Dual purpose for profile and classic?

[RC Storick]

Everyone, please stop messaging me about this thread. Something is broken and it's gone forever. It's only one thread and it is not worth the many  Hrs. to find the problem. Please start a new thread if so inclined. Sorry stuff happens

[RC Storick]

The thread by Charles Carter has been removed. That was the only way I could get rid of the error. Sorry

[Mike Haverly]

Oh well!

[Dan McEntee]

  If you made a post to the original thread, or started the original thread, please re-post to the new thread. Simple enough?
  Type atyou later,
  Dan McEntee

[Charles Carter]

Like Sparky said stuff happens.  I appreciate all the responses to my question regarding a dual purpose model for both profile and classic.  I am particularly interested in a bigger model because I like to fly bigger models.   I hope I didn't miss to many of the comments in the original thread so please post them again for a every ones benefit?   


Charles Carter

[Mike Haverly]

It depends on what you call bigger.  Most classic models are on the small side compared to modern designs.  I had a profile Oriental that served me well in both events.  Several different powerplants, Magnum .32, 40LA, Brodak .40 and 46LA, the latter being the best.  I also used it for Advanced PA from time to time with some success.

[Dennis Adamisin]

Like Sparky said stuff happens.  I appreciate all the responses to my question regarding a dual purpose model for both profile and classic.  I am particularly interested in a bigger model because I like to fly bigger models.   I hope I didn't miss to many of the comments in the original thread so please post them again for a every ones benefit?   


Charles Carter

Hi Charles
Not a lot of large models available in the Classic era, even scarcer if you limit choices to Profiles.  Biggest Classic legal Profile I can think of is the Trophy Trainer at 600 squares.

Here in the Midwest, we are seeing a lot of Nostalgia 30 events run concurrently with Classic.  If you expand your choices to Nos 30 then modern/large airplanes are easier to find.  The prohibitive favorite would be the "Imitation" designed by some guy(!!!) in CA.  This airplane is not only a killer for Nos 30, but is completely competitive with the best of today...

[Charles Carter]

Hi Dennis,

I am in agreement with you regarding the " Imitation" is a very good flying plane.  Out here in the best coast there is "Classic" events and not N30 events. Is the "Imitation" classic legal?  Also some CD's question the thickness of the "Imitation" fuse to qualify as a profile model.

Charles

[Jim Hoffman]

Charles, Imitation is not classic legal

[Dennis Adamisin]

Hi Charles,
If there are no Nos 30 events then you are out of luck with the Imitation - except it is still a GREAT contemporary design.

The fuse on the Imitation is no wider than the fuse on the Classic Era Excalibur.  Mustunt 1's with crutch style fuselages are also typically are allowed in Classic.


Pity we do not have a nationally recognized standard definition of a profile stunt model....

[Dan McEntee]

Hi Charles,
If there are no Nos 30 events then you are out of luck with the Imitation - except it is still a GREAT contemporary design.

The fuse on the Imitation is no wider than the fuse on the Classic Era Excalibur.  Mustunt 1's with crutch style fuselages are also typically are allowed in Classic.


Pity we do not have a nationally recognized standard definition of a profile stunt model....

     The only place where fuselage width is mentioned is in the profile scale rules. The definition of a profile stunt model is simple, it should have a side mounted engine on a slab style fuselage. I don't care if it's a foot thick!. Look at ALL the profile kits that were produced during the 50's, 60's 70's and so on. They all fit this description, side mounted engine and slab style fuselage. The problem lies with people that don't want to accept this and inject their own view of what it should be, and then the fuselage width thing comes back in. The Imitation with an R/C type engine mount does not fit that description.
  There has never been an official AMA rule on profile stunt, and it has always been just a fun event. The P-40 event ( or Profile 40 event)  originated along these lines and just inserted the .40 size engine limits in order to sort of level the playing field and banned tuned pipes., again, trying to make this a fun and/or an entry level event. SIG was the originator of the P-40 event along these lines. Here in St. Louis, we fly their rules and added a 10 point (I think) penalty for electric models, because they have a distinct advantage in that there is no way to mount an electric motor "side ways."  You can get that back by having an electric model with no flaps and get the 10 point bonus.  Lots of electric P-Force models out there.
    This has all been argued many times before by people that have a model that doesn't fit the description, but want to fly the event and try to force their way into it. I think it really is quite simple by saying a profile model should resemble a typical profile stunt model kit.
   Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Dave_Trible]

Dan about a year ago PAMPA tried to take this on-create a general definition and rule about a profile fuselage.  Just between the board members it became a hot topic with as many ideas as people. If we created a rule and put it out there we'd have opened a can of worms nobody wanted.  We called it a day (after about a month of chewing it out) and turned out the lights on that one.  Local rule-rules!

Dave

[Trostle]

     The only place where fuselage width is mentioned is in the profile scale rules.

(ClipP

   Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

The AMA CL General rule  book has e a long paragraph that gives a general definition of the fuselage for profile models, then has a table to show the max fuselage width and max width of additional reinforcements for 1/2A Proto, Slow Combat, various racing events, and Scale.  It even indicates that the engine can be mounted vertically.

Keith

[Charles Carter]

Thank you all  for your comments. 

Charles Carter

[Mark Mc]

Hmmm....  How about, if instead of mounting the motor centered on the fuselage as usual, you built your profile model with the inner doubler without a cutout for the motor, and just a cutout in the balsa fuse and the outer doubler, offsetting the motor mount to the right so that the centerline of the motor shaft is to the side and there is no fairing around the motor, leaving it exposed?  Heck, even go so far as to have no motor cutout in the fuse or either doubler, and offset the motor mount all the way to the right.  I'm sure the interpretation would be up to the judges or the rules committee, but that seems like it'd be worth 10 points just for the drag penalty.

Here in St. Louis, we fly their rules and added a 10 point (I think) penalty for electric models, because they have a distinct advantage in that there is no way to mount an electric motor "side ways." 
   Dan McEntee