Is it the plane or the pilot that makes a champ?

[Russell]

Lots of CL PA (Stunt) planes to choose from, but does it really matter? Isn't mostly the flyer/pilot that makes it all happen to make a pattern look really good?


For example if we all flew a Nobler wouldn't that separate skill set from plane selection? Could a flyer win it all nowadays with a Nobler?

[Eric Viglione]

Lots of CL PA (Stunt) planes to choose from, but does it really matter? Isn't mostly the flyer/pilot that makes it all happen to make a pattern look really good?


For example if we all flew a Nobler wouldn't that separate skill set from plane selection? Could a flyer win it all nowadays with a Nobler?

You mean like an IROC event where everyone drove an identical Camaro? Yeah, we almost have that now, it's called FAI and the plane is a Shark. (Donning flame retardent suit). LOL! OK OK, sorry... couldn't resist.

Yes, a top pilot will wring the most out of whatever you hand him, and a clutz will plant a Shark just as fast as his beater plane. After doing a few fly arounds at the Nats with top pilots, I was blown away by how similarly they trimmed planes, with most differences being very minor in handle setups, and was pleasantly surprised that mine was considered "in the noise" by them as well.

I think we all start out with wildly variable levels of performance as beginners, and if we do make it to the pointy end of the stunt curve, we tend to gravitate to a very similar setup. (Nothing is 100% but as a rule...) BUT... the other big factor I think is often missed is the ritualistic attitude needed to get consistent results. Sticking to a routine and recognizing the rare occasions you need to change it is another key factor, but not freaking out and needlessly changing something that is working fine is almost more important from what I've seen.

That said, to really try to answer your question, the better the plane flys and engine runs, the less of a distraction it is from the pilot concentrating on shapes and sizes, etc. If you are fighting the plane, you have already given up points on every stunt before you even started. A champ by definition would make the all out effort to build and execute a top performing plane. Todays planes arent all that different from 20 years ago, with most changes to accommodate new power packages and adjustable trim, along with better understanding of trim, and rigidity benefits. Very few classic planes come to mind that might be competitive with the right power, and the small Nobler isn't one of them...only because it wont carry the weight of the modern power Id want to run, and most of the others have too small of a tail and short moments to turn the weight up front. So, yes the plane matters, in that you pick something reasonably modern in numbers and build it to modern standards, but the power trane is the real boon we have enjoyed since the inception of the low pitch run, Pipe, Epower, etc.

EricV

[Mike Griffin]

When I lived in Georgia, I saw Bob Dixon take a worn out recovered old red Nobler with a FOX 35 on it and win many a contest in Expert.  The overwhelming factor in winning is the pilot.  Look at what Joe Gilbert has been able to do with a ringmaster. 

Mike

[Skip Chernoff]

The truth is the top pilot will have a better Nobler than everyone else.

[Dan McEntee]

  It's like what they used to say about the late, great Jan Opperman, legendary outlaw sprint car driver; "He can his'n and beat your'n, and then take your'n and beat his'n!".  Some guys can win flying the boxes they came in. But  I will guarantee you they put in a LOT of laps getting to that level.  One airplane won't make an intermediate pilot an expert. If something happens to that airplane, he won't know what it took to make that airplane as good as it was. There are race car drivers in NASCAR right now, that if their crew chief gives them a good car with the right set up for a particular track, that driver is fast. But if there is a problem with how the car handles, they have no idea what to tell the crew chief what to change. There are C/L stunt pilots out there like that also. The champions,( because the event is what it is with the builder of the model rule) are the complete pilot, that know the airplane because they built it, and understand what it takes to adjust it to get the results he wants in competition. And even with that going for him, he still needs a good coach to help him refine the smaller nuances of his presentation.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Brett Buck]

Lots of CL PA (Stunt) planes to choose from, but does it really matter? Isn't mostly the flyer/pilot that makes it all happen to make a pattern look really good?


For example if we all flew a Nobler wouldn't that separate skill set from plane selection? Could a flyer win it all nowadays with a Nobler?

   This is one of those topic that just drives me crazy, it gets answered time after time and no one believes or wants to believe the answer. To be successful in stunt, you have to master ALL the skills, not just flying.

    And no, you aren't going to be competitive flying a Nobler. For all intents and purposes it was technically obsolete 50+ years ago (about the time the Shark 45/Humbler came along in 1959).

   Then, as now, people didn't pay any attention and kept trying to thrash away for a long time afterwards. But if Bob Geiseke, who knows more about Nobler and derivatives and Fox 35s as anyone who has ever lived, gave up in the early mid-80's can't, then its a safe bet that no one else will. Which I feel compelled to point out was ***30 years ago***.

