Author Topic: Carrier Event in Van Nuys , California October 2,2011 (Read 2235 times)

Bill Barber · « **on:** September 01, 2011, 03:14:49 PM »

  The 11th Annual Hi Johnson Memorial
Navy Carrier Events Sunday ,October 2 2011
Apollo Model Field , Sepulveda Basin ,Van Nuys ,Ca.

   Carrier Events
  AMA Navy Carrier Class 1,2 & profile combined % of record
   Sig Skyray & .15 carrier combined, % of NCS 2010 top 20 score
   SPECIAL RULE FOR THIS CONTEST
   Use of 2.4GHZ radio for other than elevation control will be
   permitted in all classes of Navy Carrier

   Entry fees : First Event $15 , Additional Events $5 each.
   Pilots meeting 8:30 am , Flying starts 9am.
   Coffee Mug trophies first thru third place .
   Food will be available on site.

Valley Circle Burners website ; https://sites.google.com/site/valleycircleburners/

  CD Bill Barber
Phone (805) -241-0453
Email : barcam@verizon.net

eric david conley · « **Reply #1 on:** September 09, 2011, 07:32:42 PM »

I have to jump in here and pitch for this contest. I've gone to quite a few of them and it seems to me they get better every year. I guess you could say that there are only two events but believe me there will be quite a few carrier planes flying that day for one reason or another. I also see they are going to allow or encourage the use of 2.4GHZ at this contest so it will be interesting in what shows up. I know there are several carrier fliers in the LA area that have been working on this technology and have had flying carrier planes for a couple of years now although I have not seen them fly. I hope they show up turn in some good flights and the rest of us can learn from them on how well this will work.
Not only are there usually many different carrier planes to see there also seems to be a pretty good crowd of on lookers that show up to watch the action. Eric

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #2 on:** September 10, 2011, 03:12:33 PM »

Just askin so don't jump too hard... Doesn't using RF for the throttle eliminate the need for the third line? Doesn't this give the RF throttle somewhat of an advantage over a 3 line system. Somehow that doesn't seem right in my little pea brain.

I see nothing wrong with using the new 2.4GHZ systems for control line but not sure it belongs in carrier competition. Please tell me where my thinking is off...

bill bischoff · « **Reply #3 on:** September 10, 2011, 04:14:47 PM »

Bob, don't forget that carrier already allows the use of two line systems, with larger lines required.

eric david conley · « **Reply #4 on:** September 10, 2011, 04:30:12 PM »

It does eliminate the need for 3 lines and I thought that was pretty cool until I went to to the navy carrier rules and read what size the 2 line system would have to be. In Profile and CL-1 the 3 line systems use 3 .015 and CL-2 uses 3 .018 lines. With the 2 line system Profile and CL-1 would use 2 .020 and CL-2 would use 2 .024. I was surprised that the size jumped that much and wonder if it would really give the 2 line systems the advantage. I also wonder if there wont be a weight penalty with the 2 line 2.4GHZ because you would have to have a receiver, receiver battery, and a servo in the plane (+3ozs minimum). I don't know the comparative weights are or the comparative drag would be, maybe someone on the forum could give us some stats.
I also don't think the 2 line planes that will fly at the contest are all out competion planes. They are just a vessel to try out the idea. So your thinking may not be off at all, it should be interest to see what they come up with. I will get back on this subject as soon as I return from the contest and post what I saw.

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #5 on:** September 10, 2011, 04:54:11 PM »

Ya, I should have looked at the rules.. Let us know how it goes..

Fred Cronenwett · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2011, 05:42:26 PM »

I am currently flying Virgil Wilbur's old MO-1 in Profile carrier here in the Wichita, Kansas area with a 2-line bellcrank and electronic controls. The model must be 25 years old by now. I currently use a servo driver, so the model has a servo and a battery to control the throttle. Due to the servo driver setup I have use insulated lines which adds to the drag of the lines. I have not set up and flown with a model with 3-line since 1991. Once you have flown with electronic controls it's hard to go back and fly with a 3-line model.

I would love to the at this contest but it's too far away from Kansas, have fun, I'm sure Tony N. will be out there with his 2.4 Ghz setup.

Land sofly,
Fred Cronenwett

bill bischoff · « **Reply #7 on:** September 11, 2011, 12:06:08 PM »

I just went to the line rake calculation program on the racing web site nclra.org, and by throwing in a few quick numbers for a typical profile carrier ship, it told me that THEORETICALLY 3 .015 lines have about 20-25% more drag than 2 .020 lines. If you go to the program and play with it, be sure to get the decimal in the line diameter, and plug in the lap time is for a single lap, not seven. Otherwise, the numbers are VERY strange!

eric david conley · « **Reply #8 on:** September 11, 2011, 12:53:46 PM »

Another thing to keep in mind is that the difference in line number (2 verses 3) and line size in the "rules" is designed for safety reasons and not for performance reasons. Looks like you could use one line (.026) as long as it controlled the elevator and 2.4GHZ for the throttle and drop the line resistance that much more. I have NO experience with mono line but have heard that it is not easy to get a lot of elevator throw with it although didn't some one once fly a stunt plane with it back in the early days of control line? Also wondering if the mono line plane would loose elevator throw in the low speed portion of the event do to lack of line tension. I think I'll stop torturing my brain now as I'm having enough trouble getting my 3 line planes to stay in the air. Eric

bill bischoff · « **Reply #9 on:** September 11, 2011, 08:25:36 PM »

I've flown just enough monoline to be able to say that I can do it, but I can't begin to conceive of flying carrier with monoline. First you'd have to make a special handle with a throttle trigger, and you would have to get used to controlling the throttle with your left hand, and the elevator with your right hand. Modern speed plane torque units would be unsatisfactory for the airplane, so you would probably need to make a special control unit for the plane, too.
Wait a minute, this sounds kind of interesting....

john e. holliday · « **Reply #10 on:** September 12, 2011, 06:00:07 AM »

Yes Dale Kirn flew a Thnderbird in stunt using mono-line. Watched his son fly the same plane at VSC a few years ago. They also flew scale using mono-line. If I remembe right it used two mono-lines. With mono-lline you don't need tension on the lines like the the two and three line set ups.

eric david conley · « **Reply #11 on:** September 12, 2011, 10:03:07 AM »

Bill, I can remember seeing some information on a mono line setup that used a handle much like a normal u-control handle that had a gear setup in it that turned the mono line cable when you rocked the handle back and forth (up and down). The speed fliers didn't like it because it gave to much throw to fast (?) so it was never popular. So imagine that type of handle with a 2.4GHZ trigger for speed control (from a car transmitter) in the same place as our 3-wire handles have it. There is a speed flier in our club in Reno (Carl Caldwell) that may know something about this so will ask him. Eric

bill bischoff · « **Reply #12 on:** September 12, 2011, 04:16:01 PM »

The design of that particular handle requires line tension to work properly, so it wouldn't be the best choice for carrier applications.

Bill Barber · « **Reply #13 on:** September 30, 2011, 02:03:32 PM »

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #14 on:** September 30, 2011, 02:54:55 PM »

I have two models that are close to flying, but I've got an R/C Pattern contest this weekend too. Darn it.
I'll be there eventually! Have fun, guys.
Chris...

eric david conley · « **Reply #15 on:** October 03, 2011, 05:58:12 PM »

Went down to Van Nuys to the carrier event so I could see how the 2.4 GHZ thing was working for the fliers in southern California. Just one flier showed up that was using 2.4, it was Tony Naccarato who happens to be one of the main promoters of this system. He had two planes equipped the the system's, one was a MO1 that had a Webra for power and the other was a SkyRay 35 that was all electric. I will include pictures of both planes showing as much detail as possible. Both planes had most of the equipment on the outside of the air frame because these were both at one time IC planes.
Something he didn't have that I was looking forward to seeing was a control handle that had all of the radio gear inside of it. Tony says he actually built one but found it more trouble than it was worth so he now uses the radio strapped to his belt to control everything except the up/down movement of the elevator. Both planes performed flawlessly as for as the electronics were concerned and Tony is a happy camper with these planes and assured me that they were the future and I'm inclined to think he is correct. If you see something in the pictures you don't understand ask on the forum and I will try to answer your questions

john e. holliday · « **Reply #16 on:** October 06, 2011, 07:27:16 PM »

Eric, thanks for the report and pictures. When you see Tony, tell him old DOC Holliday says hi. Of course he probably won't remember me.

Dennis Holler · « **Reply #17 on:** October 07, 2011, 04:01:56 AM »

Wounldn't Clancy Arnold's U-tronics setup get you the same thing, or do his lines cause too much drag?

eric david conley · « **Reply #18 on:** October 07, 2011, 10:14:19 AM »

Very good question Dennis. At this time I sure don't have answers to the question and in the end it may be mixed depending on whether your flying carrier or scale which are two very different events. I'm using Clancy's U-tronics setup at this time and to change to 2.4 in my current planes would be as big a project as changing from IC to electric. My perception is that all three systems are quite different from each other.
With U-tronics I use the same lines as I do in IC so that stays the same. If I went to 2.4 I would use 2-lines instead of 3-lines and the line diameters would change quit a bit in Profile, CL-1&2. So much so that I don't know if the 2-line system would be Superior or not? In .15 carrier I don't know what size line would be required when changing from 3-lines to 2-lines? Then with 2.4 you will have to have a receiver and battery pack to power the throttle that is used quite a bit during the low speed portion of the event so the battery would have to be a 400-600 mah maybe, I don't know.
And then with 2.4 there is the control handle where I would want the throttle trigger just like it is in my present 3-line handles as I'm a firm believer in using only one hand to control my carrier planes. I'm left handed and only use my right hand, darn I cant think of anything I use it for, oh well. I'm sure there will be a lot of development in the near future in this area and who knows what we will come up with. Eric

john vlna · « **Reply #19 on:** October 07, 2011, 11:30:06 AM »

Dennis,
I fly my electric carrier planes on two lines. I use Clancy's unit, mounted in the handle. Commercial lines with nylon coating are to draggy, so I make my own insulated lines. It is very easy, just coat them with water based polyurethane, adds almost no weight or size increase.

Carrier rules require an increase in line size, .015 to .020 for profile for example, when using two lines.

Attached is a picture of the Seafire I flew at muncie with this system and prototype handle

Fred Cronenwett · « **Reply #20 on:** October 07, 2011, 03:22:45 PM »

I have been flying with electronic controls for 20 years now and have flown almost every system there is. I have used Bill Young handles with the trigger, but prefer the servo driver or transmitter hanging on my belt. Operating the throttle control with my left hand while flying with the right hand it not a problem for me. But I have certainly heard many arguments for both ways to operate the throttle. The main point is that use what is most conformatble for you. I like the handle to be as small as possible and very light. The moment I reach up to the handle to flip a toggle switch or move a trigger I change the elevator control.

I also fly with the nylon coated lines for CL scale and even my profile carrier MO-1 has nylon coated lines and it flies ok, the engine (35FP) is not fast so not sure if the lines are holding me back or if the engine is holding it back, either way I don't care what my time is and fly for the landing. I have a friend in Chigago that flies with 2.4Ghz for CL and he says that the line drag goes down dramatically with normal unisulated lines.

Converting a model from electronics to 2.4Ghz is easy, install normal 2 lines, put the reciever, battery and servo on the plane. If flying electric use the BEC and you don't need a battery for the reciever. The recievers are small and fit almost anywhere.

The best way to evaluate the changes is to take a carrier model that has 3-line, time the high speed and then install insulated lines, an electronic control system like Clancy's and then time it again (lines could have nylon coating or polyurthane) and then put 2.4Ghz on with skinny unisulated lines and measure the high speed.

Electrics have arrived and they demand some form or electronic controls and 2.4Ghz is the best way to get that done. Any form of electronic controls are expensive. I always think back to Virgil Wilbur, he told me that he was going to hate electronic controls but would try it. After his first test flight with electronic controls he then converted his entire fleet within two weeks to electronics controls and cut every 3rd line he had. So much for hating electronic controls.

Land sofltly,
Fred Cronenwett