Author Topic: New Carrier Class (Read 1763 times)

Kelly Wilson · « **on:** September 14, 2009, 08:52:16 AM »

I was talking with several people at he Memphis Stunt Classic this past weekend. The talk got around to carrier planes. Several of the guys indicated an interest in carrier planes, but didn't have any interest in the speed aspect and hated the prop hanging.

The suggestion was a new carrier class that allowed for slightly larger planes. The emphasis would be on fidelity to scale, realistic takeoffs and landings. Extra credit/points for retract gear, biplanes, twins, a scale/military function during the flight. No emphasis on speed and "zero" emphasis on prophanging. This might also open the door for 4 strokes and other engines.

I am sure there are a thousand reasons why this wouldn't work, but there it is for what it is worth. Your comments appreciated.

Kelly Wilson

Paul Smith · « **Reply #1 on:** September 14, 2009, 12:07:12 PM »

I put together a carrier plane with a STOCK OS Max LA25.

At a recent contest I loaned it out to seven previously non-carrier pilots and they were all able to do high/low/landing the first day.

I'd like to see a new event based on a single low-cost over-the-counter engine and NO SLIDERS. Also, the old pre-1975 scoring system.

Peter Mazur · « **Reply #2 on:** September 14, 2009, 12:12:27 PM »

This sounds like fun, but it imight best be not a new Carrier class but rather a new Scale class. In all the Carrier events, performance is what matters: going seriously fast, seriously slow, and getting it back onto the deck. Scale aspects are secondary. But for this new event, scale aspects are primary, and static scale judging , realistic flight and in-flight scale operations would be what everyone would go for, just as in Scale. So this is just a C/L Scale event where a Carrier-based aircraft is modeled and some of the required flight pattern requirements are carrier takeoff and landing.
Such an event might pick up entrants from both Scale and Carrier ranks. If you hold the event at contests that already have Carrier events, you could borrow use of the deck for a while for your flights. You'll need to provide your own scale judges as Carrier judges might not be up to it. Anyway, if you hold it near where carrier events are held at other times, you could possibly borrow the deck. (Also, many of us have flown off of decks marked on the ground, and that works, too. You can even do it with a deck set up on grass if you write the rules suitably. So all you really need is a set of bags and lines and some 1X2's.
Pete

john e. holliday · « **Reply #3 on:** September 14, 2009, 01:05:07 PM »

Profile Scale Carrier with what engine? About the time you pick an engine they go out of production. As Pete says Carrier is High Speed, Low Speed and Landing. I think it would also have to be set up so the planes would still be able to fly the regular profile event. Not like they did Skyray which allows .40 size engines. Also maybe have the leadouts in a locked location, adjustable, but not movable in the air. Could be a top speed limit imposed for us old guys that can't turn that fast anymore.

Try it locally and see what happens. Also put the rules out in case some out of towners might like to try it. Could even do like the real decks and have only three or four cables to snatch with points for the cable that was grabbed. I think I am done rambleling. DOC Holliday

Steven Kientz · « **Reply #4 on:** September 14, 2009, 03:13:27 PM »

For the guys who are really into scale you can do catapult launches. Extra points if it stays together, you wouldn't have to do a pull test either. It would test it on takeoff.

david smith · « **Reply #5 on:** September 14, 2009, 06:35:04 PM »

Catapult launches would be cool to see...from a distance!!!!!

david smith · « **Reply #6 on:** September 14, 2009, 06:38:31 PM »

Also RATO(Rocket Assisted Take Off) would be cool with 1 or 2 or 8 rockets! Imagine a C-130 taking off in about 3 inches!

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #7 on:** September 14, 2009, 06:44:09 PM »

Quote from: Kelly Wilson on September 14, 2009, 08:52:16 AM

I was talking with several people at he Memphis Stunt Classic this past weekend. The talk got around to carrier planes. Several of the guys indicated an interest in carrier planes, but didn't have any interest in the speed aspect and hated the prop hanging.

