News:



  • June 08, 2024, 11:28:33 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?  (Read 11654 times)

Offline Steve Fitton

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2272
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #50 on: May 31, 2012, 12:09:33 PM »
Quit messing around and go with an ST .60
Steve

Offline Heman Lee

  • AeroManiacs
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
    • AeroManiacs
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #51 on: May 31, 2012, 12:19:46 PM »
    Five years ago I built a "Fancherized Twister" which is still being flown by Steve Helmick.  It has a Magnum .36 on it and I never considered it to be over powered, in fact I thought a little more wouldn't hurt.  I sure Tim is having fun, he's just trying to learn and sometimes a seemingly simple question can become overwhelming with so many different answers.  I have and engine that I have offered Tim which will work fine if it is a true F Twister. 

A lot of us build a particular model because it brings us back to our youth.  I have a particular affinity to the Sig Banshee because that it what I learned to stunt on.  I have a new Banshee kit on my work bench that I what to put an LA25 into for our local .25 Stunt event.  When I first meet Paul Pomposo, he was flying a Sig Banshee with only a .19 engine.  It was a Fancharized Banshee built by Ted himself and probable only weighed 30oz.  I am thinking about doing the same thing without chopping off the nose or changing the design, so I can use it in Classic, P40, 25 Stunt, Profile, etc.

Offline dirty dan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #52 on: May 31, 2012, 12:53:44 PM »
Being a glutton for punishment I'll chip in and say that if I were interested in a Fancherized Twister--and I am not, the Wimpact being much more to my tastes in a flapped profile stunt model--it would be built from really good wood and powered by a 20FP with BB T-U.

But the motor would be mounted on pads.

Should the first-choice power not haul the mail I'd switch to a piped 25FP.

If this didn't work out as planned I'd switch to a Magnum 36 with tongue muffler.

The 46LA is a pretty neat stunt motor, agreed. I don't actually own one but it just seems like way too much motor for this project.

Ah, but my real advice is set to these ruminations aside. Instead, get that Flite Streak working to your satisfaction. Then put most of your effort into the Skyray 35 instead of needlessly complicating things with the proper trimming of a flapped model. Especially as flapped models are not a cure-all for any performance-related shortcomings of which I am aware, most certainly none in the skill-level classes of Intermediate and, yes, even Advanced.

Dan

An edit: While I don't want to shred the preceding, not finding that approach very honest, after some reflection I have to wonder if a 20FP w/BB T-U is a completely viable option for the model under discussion. Yes, it would work. I know that even I could get it to work. My first Wimpact, while built with all the stuff and the intentions to power it with a piped motor, was initially flown with a Brett-spec 20FP. Just to see if it could be done.

And it could, even if the model couldn't be said to fly with authority, particularly when powering up and over the top of the reverse wingover. (That particular Wimpact was 425 inches and around 35-36 ounces.) I pretty much fixed this issue with 25% fuel but as the real goal was a piped 25FP it didn't take long to fit a pipe. The 450-inch Wimpact and the W500 have never been flown on anything but a piped 25FP.

Bottom Line: I cannot advise anyone with 4 or 5 models under their belt building a Twister--with Ted's mods or not--and especially from an unmolested kit and then powering it with a box-stock 20FP. Too many opportunities to go slightly wrong...

Dan

« Last Edit: June 01, 2012, 11:44:11 AM by dirty dan »
Dan Rutherford

Offline Bob Reeves

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3415
    • Somethin'Xtra Inc.
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #53 on: May 31, 2012, 03:03:19 PM »
I flew a Modified Twister all the way through Intermediate to the middle of Advanced then for a couple more years in Profile. Started with an OS 35S, too much vibration, then a choked down FP-40, not enough power for Oklahoma wind then a Saito 30, set up wrong but managed to place at Brodaks that year and finally a Saito 40A that brought home a bunch of hardware and stayed on it and till I retired the airplane.

Wouldn't think of putting a 25 on one, at least not for the conditions we have to fly in.. If I were to build another it would have a Saito 40 from day-1.

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #54 on: May 31, 2012, 03:26:03 PM »
Ah, but my real advice is set to these ruminations aside.

Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.

Hmm.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Randy Cuberly

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3674
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #55 on: May 31, 2012, 04:24:40 PM »
That's cuz you're at 2500 feet.
Chris...

Well Chris there is something to what you say about the altitude, however I've flown this setup in a couple of different airplanes here in Tucson 2500 Ft and in LA a couple hundred ft above sea level and other than a slight needle setting change and a little more nitro here, it works very well there also (maybe even better than here).  It's a sweet spot setup on the LA46...and I've tried a lot of different setups including a bunch that didn't work very well.  (Port timing and head volume changes).
That said on a smaller airplane like the Twister even a weak setup would probably work fine as long as it gave a steady run.
My airplanes were all 620 to 650 sq in 53 to 56 oz range.  The more powerful setup would be necessary for that especially here in Tucson at 100+ degrees and 6000 to 7000 ft density altitude.  That's where the real test begins as you well know!

Randy Cuberly
Randy Cuberly
Tucson, AZ

Offline dirty dan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #56 on: May 31, 2012, 04:49:56 PM »
Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.

Hmm.


Yes, and it is also accurate to say that with proper trimming and a few decent practice sessions your ARF Flite Streak would net you scores 50 points higher.

Take the information gained with that model applied to the Skyray 35 and your scores would surely improve again.

All, please note, without a summer building effort and dealing with the complications of a flapped model.

Don't you or anyone else make me do it (!) but I have quite the story about one of my own Skyray 35s and flying it in Expert PA. The story has been told before. Nobody wants to hear it again. Trust me.

Dan
 

Dan Rutherford

Offline Scott B. Riese

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 500
  • Just a student of stunt
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #57 on: May 31, 2012, 05:36:15 PM »
You are keeping in mind that I am by no means an expert flyer, and that I'm not going to be tossing out 70% of the wood to replace it with contest-grade.  Yes?

WHY???????

Nothing wrong with the kit. My kit planes came out at 35 oz. The wing loading with a twister with handle it.
Scott Riese
Portland, Oregon
AMA 528301

Offline Scott B. Riese

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 500
  • Just a student of stunt
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #58 on: May 31, 2012, 05:49:47 PM »
Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.

Hmm.

OK WRONG.....The regional Management had NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR "GIFT"........"I did"
I was asked to give out the TWISTER to someone that could USE a kit, to build to help, improve in OVERALL STUNT. YOU where the logical choice. Hence..........Beginner Stunt....ONE ELECTRIC and ONE Carbon based.....Easy to discertain WHO WILL RECIEVE the "GIFT" We as Stunt flyer's want to help YOU and Others to improve. IF the Twister is NOT up to your standards I have a Brodak P-51 B that I can give you. If you need an engine I have many OS-40 FP reworked by me for you also.....FREE. I want you to have fun!!! Just remember one thing.....DON'T RE-INVENT THE WHEEL.

Your Friend

Scott
Scott Riese
Portland, Oregon
AMA 528301

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #59 on: May 31, 2012, 06:02:17 PM »
OK WRONG.....The regional Management had NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR "GIFT"........"I did"

I misunderstood then -- did I miss part of the announcement?

Quote
I was asked to give out the TWISTER to someone that could USE a kit, to build to help, improve in OVERALL STUNT. YOU where the logical choice. Hence..........Beginner Stunt....ONE ELECTRIC and ONE Carbon based.....Easy to discertain WHO WILL RECIEVE the "GIFT" We as Stunt flyer's want to help YOU and Others to improve. IF the Twister is NOT up to your standards I have a Brodak P-51 B that I can give you. If you need an engine I have many OS-40 FP reworked by me for you also.....FREE. I want you to have fun!!! Just remember one thing.....DON'T RE-INVENT THE WHEEL.

It's getting built with stuff from the kit box, with wood replacements only where things are truly atrocious (I'll show you the pieces -- they're bad), to the Fancherized twister plans.  I'm sure it'll be plenty good.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Scott B. Riese

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 500
  • Just a student of stunt
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #60 on: May 31, 2012, 06:27:11 PM »
I Think so......Mike Coner gave the kit to John Thompson to give to someone that IS DISERVING of a good and reliant plane. John had so much to do I was asked to help........So Sorry for the confusion
Scott Riese
Portland, Oregon
AMA 528301

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #61 on: May 31, 2012, 07:36:57 PM »
Round and round. Our CL discussions often go like that.

