News:



Advertise Here

  • September 15, 2019, 03:11:33 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion  (Read 780 times)

Offline goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« on: July 02, 2019, 10:50:02 AM »
  I feel guilty every time I bump this subject
to the top in the main forum. Hopefully we
can discuss it here.

   I like the idea of a reedy only category,
but as my devious mind starts to work,
I realize that there are so many configurations
of engines that what is meant by a reedy
needs to be defined.

  Obviously a Baby Bee to a Black Widow
would be considered a standard Cox reed
engine, so would a common reed Product Engine
be allowed without the integral tank? ( #4 in picture)
Having enough fuel to complete the pattern
would be a big advantage.

See what I mean? 
This needs to be discussed and decided.

Cheers! - K.
Keith Morgan

Offline Dennis Adamisin

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3999
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2019, 06:11:53 AM »
Hi Gooz
Great idea starting this thread here.

I think the pattern should be designed around the capabilities (flight time) of the large integral tank engines (Golden Bee, Black Widow).  The Product engines should be legal, and  should use a similar sized tank to the Golden Bee for similar flight duration - meaning larger tanks are unnecessary.

Of course we should prohibit pressurized systems or bladders from reedy's, but other than that go ahead and use the product engines since there are so many of them around.


Denny Adamisin
Fort Wayne, IN

"The good old days weren't always so good, tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems..." - Billy Joel

Online Carl Cisneros

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2019, 12:10:46 PM »
Guys;
What would a good 1/2A kit be for use with the little reed motors?

Already received the Pathfinder for my NV motor.

Carl
Carl R Cisneros, Dist IV
Control Line RB

Online kenneth cook

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1212
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2019, 01:07:55 PM »
          I have to ask why would you not allow a bladder? Do you think it makes the engine run more rpm's? Most 1/2A's designed around a integral type bee doesn't have enough fuse area for a tank. Therefore, one has to lengthen the nose to allow for one. The next problem is getting a tank to fit or not having anything in the way to allow for height adjustment. This is where landing gear can be a issue. Using a bladder on a reedy isn't going to offer any more power unless the venturi opening is enlarged. It will take all the bs out of fiddling with existing models and can allow placement anywhere. Bladder was allowed in the 1/2A event just passed and shouldn't be excluded here. It can also insure reliability in seeing a plane through the pattern.

          Carl, I have to say that the Brodak Baby Clown makes a excellent choice for a reedy. I have had one in kit form and one in ARF. Using them be it a integral type bee or product engine, they fly terrific. My favorite flying 1/2A is the Lil Tomahawk. I believe Outerzone lists plans for this plane. Both of these examples have a decent wingspan and fly well. I'm currently flying both and have since switched to product engines. Brodak currently offers both kit and ARF in beam mounting therefore some modification would be required.

Online Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3576
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2019, 05:15:30 PM »
1/2A Snapper, Baby Flite Streak, RSM Miss Ashley, my Frite Streak, my original version Skyfire, Top Flite profile series P-51, Hurricane and Little Tony (not sure of the last two, but there were three kits in that series), any of Brodak’s 1/2 A series for reed engines, any number of published designs.

Converting the Brodak Baby Clown to a Baby Super Clown by adding scaled authentic flaps is killer. I can provide the drawing.
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 goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2019, 11:06:53 AM »
  How do people imagine the split
between reedies and front rotary
valve engines?

 - Two classes?

 - Two separate events?

 - Extended or no time limit for reedies ?

   Also, please check out the extended
tank on engine #5 in my picture.
Should it be allowed?

  I am having fun designing in my head
and since I have a lot of Cox options,
I am fighting a temptation to hot rod this
thing out of all proportion to the event.

  I probably need a dose of reality..  n1

Cheers! - K.
Keith Morgan

Online Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3576
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2019, 01:17:55 PM »
Keep it as simple as possible. Remember, if there are no rules, you can't cheat!  LL~

Check out the Kwikee Stunt rules in the main forum version of this topic.
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 Paul Smith

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4886
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #7 on: July 04, 2019, 01:41:50 PM »
If I were writing the rules I would say:

Open Class: any piston engine up to .050 cubic inches of swept volume and full AMA Stunt Rules.