The suggestion was a new carrier class that allowed for slightly larger planes. The emphasis would be on fidelity to scale, realistic takeoffs and landings. Extra credit/points for retract gear, biplanes, twins, a scale/military function during the flight. No emphasis on speed and "zero" emphasis on prophanging. This might also open the door for 4 strokes and other engines.

I am sure there are a thousand reasons why this wouldn't work, but there it is for what it is worth. Your comments appreciated.

Kelly Wilson

If it were me, I would only make the following changes to the current scale classes, more points for scale fidelity, make the points for fast and slow emphasis even somehow, ditch the 60 degree rule and make it a max of 30 degrees and ditch the moving sliders.

Wayne

Kelly Wilson · « **Reply #8 on:** September 14, 2009, 09:15:24 PM »

Hey Guys,
Thanks for all the great comments. I think Pete is right, it would verge on being a Scale class. Maybe more like Sport Scale & Profile Scale. I think what the guys that I was talking to at the Memphis Stunt Classic were expresssing was love of and respect for the Warbirds and something that flys & looks more like the real thing. I could see some of the old TopFlite Bearcats, Corsairs and maybe some of the Ziroli warbirds from Flying Models plans with 60 engines. A Grumman F3F or Boeing F4B would be cool too.

We are talking about using a piece of conveyor belt for a carrier deck here in Memphis . It would at least serve as a carrier deck until we can see how much real interest there is and build the real thing.

Kelly

Jim Oliver · « **Reply #9 on:** September 14, 2009, 10:10:02 PM »

Kelly,

Per our conversation at Memphis, the realistic/realism aspect sounds great. A possible glitch might be the relative abuse that Carrier models take on landing..........I'm not sure I could build a "scale" model that would last very long
under those conditions.

Your thoughts?

Cheers,
Jim

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #10 on:** September 14, 2009, 10:47:52 PM »

Wayne,

Years ago I had an OPS 60 powered Sterling Guardian with fixed leadouts that would rock nose up between 30 and 45 degrees on low speed and stay there. Would give maybe a 2 minute low speed. It wasn't modern prop hanging but it was sure fun to fly.

All,

Everyone does understand that if you want to try modifications to the rules in a contest, all you have to do is publish the changes in the sanction and contest announcement.

Want a "better" balance between high speed and low speed? Use a different multiplier in calculating the low speed points. The current factor of 10 worked pretty well to balance HS and LS points until the extreme low speed became possible. Try 7.5 or 5.

Want to make it harder to hit the extreme low speed, shift the maximum allowed angle of attack to 45 degrees. I think you'll find 30 degrees is shallow enough that many folks would break it in a 90 second low speed.

I'd leave the sliders alone until the above two items have been tested. You need some of the current good carrier flyers to agree to try a contest or 3 with the modified rules to get some useful data.

Dave

Paul Smith · « **Reply #11 on:** September 15, 2009, 05:50:15 AM »

The Nostalgia classes would pretty much fill the need if they just used 1974 rules and let you design a new airplane to the old rules. In reality, Profile Carrier only existed for about six years (69 to 75) under those rules and their just aren't many published or kitted designs to chose from.

If you could design your own model to fit the old rules (like B Team Race) it would be good.

One point per MPH high and three points per MPH difference. Just simple math, no ratio stuff.

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #12 on:** September 15, 2009, 09:04:41 AM »

Paul,

Yep using the old scoring system is one alternative.

You could just as easily double the high speed points in the current system to emphasize high speed more. But the folks that are turning the excellent low speed flights aren't slouches at high speed either. You'll just widen the margin they win by.

I'd like to see some folks play with the current scoring system (the ratio multiplication factor) to see how that affects the scoring. If we had a database of score sheets we could model the changes and see the projected results. I'm interested in trying to (re)establish the balance between high speed and low speed scoring needed to give approximately equal weight to the phases of flight. I'm not chasing remaking Navy Carrier in some image I had of the event from 35 years ago.

If you want to limit low speed performance, dropping the maximum AOA is probably the easiest approach.