    Yes, David Fitzgerald would beat almost everyone like a drum with his Chipmunk/ST46 as long as he pleased to, and Paul Walker and his Skylark/McCoy 35 would beat almost everyone like a drum as long as he pleased as well. Maybe, there's an outside chance that someone else could come along with a Nobler/Fox 35 and attain their level with Chipmunks and Skylarks. At which point David would go get his Thundergazer and blow this hypothetical person out of the water. 

    Point being, David and Paul and people of a the same general category aren't trying to win 200 local Advanced contests against guys with Noblers, they are trying to beat each other. To do that, they have to master a far greater array of skills far beyond flying.

   By the way,  the vast, vast majority of the people whose airplanes I fly are *very severely limited* by their equipment and many of them would fly a class higher than they do if they had even a mediocre airplane/engine. We have seen many cases where people have picked up an estimated 50-100 points in a few flights after either getting a good airplane or having an expert do trim adjustments for them. Getting even a decent but modest airplane like a properly-trimmed  Skyray/20FP would greatly improve their scores, and I don't just mean beginners.


     Brett

   

[Peter Nevai]

I believe Eric has it right. Everything being equal then it is a combination of plane and pilot. But if things are not equal then the skilled pilot flying a Nobler will trounce the unskilled pilot. This is because a skilled pilot can compensate for a whole load of deficiencies in the model on the fly. Anyone can buy a Honda sport bike that is ready for the race track right off the show room floor but will be beaten every single time by a experienced racer even on less capable machinery.

[john e. holliday]

As I read this again it makes me remember a story in one of the magazines about Bob Palmer.  Seems a fellow competitor thought it was totally the plane and engine combo the reason Bob kept winning all the time.  with the permission of the event director Bob traded planes with the competitor for the day if he could have a test flight on the plane.   Seems afterward the guy never complained again as Bob won again with a strange plane.   I've had guys fly my planes so I could see how it looked and they would make me look bad.   Of course I'm not that great either,

[mike londke]

Joe Gilbert kills the competition with a Ringmaster on a regular basis. I saw him do it at several contests just this summer. He's an amazing pilot.

[RandySmith]

Lots of CL PA (Stunt) planes to choose from, but does it really matter? Isn't mostly the flyer/pilot that makes it all happen to make a pattern look really good?


For example if we all flew a Nobler wouldn't that separate skill set from plane selection? Could a flyer win it all nowadays with a Nobler?

In  Precision Aerobatics  it is without question the  PILOT

Randy

[Mike Griffin]

In  Precision Aerobatics  it is without question the  PILOT

Randy

Exactly what I said in my earlier post. 

mike

[Mike Griffin]

Joe Gilbert kills the competition with a Ringmaster on a regular basis. I saw him do it at several contests just this summer. He's an amazing pilot.

Exactly what I said in my above post.

Mike

[Brent Williams]

1. Joe Gilbert kills the competition with a Ringmaster on a regular basis.

2.  He's an amazing pilot.

The statements don't necessarily imply cause and effect. The most important part of your declaration is this:
- Joe is an amazing pilot. 

An amazing pilot will be able trim, compensate and fly a bad plane to good results.  The fact that Joe Gilbert, Paul Walker, Dave Fitzgerald, Ted Fancher and Brett Buck can take a well trimmed, (nostalgic to the point of lunacy, notorious, ubiquitious, addling, mostly bad plane) ringmaster and put up a 550+ score, doesn't mean that the average or poor flyer will be able to fly a Ringmaster (or that same Ringmaster) straight to the Walker Cup.  It also doesn't mean that same average person will be able to show up with a new SV-11/Impact/Thunder Gazer and march straight to the podium without having expended A LOT of effort and burned copious jugs of fuel/electrons.  I'm leaving absolute innate ability apart from this conversation, also.

As Brett laid out earlier, you need great equipment that's trimmed properly to be able to make progress.  Once you are past the constantly crashing, learning phase, you need a plane that allows you to fly the shapes accurately and consistently at a speed that is comfortable. 

I can attest to these principles.  I have only been flying for a few years.  I can go back 2.5 years and look at my progress from having no skills to being able to fly a decent pattern.  I'm far from good at this time, but my flying has improved quite markedly this season by flying a plane that is able to be flown competitively and that I can trust in most situations.  It has decent stunt design parameters and it has a known, good power system (LA46) that runs great.  I just put up flight after flight, where I listen to the coaching and try to improve each time I go up.  It's working for me.  It would be much harder if I was trying to do this with a Ringmaster or some other poor, antiquated design.

That said...I will be flying a nice S-1 Ringmaster/McCoy 35 in the upcoming Ringmaster Fly-a-thon.  You all should too!

[Brett Buck]

An amazing pilot will be able trim, compensate and fly a bad plane to good results.  The fact that Joe Gilbert, Paul Walker, Dave Fitzgerald, Ted Fancher and Brett Buck can take a well trimmed, (nostalgic to the point of lunacy, notorious, ubiquitious, addling, mostly bad plane) ringmaster and put up a 550+ score, doesn't mean that the average or poor flyer will be able to fly a Ringmaster (or that same Ringmaster) straight to the Walker Cup.

  As an aside, at some point it become very hard to separate the naturally skilled from those who have just done well enough and smart enough for long enough to learn how to cope. Of the list above, I would be hard-pressed to say which way (natural or decades of flying) any of them lean, aside from maybe Ted, who after watching most of his flights for the last 30+ years, seems to have the edge. It's clear who is the LEAST, yours truly, but I am not complaining because I have managed and continue to manage very well over the years despite limited physical gifts (and to the original point, because my engines almost alway run, my airplane is almost always in good trim, and I have had the very best coaching).

  Only two people stand out to me as having remarkable natural skills - the late Jason Pearson, and 67 NATs Champion Bart Klapinski. Jason, who most of you have never heard of, could do remarkable things with the absolutely WORST airplanes I had ever seen. The Twister constructed entirely from pine was one of the *best* of all of his airplanes.

      Brett

[Tim Wescott]

Lots of CL PA (Stunt) planes to choose from, but does it really matter? Isn't mostly the flyer/pilot that makes it all happen to make a pattern look really good?


For example if we all flew a Nobler wouldn't that separate skill set from plane selection? Could a flyer win it all nowadays with a Nobler?

Any given combination of plane & pilot will be held back by a combination of pilot skill and the plane's ability to fly.  A crappy plane will hold a good pilot back, a crappy pilot won't be able to get even close to the most out of a really good plane. 

(This is, by the way, why I'm on the Brett Buck Sig Skyray bandwagon.  When you're first learning stunt, you simply aren't good enough to gain more than ten points or so from flying the Very Best Airplane of All.  The Very Best Airplane of All is going to require trimming that's beyond your ability to see the need for, and when you crash it it'll take a whole lot more effort and knowledge to fix (possibly more knowledge than you have).  A Skyray is not going to hold you back in Beginner, or even in Intermediate, but not having a plane because those flapped jobbies take longer to fix will.)

Yes, if we all flew Noblers then that would separate skill set from plane selection -- but no, I don't think a pilot could win it all now flying a Nobler.

[peabody]

From looking at results, it appears as if the European, Asian fliers seem to feel that it is the pilot.....look at all the Sharks

Have fun

[Brett Buck]

From looking at results, it appears as if the European, Asian fliers seem to feel that it is the pilot.....look at all the Sharks

    Given that the FAI has foolishly removed modeling from their modeling competition, of course that what it is. Orestes, Igor, Ritchie, Paul, David, etc, i.e. all recent World Champions have proven capable of building and trimming their own models, but at some point someone who couldn't otherwise win, will win.

    That will be the day that "F2B World Champion" will lose all meaning and value.

    Brett

[Ted Fancher]

" That will be the day that "F2B World Champion" will lose all meaning and value. "

Amen!

[john e. holliday]

Isn't it that way for all FAI events?   Remember when I was playing with F2C the model construction/developed had to be shared between the pilot and pitman.

[Brett Buck]

Isn't it that way for all FAI events?   Remember when I was playing with F2C the model construction/developed had to be shared between the pilot and pitman.

   Shamefully, yes, most if not all. A classic case of utterly missing the point. I would note that there are more than a few in the FAI hierarchy who appear to delude themselves about putting model airplane contests in the Olympics, this is more-or-less consistent with that idea.

    Brett

[M Spencer]

" That will be the day that "F2B World Champion" will lose all meaning and value. "

Yea , it really need some devisions to give it any credibility now . 

IF you had , say , a Manufacturers Championship , and a Pilots Championship ,

in this modern short attention span hyped op consumer age 

AND in Flying a Electric & a I.C. E. Devision , it could get intresting again . The Conveniance of electric has de skilled the I . C . Fueling requirements .  and thus the tensions and barometric precision .

Also in Classic & Vintage , if the points were for the same generation electrical equipment as the aeroplane . . . .,

=============================================================================

My Thoughts is a CORRECT ' Media Relay ' of the Event ( LIKE THE COMMING TEAM TRIALS ) would intest most petrol heads if PROPERLY PESENTED . ( 100.000.000 viewers !_- you Might Get a Few More ENTRANTS ! )

Tho my idea of CORRECT is cool calm documetaryish , like Bruce Willaces endless summer / on any sunday , perhaps. or the golf or tennis . Mature Audiance . Not the slap dash hysteria typical of motor / motor cycle
race presentation moneybag events . 

If NOBODY Tries It , we aint got a show , long term .
@#$% Sites demand better / more skilled flying. So would enhace the prestige .  So location for camera etc prevails .
Anyone got a cherry picker , a zoom lense , and a bi of nouse , to do a docu on the coming team trials, as a taster for main stream media .