard to control smoothly, it is tailheavy. It should be smooth and controllable.  Under power another test is to lock your handle against your chest. The model should track true. If it starts to oscillate up and down, it is either tailheavy or the control sensitivity is too high. The effects interact, and it is a project to get both of them right at the same time. LOTS of flying and testing, sadly, no magic bullet.

The goal is to track true, turn well, and land smoothly. That is the reason there is so little variation in the proportions of top level model designs. It is really hard to get national level performance without man years of flying and testing. That has been done by hundreds of top flyers over the last 70 years, and the proportions are pretty well locked in stone. Most of the “design” is now cosmetic.

On the other hand, there are a few who bit the bullet and came up with wild designs that work. Bill Netzband with the Fierce Arrow, Bob Barron with the Bearcat (Barecat?) and my own Sky Streak forward swept flying wing. RSM can provide kits of all three.
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Offline Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3391
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #80 on: December 20, 2018, 08:45:31 PM »
Reedies (Black Widow & Golden Bee) are a moot point vs .061's.   Even if they make three pit stops they won't stand up against modern .061".

Not true, I won with a Black Widow powered model with one pit stop. Flying a forward swept flying wing. Against John Wright flying a Skyfire (my design) as built by Bart Klapinski. It just doesn’t get any better than that!  ;D ~^ VD~
Think S.M.A.L.L. y'all and, it's all good, CL, FF and RC!

DesignMan

BTW, Dracula Sucks!

A closed mouth gathers no feet!

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #81 on: December 21, 2018, 06:19:57 AM »
Bob thanks for the update on what's going on regarding the event. You had no mention of electric stuff .Will it be an all "gas model" event? Skip

Offline jfv

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 437
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #82 on: December 21, 2018, 08:34:29 AM »
Got a new Medallion .049 just for the event.  Got to get started on the build.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2018, 07:56:06 PM by jfv »
Jim Vigani

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1426
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #83 on: December 21, 2018, 08:56:36 AM »

I didn't think to ask but as a glo and electric flyer  and flying an 09 size ringmaster I would say that the glo's would be at a dis advantage so if asked I would say no, if someone wants electric they can start their own event  RAD
rad racer

Offline john e. holliday

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 19988
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #84 on: December 21, 2018, 09:27:34 AM »
I agree with Bob  alias RAD Racer. H^^
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530

Have fun as I have and is still breaking a record.

Offline James Holford

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1366
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #85 on: December 21, 2018, 09:28:51 AM »
I second that!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Jamie Holford
Baton Rouge Bi-Liners
Lafayette, La
AMA #1126767

Offline Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4767
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #86 on: December 21, 2018, 02:13:05 PM »
Bob thanks for the update on what's going on regarding the event. You had no mention of electric stuff .Will it be an all "gas model" event? Skip

The term "1/2 A" means a piston engine under .050 cubic inches of swept volume.  Anything else is an abuse of the language and a fraud.
Paul Smith

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #87 on: December 21, 2018, 07:15:41 PM »
Yo "formerly known as" ......you've got me cheating before we even have the rules firmly in place. I love it!  I'm going to scratch build something of my own design. I'm thinking that I'd rather not have a bullet on my hands. Something that will fly more slowly like a full sized stunter. I'm going to use a ,061.

Questions to think about:
Flaps or no flaps?
Bellcrank size?
Wing area?
Profile or full body?
Finished weight?
Airfoil type?

I'm presently flying a Pinto with .051 but it flies so fast and it hard to precisely control for smooth stunts. So what do you think?

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1426
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #88 on: December 21, 2018, 09:05:16 PM »
Keith's original Tercel has more than one win when 1/2A was flown at the nats .it was flown on long lines .just under 52 ft I believe. he said it had a cox Madalian .049 single transfer piston and sleeve  in it.i never got to see it fly but I guess it was impressive.


I am starting one of his new RSM 10% Tercel kits .it has 246 sq in wing which is 1 1/2 in thick. I cant believe that an .061 is going to pull his thing

like u it is going to be a trick to get enough power without the speed. i believe the prop is going to be the Key
rad racer

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #89 on: December 22, 2018, 06:49:29 AM »
Yo "formerly known as" ......you've got me cheating before we even have the rules firmly in place. I love it!  I'm going to scratch build something of my own design. I'm thinking that I'd rather not have a bullet on my hands. Something that will fly more slowly like a full sized stunter. I'm going to use a ,061.

Questions to think about:
Flaps or no flaps?
Bellcrank size?
Wing area?
Profile or full body?
Finished weight?
Airfoil type?

I'm presently flying a Pinto with .051 but it flies so fast and it hard to precisely control for smooth stunts. So what do you think?
VD~ ;D VD~
Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Offline Skip Chernoff

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #90 on: December 22, 2018, 08:15:22 AM »
I'm thinking that this 1/2A thing is going to be a blast. Paul, we are all going to have fun regardless of engine size......YOU included....haha. I can't wait to see all of the terrific planes and set ups the guys come up with. I'm going to get all of the Philly crew souped up on this ,believe it!......Vroom Vroom. Skip

And as for you "Formerly Known As" you'll be restricted to 25' dacron lines!!!