But none of that will take folks that aren't competitive today to the top three tomorrow. I've always looked at the performance of the folks at the top of the score sheet as a challenge. I don't want the event watered down, I want to improve to that level of performance.

I seriously doubt any scoring system change will increase participation in Navy Carrier. Showing folks that Navy Carrier is fun AND challenging then mentoring them into the event is the way to increase participation.

Dave

Kelly Wilson · « **Reply #13 on:** September 15, 2009, 03:38:09 PM »

Hey Jim,
You are probably right. I'll be the first to admit that my experience is extremely limited on this. I would guess that probably a 40 R/C size plane with a 60 engine. You would need more wing area and lighter weight on the more scale type planes to be able to fly the plane to the deck. I currently have a class I Airbonita that weighs 42oz with a 30" span and a classII Guardian with 36" span that weighs 53 oz. They come down in a hurry when you slow down.

Lots of good comments and ideas on carrier planes. Hopefully some of this will develope into proposals and rules changes. It would be great to see carrier grow like stunt has over the past few years. It needs a class or classes to broaden the appeal without compromising the intent and character of Navy Carrier. I don't think that you are going to attract young people in any numbers, but there is a large group of c/l flyers that love to build and fly that aren't never going to enter a stunt contest and/or be able to fly the AMA pattern. It doesn't mean that they aren't good modelers, they are just not stunt flyers.

Kelly

Bob Heywood · « **Reply #14 on:** September 15, 2009, 04:23:44 PM »

Stunt is Stunt and Navy Carrier is Navy Carrier. You can't change the basics.

A key element of Stunt's broad popularity is the proficiency level breakdown. The competition at any level is fierce and there is incentive to improve and advance. Think about it...

Mike Anderson · « **Reply #15 on:** September 15, 2009, 06:09:04 PM »

Quote from: Kelly Wilson on September 15, 2009, 03:38:09 PM

.................. Hopefully some of this will develope into proposals and rules changes. It would be great to see carrier grow like stunt has over the past few years. It needs a class or classes to broaden the appeal without compromising the intent and character of Navy Carrier. I don't think that you are going to attract young people in any numbers, but there is a large group of c/l flyers that love to build and fly that aren't never going to enter a stunt contest and/or be able to fly the AMA pattern. It doesn't mean that they aren't good modelers, they are just not stunt flyers.

Kelly

Hopefully, it won't ... Sorry, but I don't think "NEW" carrier events will get any new flyers. We already have an event or several that cover anything you can think of as far as rules -- speed limits, equipment and controls limits, airframe limits, rules for old guys and rules for the latest engine. If you want to try some local rules variations or a local "New" event, by all means do so -- advertise it and promote it or keep it to yourselves and have your own local event with records and all (You should see "Circle Cutters" Carrier event! Complete with balloons to break and 4 "decks").

But after all the whining and crying is done, if you change the rules of the rulebook events, you will LOSE flyers, not gain flyers. This has been proven in MANY events over the years. As stated above, the only real hope is to encourage every spark of interest and try to sell and promote the events on their own merits. Joe Just's "Postal Contest" has the look of a good tool for this -- there could be other "Postals" or how about a You-Tube or facebook contest -- in a given week, upload video of any flights done at YOUR field - break it down into classes like Stunt has - Expert, Novice and "Total Newbie Flying Someone Else's Plane" or whatever.

As for the Stunt connection - consider that a lot of ex-combat, ex-racing and ex-carrier flyers now fly stunt - for several reasons, but largely, NOT because they lost interest in the other events but they either can't get to the <dwindling> number of contests they used to or they can't justify the time and money expended on equipment that they use less and less often.

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #16 on:** September 15, 2009, 07:44:14 PM »

Skill classes might help.

One reason folks gravitate to stunt is real simple. All you need is a suitable airplane and a circle.

The other is the enthusiasm the stunt greet your improving skills. Go up on the main forum and describe how you finally flew 6 laps inverted with your ST 46 powered Skyray without crashing and see how many folks come out of the woodwork to pound you on the back in congratulations and encourage your next step to flying your first full pattern.