Reed Class:  Golden Bee and Black Widow only and AMA pattern less the squares & triangles, pit stops permitted.

That seems simple enough.
Paul Smith

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4812
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2019, 02:14:46 PM »
Here I go again building stuff for an event that's going to change the rules every week. Just bought 2 Big Mig .061 and a Pathfinder kit and already regretting it.


Motorman 8)
There will be a sunny day and we will fly our airplanes.

Offline goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2019, 03:27:51 PM »
Transcribing the Kwikee Stunt Rules to keep it easy.

KWIKEE STUNT RULES

This event was designed to allow very quick 1/2A contests.

AIRCRAFT

Wings must be flat sheet, no airfoil. Edges may be rounded

ENGINE

Limit .061 ci. ( 1cc )

PATTERN

All the maneuvers in the modern PA pattern except only
one lap is required between maneuvers and only one of
each maneuver is required.

JUDGING

   All pilots are required to judge each flight other than there own.
The entire flight is judged on a one to ten scale. The scores are
simply added up.
   For example, if there are ten competitors, the minimum score
would be 9, the maximum 90.
Keith Morgan

Offline goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #10 on: July 04, 2019, 03:33:44 PM »
Hello Motorman,

  I don't think anyone is making rules yet,
and I sure don't want my better 1/2A planes
left out either.

  There are so many variables.
We need to talk about it.

Cheers! - K.
 
Keith Morgan

Online Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3576
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #11 on: July 04, 2019, 11:04:53 PM »
Here in LA, we fly 1cc event with the full PAMPA pattern, It really is not that hard unless you come to the contest with an untried model.

Scores usually are in the 400s with strict judging. We don’t tolerate “That’s great for a 1/2A”. In light winds a small model can easily do a “Pro” pattern up to the pilot’s ability. Bart Klapinki borrowed my Sky Sport model and pulled a 495 point pattern on his first flight. Wish I could do that despite flying it all the time.  HB~>

Practice, work out the bugs and you will prosper.
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 goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2019, 04:35:55 AM »
  Brad LaPointe sent me this as food for thought.

  Larry might be right about not making excuses
for 1/2A's being able to fly the full pattern.
My TD.049 runs seven minutes plus on one ounce
of 10%.  I don't know how reed engines can
fit into the event without external tanks.
Yet.

From Model Airplane News - October 1977

Sunspot. Control line stunt model, for 1/2 A power.

Quote: "COMPETITION 1/2A STUNT. The exact year is hard to pinpoint, but perhaps 1974 marked the revival of 1/2A Stunt. Cox Manufacturing ignited the spark by distributing a number of their 'Super-Stunters' at the '74 Nats, and ever since then, when stunt stars sported these mini-craft as a gag, the event has burgeoned.

The appearance on the scene in 1975 of such fully blown microstunters as Tercel"foreshadowed the disappearance of the gag. Some stunt heavies were beginning to transcend the sub-twenty dollar, out-of-the-box jobs, and the gleams which shone in some eyes indicated desire that the event be taken seriously.

It may now be proving itself worthy of serious consideration. At the '76 Nats all the idiosyncrasies were visible that can be observed in the 'father' event: competitive mannerisms, prepared equipment, rehearsed patterns, etc. Bob Whitely, Keith Trostle, Jim Lynch, Jim Armour, and Frank McMillan are some stuntsters who made 1/2A in '76 a bit more interesting than in recent years, by competing with time-constructed vehicles. Perhaps as much effort went into their '/2A's as went into their 'regular' stunt ships, seeing them fly in a wind that made even closely watched Walker Cup flights look bad would make it believable.

In addition, Bob Hunt reports from his renowned New Jersey wing factory that considerable numbers of Half-A foam wings are sold regularly; monthly pictures and columns in Model Builder magazine by 'Mr Half-A' himself, Larry Renger, indicate that a certain cross section of the modeling populace is into it enthusiastically.

In spite of the seriousness with which some are taking the event, these quasi-statistics should not cause disillusionment.

Competitively, 1/2A is an aerobatic controversy. This should not surprise the SSF (Serious Stunt Flier, as coined by Model Builder's 'Dirty Dan' Rutherford), for within Stunt society there are pros and cons for everything, even for the style clothes worn while flying. So, if this mini-event's revival is to be observed, consideration must be given to what's happening on the other side where dwell corner-of-the-eye cynicism, fist-clenched dissention, and all that other "heavy stuff' bad guys usually reek of.