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1426
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #91 on: December 22, 2018, 08:45:40 AM »
u are too kind #^
rad racer

Offline Chris Fretz

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1121
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #92 on: December 22, 2018, 04:56:46 PM »
I'm thinking that this 1/2A thing is going to be a blast. Paul, we are all going to have fun regardless of engine size......YOU included....haha. I can't wait to see all of the terrific planes and set ups the guys come up with. I'm going to get all of the Philly crew souped up on this ,believe it!......Vroom Vroom. Skip

And as for you "Formerly Known As" you'll be restricted to 25' dacron lines!!!
n~ I'll make it work somehow :P
Formerly known as #Liner
AMA 1104207
Advanced

Offline Keith Renecle

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 795
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #93 on: December 23, 2018, 12:01:42 AM »
Seeing that there seems to be some of a for/against problem with small electric models, how about a compromise??  #^

Keith R
Keith R

Offline Trostle

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2394
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #94 on: December 23, 2018, 02:54:18 PM »
The term "1/2 A" means a piston engine under .050 cubic inches of swept volume.  Anything else is an abuse of the language and a fraud.

Well, past events have limited "1/2A" events to be powered with something, normally less than 0.0504 cu in.  Now, there is a whole world out there producing 1cc engines (0.061 cu in).  Yes, the rules for speed and free flight still have "1/2A" events limited to 0.0505 cu in.  But lo and behold, there is an official AMA 1/2A scale event that allows engines up to 0.061 cu in.  There have been several "1/2A" scale events and "1/2A" stunt events around the country that have allowed engines up to 0.061 cu in and it seems there will be more.  The argument that anything that allows more than ".0504 cubic inches of swept volume" as a "fraud" is archaic and behind the times.

A well built, properly designed/sized model, properly trimmed out, with a reasonable weight powered by a well prepared .049 cu in engine will probably just as competitive compared to a similarly properly designed/sized model, properly trimmed out, with a reasonable weight powered by a well prepared .061 cu in engine.

Keith

Offline Trostle

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2394
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #95 on: December 23, 2018, 02:56:36 PM »

Keith's original Tercel has more than one win when 1/2A was flown at the nats .it was flown on long lines .just under 52 ft I believe.


The original Tercel won the Nats 1/2A stunt event three times including the one time Bart Klapinski flew it.

Keith

Offline Jim Mynes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
  • Mount Dora, FL / Litchfield, ME
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #96 on: December 23, 2018, 04:17:20 PM »
I didn't think to ask but as a glo and electric flyer  and flying an 09 size ringmaster I would say that the glo's would be at a dis advantage so if asked I would say no, if someone wants electric they can start their own event  RAD

I think you’re scared.
I have seen the light, and it’s powered by a lipo.

Offline john e. holliday

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 19988
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #97 on: December 24, 2018, 09:23:22 AM »
I think is the electric motor ran the same prop as the .049 they might be allowed.  But is 1/2A going with the definition/size of our countries on the other side of the pond,  .061 cu?  The little diesels will swing a bigger prop on a stunt run, I believe. D>K
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530

Have fun as I have and is still breaking a record.

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 991
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #98 on: December 24, 2018, 10:12:24 AM »

I'm using like 29ft ONLY cause that's all I could fit in the backyard.
Ah the "good ol Days" when line length was 1/2 the distance between the trees in the back yard!  That is why that "Fancy" Cox handle had a spool so you could fly in your buddy's back yard too!

https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/123241780091_/Vintage-Cox-Control-Line-Handle-For-Control-Line.jpg

Ken
AMA 15382

If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Trostle

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2394
Re: 1/2 A stunt at Brodaks
« Reply #99 on: December 24, 2018, 03:10:06 PM »
  But is 1/2A going with the definition/size of our countries on the other side of the pond,  .061 cu?  D>K

Well, if there still were .049's produced here in the states, it would make sense to try to adhere to keeping the 1/2A events limited to .049 cu in (or .0504 as allowed in the AMA rules).  Alas, such is not the case.  Yes, there are new .049's available for purchase here (Brodak) but any .049 that is now produced comes from another country and most are based on the 1cc (.061 cu in) engines from those manufacturers.  The supply of Cox engines will eventually be depleted.  Obtaining any Cox of any size now in good condition is getting more and difficult.  So, we see the 1cc (.061 cu in) engines being accepted, at least in 1/2A CL Scale  (an official event) and CL Stunt (unofficial events) around the country.

One good thing about these small engines from other countries is that most are available with a surprisingly good operating throttle for Scale use.

Yes, throttles have been available for the Cox engines, but those are scarce and their operation does not compare to engines like the Norvel or Wasp engines.

Keith

Keith


Tags: