How to fly slowly

[Russell Shaffer]

I love it, Alan.  I feel better at higher speeds even though my maneuvers are even worse.  With my flying skills I'm way better off leaving the judges wondering what just happened.  If they know for sure, I've got a problem. Just ask Steve Helmick. 

[W.D. Roland]

Have been checking this thread several times a day.
and thinking........................

And slowly making an airplane work.

Saturday clocked the Chipmunk/OS35 at 5.34 sec lap.
This felt to slow as would get a wobble on square corners sometimes.
Airplane was hinging(? term) on overheads so removed 1/2oz tip weight.
This also cured 90% of the wobble in squares corners.
Still a small amount of hinging overhead with line tension getting borderline.

Apparently was rolling out and then "springing" back with G load changes.

This may go out the window when the C.G. gets moved back.(next change)

Things that should always be true.
Vertical up lines depend on high power(thrust) to low weight ratio.

Maintaining speed in maneuvers like horizontal 8s where 1/2 of manuver is down hill mostly
need a low wing loading. good power to weight always helps.

Long way to go still

Lighter must be better.

[Ted Fancher]

I'm reminded of George Aldrich's comment in his Nobler article (MAN?) that slow flying is harder because the judges can see your mistakes easier!

So I guess the ease of maneuvering goes both ways. Of course he was comparing his speeds to the old pattern flying techniques I think.

Good points, Alan.  I wrote many a time back when I was doing columns that I generally scored better with a faster flight than I did a slower one (often at the same contest back in the Tiger .46 days).  If a guy's sitting out there counting your boo boos you'd better not give him any more time than necessary to do so!  And, again, at least in my case, it is much easier to fly repeating shapes if the airspeed is constant and events happen quickly enough for a little visual retention to be operative.  In my opinion that's easier at a quicker pace than at a slower one.

On the other hand, I agree entirely with Brett's comments regarding Dougie Moon's patterns.  Clearly, the visualization thing isn't an issue with Doug.  He pretty much gets it right at speeds that would put yours truly  to sleep.

Ted

[Chris McMillin]

Have been checking this thread several times a day.
and thinking........................

And slowly making an airplane work.

Saturday clocked the Chipmunk/OS35 at 5.34 sec lap.
This felt to slow as would get a wobble on square corners sometimes.
Airplane was hinging(? term) on overheads so removed 1/2oz tip weight.
This also cured 90% of the wobble in squares corners.
Still a small amount of hinging overhead with line tension getting borderline.

Apparently was rolling out and then "springing" back with G load changes.

This may go out the window when the C.G. gets moved back.(next change)

Things that should always be true.
Vertical up lines depend on high power(thrust) to low weight ratio.

Maintaining speed in maneuvers like horizontal 8s where 1/2 of manuver is down hill mostly
need a low wing loading. good power to weight always helps.

Long way to go still

Lighter must be better.

Try a little engine offset and see if those overheads don't get a bit more tension.
Chris...

[W.D. Roland]

Thanks Chris.
Going to play with the line rake first as I am at the limit of adjustment on the aluminum engine mounting plate.
Need to see how it reacts to the rake adjustment any way.
Will need more rake when C.G is moved back.?
Need to see what it does with (more)rudder also but that would add drag as well.

Might have to speed things up a little but the slow is nice--I like slow. I am slow.

David

[john e. holliday]

The more you fly the slower the plane will become.  We used to fly 1/2A Combat Kittens on 35 foot lines just for grins.  Then fly the stunt plane,  Amazing how slow it seemed.  Same with the combat planes of the day. 

[Doug Moon]

Good points, Alan.  I wrote many a time back when I was doing columns that I generally scored better with a faster flight than I did a slower one (often at the same contest back in the Tiger .46 days).  If a guy's sitting out there counting your boo boos you'd better not give him any more time than necessary to do so!  And, again, at least in my case, it is much easier to fly repeating shapes if the airspeed is constant and events happen quickly enough for a little visual retention to be operative.  In my opinion that's easier at a quicker pace than at a slower one.

On the other hand, I agree entirely with Brett's comments regarding Dougie Moon's patterns.  Clearly, the visualization thing isn't an issue with Doug.  He pretty much gets it right at speeds that would put yours truly  to sleep.

Ted

One cant just fly slow and then fast with the same trim and motor setups.  That is the first thing that has to be decided on.  The plane and motor wont perform well in both speed ranges with the same setup.  It will either be very good at the faster speeds, 5.1 5.0, or very good at medium speeds 5.35-545, or very good at slower speeds 5.65-5.80.  It may feel pretty good at all the speeds but it will perform best at one range.  And you will too.  

The trim is setup for the flight speed.  It isnt a matter of turning the needle in and out.  As most know the needle sets the mix and the prop the speed.  Not the other way around.  

I have my 65 from my nats plane that generally flys a 5.80 lap time with corresponding maneuver speeds in my newest plane.  That plane is requiring a completely different prop during its initial flights.  The super flat pitch at 3.5 from the other plane wont move it faster than 6.10 and that is not going to cut it.  It needs to go faster at first while I get the balances setup and the CG in the right spot.  The pitch on the prop is up and the flight speed is up, 5.50 maybe, and the plane seems to like it.  But the motor run is horrid and my initial flights, just 8 so far, are miserable examples of flying.  

I got a ways to go but I think I can get it back to the 5.80 speeds.  

It is all in the trim.  I have had people fly my plane who fly around 5.10-5.40 and they say afterword the trim is nice and it is very solid everywhere they go they just have more time.

You take a 5.40 plane and just slow the motor down with the needle so it will fly slower and it will be a mess for sure and your judges will crush you all day.  But you get the strong motor run and the trim right you all of a sudden have a model that is in good trim but just going slower.  That will always give you more time to get it correct.  You can get your mind way ahead of the plane and really begin to see the whole maneuver as you fly it.  For me it feels like proactive flying instead of reactive flying.  It really helps when trying to get the over all geometry correct.  

Note: It always has to appear to be on rails.  That is how you avoid getting kicked by the judges when you fly slow or fast.  But it is much more noticeable when people fly slow because planes tend to "flop" or "hinge" here and there and they look under powered.  

That is just my .02 on it.  

Now anyone got any ideas on how to get tail weight out of a plane.....I got issues.....big ones...

[Howard Rush]

My airplane gets soggy at 5.4.  I am impressed at how you can go so slow.

Have you tried a carbon tank to lighten the nose? 

[Howard Rush]

Hold on.  By tail weight, do you mean ballast that you had to put in to get the CG back or is the airplane tailheavy?  A carbon tank could still be the solution.  If it's the former, you want a Fitzgerald-Tichy tank.  If it's the latter, you want one of mine. 

[Doug Moon]

Hold on.  By tail weight, do you mean ballast that you had to put in to get the CG back or is the airplane tailheavy?  A carbon tank could still be the solution.  If it's the former, you want a Fitzgerald-Tichy tank.  If it's the latter, you want one of mine. 

It is tail heavy.  I made a mistake when building it.  If i use the built up covered stab I put the nose at 9".  If I use the foam sheeted stab I am supposed to put the nose about 9.75-10".  I used the foam for stiffness and 9" moment.  OUCH!!  I need weight out of the tail. Or weigh in the nose. 

[Will Hinton]

I heartly agree with Doug's approach to the 5.8 lap times.  I have switched from a 4 pitch, 12.5" three blade to a 4.25 pitch and got the airplane down from 5.5's to 5.7's with a happier engine run. Then, after nicking a prop in Dayton two years ago the only thing I had with me was a 13 X 4.25.  I had no choice but to use it, and I hit my 5.7 lap time but had even better tension throughout the pattern.  Really solid on top and more consistent everywhere.
Now fpr two years my faithful old 65 is happily cranking out exactly what I want.  Maybe my patterns aren't expert class yet, but others are giving me hints that the dreaded "moving up" time is rapidly approaching and the scores have increased much more rapidly with the slower pattern speeds.
Will

[john e. holliday]

Doug you may not like this idea, but, a dremel tool and ex-acto knife do wonders at removing unwanted wood.  Hate to see you ruin a gorgeous finish tho.

[phil c]

Hi Phil,


1. When you say "line length 65 ft" do you mean eye to eye?

2.  or do you mean total AMA rule length? center of handle to center of plane's fuselage? (which means that the max eye to eye line length can be 66 feet 10 inches, less if your using a handle with cables)

3. or do you mean center of rotation (usually our  chest at the shoulder, the way most of us fly) to the center of the plane's fuselage? This is the only dimension we can use when computing speed from lap times. (unless you have very accurate on board speed sensing equipment ;-)


In my SS earlier on this subject I gave the eye to eye line length but used #3 above to compute the speeds. 

I think there is a lot of confusion on the actual speeds of our planes on different lines and at different lap times because many of the charts that were published in the past did not use center of rotation to the center of fuse dimensions in their creation. I only ask the above so that we can all make sure we are using the same #s.

Thanks again for the force #s 

Regards 

I appreciate your opinion Rudy, hopefully stuff I write helps people out.

I always use the AMA line length.  Its purpose is only to give a consistent calculation from plane to plane and time to time.  That is what the airplane sees.  Adding in arm length etc. confuses things, since a good pilot often uses a lot of arm and body action to help the plane along through the tight spots.  So it is impossible to calculate a truly accurate speed, and not really needed.

The plane really only sees the drag(rake) of the lines and the swinging of the line weight around in maneuvers.  This can really screw up a plane if, as Doug points out, it is flying slower than its comfort zone.  This effect is really easy to see when you get a slow engine run.  The lines bend back, the plane wants to come in on the RWO unless you whip it through, the square maneuvers are very hard to keep smooth because the plane rocks around as the lines swing through the corner.  The 8 intersections get screwed up by the plane lollygagging around in during the control reversal.

The other critical factor is the pilot's comfort zone for speed.  After skimming the ground in numerous outside square and triangles I can state unequivocally that if the plane is going too fast for you you will crash.  If the plane/prop/conditions permit the slower the better.  There is a noticeable difference in the reaction time required between a 5.3 lap and a 4.9 lap on the same plane, or between flying the same plane/lines in a 5mph breeze or a 15mph breeze.

[Alan Hahn]

ahhhh,
now the secrets are coming out

[John Sunderland]

IMHO flying stunt well does not permit slow lap times on nice days and faster ones in turbulent weather. Consistency is and always will be the name of the game. Since slow lap times can not succeed in turbulent conditions it is necessary to pick a fairly brisk speed to fly at regardless of the conditions.

In more than twenty years of competing with the best fliers in the world I do not think I have ever met anyone who was consistently successful while flying slow lap times. If I had to pick a range of all around useable lap times I would look in the range of 4.9 to 5.2 seconds per lap and not much slower. Can you fly slower? Sure!

In choosing a lap time bear in mind that it is the model which is doing the flying and not you! The model must be flown at a speed which will permit it to execute every manoeuvre as well as the last in all conditions without variance. That you "LIKE " to fly slow has little to do with successful mastery of the pattern. If your model is struggling at some point in the pattern you need to pick the lap speed up and learn to deal with it. Longer lines with the same lap speed will yield higher air speeds and make the model fly crisper manoeuvres.   

Kim.

Very well put. We are talking tenths of seconds here. 5.1 and 5.2 were norms for conventional 4-2-4 stunt engine runs. I learned to be comfortable as fast as 4.9 and 5.0. depending on the airplane. Lap times  of 5.3 to 5.6 just gives a little extra time and took me a good bit to get used to. Any way you slice it, presentation with a crisp flow looks good. Doug  Moons bird looks like it is taking  forever but the execution of each and every turn  simply looks good. His deal works well and I am surprised more guys havent copied his set-up. Of course the lack of four blade props could account for that.