For one thing, the word 'official' must run the gauntlet through the AMA. It seems that no one has yet chosen to propose it and follow through. Well, there are 1/2A events; maybe the Stunt clique just doesn't want one.

Although there is apparent interest, the event is still in a stage that has yet to progress beyond mere novelty. Half-A Stunt has been fortunate in its reportage, and perhaps a bit overrated with regard to its popularity. There have been practically no local 1/2A Stunt events, and at the Nats where the event does happen to take place, it is loosely organized, with no clear definition of governing rules.

Finally, there are hard-core cons who consider Half-A a ball-and-chain around the foot of Acrobatics. This group feels that the father stunt event is losing valuable prime time to a meaningless goof-off event, and that PAMPA, in addition to local contest holders across the country, has enough problems putting on well-run Stunt contests, especially the Nats, without complicating and compounding things with 1/2A.

Who is right? On a competition level should 1/2A be promoted or not? This is something PAM PA must deal with objectively, because it utilizes good effort - something that even the father event has trouble eliciting..."

Sunspot, MAN, October 1977.
Keith Morgan

Offline Dennis Adamisin

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3999
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2019, 09:10:15 AM »
Keith
EXCELLENT post.

I was there when Cox (spearheaded by Larry Renger) brought a bunch of their then new ME-109's, with foam sheath wings, reed valve engines & external tanks to the NATs.  Not sure what the engine configuration was, I would GUESS they were stronger than a stock Golden Bee.  However the system WORKED and they instantly captivated a sizable group of otherwise serious stunt flyers into having an absolute blast!  I was one of the Judges of an impromptu Stunt Contest that occurred.

As pointed out in the airticle you posted, in successive years the 1/2A event was confirmed and purpose built airplanes built around ever higher performing Tee Dees (the only hi performance choice available) became the norm.  Performance was spectacular, but participation started to wane - took as much or more effort to participate in part because of the temperamental nature of extracting the max power needed for the ever more sophisticated (mostly bigger) airplanes to perform.

There are now more engine choices and (as flown at Brodak) choices up to .061.  You can spend as much on a 1/2A Combat engine as you can on a high-zoot Pro Stunt engine.  There were LOTS of great airplanes, but history suggests that the boom & bust will repeat itself.

There were folks at Brodak wistfully saying they wished there was a separate class for (much lower performing) reedies they used to fly as kids.  In my mind that extended to the OK Cubs & similar that also existed as simple entry level engines that would run, albeit at a lower performing level.

I posted an earlier version of what follows in the Open Forum, ONLY AS A THOUGHT STARTER, for a reedy class event that would TRY to keep things simple.  I copied (& updated) it here for the same reason - Why a Reedy class? Because THOSE are the engines we grew up on!  I remember my brother & I burned up literally GALLONS of 30%-40% nitro (Rat Racer fuel) 8cc at a time through baby bees & golden bees.  We even had a couple with dual port sleeves.  However we'd be hard pressed to make a reedy competitive with even a Tee Dee, much less a Big Mig .061.  Reedy engines are still plentiful too.

SUGGESTIONS FOR A REEDY CLASS: (just cuz ya gotta start somewhere)  K.I.S.S.!
* Cox Reed Valve (any), OK Cub, Wen Mac or Testors up to .049.  Includes Cox Product Engines with external tanks. No pressurized fuel systems.
* Flights to be done on a single tank of fuel, 3.5 minute(?) time limit. No maneuver scored after that time
* 35' lines, 15#(min) Spectra (short lines make it easier for single port engines, harder for the late series hi performance reedies because of excess speed)
* No Take-off or Landing, allow hand launch & belly landing (omitting LG improves performance when power is marginal)
* Maneuvers (blend of Modern & OTS maneuver descriptions. Goal is to fit expected flight duration for a Golden Bee with integral tank on ONE run)
    > Starting & launch in 30 seconds - 5 points
    > Reverse Wingover
    > 3 round Inside loops (recover inverted)
    > Inverted flight
    > 3 round Outside Loops (recover upright)
    > 3 round Lazy 8's (like OTS except keep to 45 degrees)
    > 3 Vert 8's (like OTS)
    > 3 OH 8's (like OTS)
    > 4-Leaf Clover (enter/exit from level flight)


*One thought would be to replace the last three maneuvers with ones that can be flown from level flight.  THAT should make it more plausible to fly this event when the winds start coming up


I think this would be easy to fly with a Baby Flite Streak or Combat Kitten type airplane with a Golden Bee - might get away with a Skyray or Stuntman. My often flawed long term memory is that I could get about that many maneuvers out of a Golden Bee on a single tank, but would have to try it again to see!

Why my fixation on a single tank flight? Just cuz - multiple flights are a PITA...



Inviting better ideas.



Denny Adamisin
Fort Wayne, IN

"The good old days weren't always so good, tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems..." - Billy Joel

Online kenneth cook

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1212
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2019, 05:52:42 PM »
           I really don't know why so many were wishing that they could've flown their reedies, that was never a issue. They were allowed from day one and that never changed. Paul Smith said it early on prior to the official rules being posted, if you want duration, put a tank on it. So where were all those people that wanted to fly? It takes little to nothing to make a reedie fly long enough. Put a product backplate on it or drill the stock tank and attach a external tank.

Offline Dennis Adamisin

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3999
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2019, 06:27:45 AM »
           I really don't know why so many were wishing that they could've flown their reedies, that was never a issue. They were allowed from day one and that never changed. Paul Smith said it early on prior to the official rules being posted, if you want duration, put a tank on it. So where were all those people that wanted to fly? It takes little to nothing to make a reedie fly long enough. Put a product backplate on it or drill the stock tank and attach a external tank.

I dunno, maybe because using a reedy versus a Profi or Big Mig .061 is like showing up in the OK Corral with a rubber knife..? 
Denny Adamisin
Fort Wayne, IN

"The good old days weren't always so good, tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems..." - Billy Joel

Offline goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2019, 04:15:48 PM »
  I spent today with Paul Smith and
the usual suspects at the Balsa Beavers
Summer Scale event.
   We had a brief discussion about Cox
engines and how they run fine when we
keep it simple. They are old engines so
expecting them to have modern power
will get complicated. Paul knows his stuff.

  My original intention with my Focke-Wulf
was to have a competitive plane that uses
a reed valve, dual bypass, normal head,
plastic back plate, Product Engines.
  I still haven't flown it in that configuration,
but I'll do it soon since it would be a good
discussion point.

Cheers! - K.


 
 
 
Keith Morgan

Offline Dennis Adamisin

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3999
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2019, 06:49:39 PM »
...and it is quite possible that I am clueless about the max potential of reedies.  However I have never seen one that would run with a Tee Dee, much less the modern stuff.
Denny Adamisin
Fort Wayne, IN

"The good old days weren't always so good, tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems..." - Billy Joel

Offline goozgog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2019, 03:25:04 AM »
...and it is quite possible that I am clueless about the max potential of reedies.  However I have never seen one that would run with a Tee Dee, much less the modern stuff.

   No doubt about it Dennis but I want to see
if the horse I'm flogging is dead or just stunned.
( and pinning for the fiords ? )
 <=

Cheers! - K.

( Edit )
  OMG! Sorry Dennis. I just re-read this and
it sounds like I'm calling you "clueless".
I was trying to say that you are correct about
reedies and TD's.
Yikes!
« Last Edit: July 08, 2019, 11:40:43 PM by goozgog »
Keith Morgan

Online Larry Renger

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3576
Re: Half A at Brodak's - Rules discussion
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2019, 07:16:23 PM »
Here is a "reedie" design that will do a clean pattern. Tank run is short, of course, so refueling would be needed in the rules. (First takeoff and last landing for score) Shorten the nose and use a Kavan tank extender or lengthen the nose, use a product engine and external tank. Weight came in under 7 ounces, Wing Area about 160 sq.in. Published in Flying Models.

Built up wing should meet or beat the original Cox folded foam wings. Span 30", root chord 6", tip chord 5", 15% airfoil (NACA 0015). The original wings show up on e-Bay now and then. Or get Bob Hunt to cut you a killer pair!
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!


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here