Further, once you can fly something you think looks like the pattern, they have a class for you at the contest. They hand out trophies to the beginner with the same cheers and clapping as they do for the experts.

And they don't have 14 subclasses of stunt that use mutually exclusive equipment rules (but they are started down that path). One can move up the skill ladder without having to replace the starting equipment until fairly late in the progression.

Contests aren't to bad either. A couple of judges, a pit boss, and maybe a scoring tabulator. No deck, ropes, triangles, center judges, or sandbags (Navy Carrier). No lap counters, timers (1 to 3 per pit position), and at least 3 different circle markings (Racing). Basically set up anywhere and run your contest.

And one does not have to be fast of foot or strong of arm to fly the event.

Stunt isn't my cup of tea, but it does have a lot that makes it desireable.

Dave

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2009, 08:51:53 PM »

I think the best example of something that worked as an entry level event, at least for a short time, was Fox Racing.

This was setup to use a common engine, and common profile airframes. It grew to be really popular because a lot of CL guys already had that equipment, and at least at first, getting a Fox35 to restart fast in the pits was a talent that racing pro's didn't have exclusive rights to.

However as time went on, the standard 35 sized general airframe became a Mongoose or smaller, and the pro's, being pro's after all, started to win everything.

Now Fox Racing is less and less popular, simply because the average Joe Stunt doesn't or can't spend that much time at it.

I am guessing the same exists in most of the events, other than stunt. It is just the total number of CL flyers is a fixed size. And most of them fly stunt.

I think one day I may try an entry carrier event, like Skyray, after all Treetown has a lot of expertise in carrier!

Mike Anderson · « **Reply #18 on:** September 15, 2009, 09:08:26 PM »

Alan -

If you try Skyray, you can put an electric motor on it !! REWOUND !!! Be sure you get some other advice from Pete with regards to an ESC (your 45 Amp. won't cut it) and a timer (we don't use one) - but the planes (Skyrays) are dead simple to build and are quite a lot of fun to fly. An Axi 2826 is out of the box capable of 75 mph and I am kind of anxious to try some of the Turnigy equivalents -

You won't regret it - besides if turnabout is fair play, I flew my 3rd ever judged stunt flight at Fargo in July and am seriously considering flying Intermediate at Omaha - so you Stunt grunts owe us Carrier jocks one Newbie.

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #19 on:** September 15, 2009, 09:28:47 PM »

Quote from: Mike Anderson on September 15, 2009, 09:08:26 PM

Alan -

If you try Skyray, you can put an electric motor on it !! REWOUND !!! Be sure you get some other advice from Pete with regards to an ESC (your 45 Amp. won't cut it) and a timer (we don't use one) - but the planes (Skyrays) are dead simple to build and are quite a lot of fun to fly. An Axi 2826 is out of the box capable of 75 mph and I am kind of anxious to try some of the Turnigy equivalents -

You won't regret it - besides if turnabout is fair play, I flew my 3rd ever judged stunt flight at Fargo in July and am seriously considering flying Intermediate at Omaha - so you Stunt grunts owe us Carrier jocks one Newbie.

The only downside is that I would have to go to Bill's house to pick up the deck!

Peter Mazur · « **Reply #20 on:** September 17, 2009, 04:15:15 PM »

Carrier has skill classes (unofficial) only we call them "Sportsman" and "Open." Sportsman Profiile Carrier is flown at most of the Midwest contests and at the Nats. Sportsman .15 is flown at the Nats, but I don't know where else. The Sportsman Profiile can be flown with any equipment that is legal in AMA Profile. We have only one problem: Lack of contestants. We hold the events anyway, because that is our best hope for getting a beginner started in competition. I hope others will continue to do the same. Any beginning contestant who can go so far as to make a high, low, and landing is going to be on the leading edge!
Pete

Author Topic: New Carrier Class (Read 1763 times)

david smith

david smith

Alan Hahn

Alan Hahn