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #62 on: May 31, 2012, 07:43:44 PM »
Tim,,
I have flown Scotts reworked FP,even the one done by coleman lantern, on a picnic bench in McMinnville after how many beers Scott?? LOL( and some done by me as well just for the record  H^^), run them the way he says and its a perfect match for the twister,, thats what mine flew on,,,

BONUS ROUND,, Scott is offering an engine sans financial commitment,, sounds like to me that you are in fat city dude,,
This is the kind of generousity that makes me love stunt guys,,

that said,, I still think that if you were to just once,, set the flight streak up exactly as recomended,, and fly it that way,, it would be a learning experience for you.

There is a lot to be said for flapless airplanes,, my recomendation would be to build the twister,, but fly out your stable of flapless airplanes bringing the twister in to the picture at some time later,, That way you can enjoy the finishing process, and it wont go for naught,, ( if it meets terra firma at the wrong moment,, )

For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #63 on: May 31, 2012, 07:48:06 PM »
that said,, I still think that if you were to just once,, set the flight streak up exactly as recomended,, and fly it that way,, it would be a learning experience for you.

There is a lot to be said for flapless airplanes,, my recomendation would be to build the twister,, but fly out your stable of flapless airplanes bringing the twister in to the picture at some time later,, That way you can enjoy the finishing process, and it wont go for naught,, ( if it meets terra firma at the wrong moment,, )

That's certainly my intent -- both of those.  It's summer crashingflying season, and I (oh thank heavens) have almost more paying work than I can handle, so I figure that if I start the Twister now it'll be ready for covering when the rains start.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13788
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #64 on: May 31, 2012, 08:04:25 PM »
Is the LA 25 plenty-o-motor for a Fancherized Twister, assuming that o

   The best-flying Fancherized Twisters I have ever flown were powered with 25FPs. The new version of the 25LA would have no problem with this airplane up to about the mid 30s, if not more. They were routinely flown with Veco 19s in WAM A Stunt by the Fitzgerald and McClellan clans and flew generally better than 35-sized airplanes of the era (early-mid 70's).

    Brett

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #65 on: June 01, 2012, 03:12:27 AM »
Veco 19s can haul. They were for years the preferred power for many in Clown Racing at Brodak. Acquitting themselves well against more race dedicated engines. There was a Nats winning stunt flier from the East Coast who flew a Humbug, I believe, with a Veco 19. He didn't win with this particular combo, but placed high enough to raise controversy. Since this comparatively small power plant hung on a flapless long winged plane was defiantly unlike the orthodox. Looking at Eric Rule's cite, I see the Humbug spanned 58" and weighed in at 44 ounces.  I have seen many speed limited combat planes ripping fast with LA 25s up front. These planes are not small. Pull out the venturi, stick on a bladder, needle until the LA 25 hits a teeth drilling screech. We've tacked these engines at 20 thousand and above. Since they pull these foamies with biggish wings near eighty miles an hour, I have to agree, yes, there's plenty of power to do a Twister through the pattern. How different in approach tho to the sweet flying, docile, ARF Flite Streak I saw last weekend, using the self same LA 25 to power a fairly light shorter winged stunt/trainer at speeds (and with a level of responsiveness) friendly to pilots new to stunt.

This evening I was talking with a friend who builds race cars, hot rods and the like. A man having built countless fast and REAL FAST engines by this time. My newest Twister sized profile on the dining room table (a flapped Magician powered by a Tower 40 with.... head gaskets... and...). Contrasting this plane with the inverted mounted engines on a few full bodied planes nearby, he thinking that the inverted engine would feed better and so forth. Then I said, well no, not necessarily since the engines are subject to so many different and constantly changing forces. Then I started to explain a usuable/ideal stunt run. How these SIMPLISTIC engines can be tuned to increase power in this part of the maneuver, reduce power in that part of the maneuver, switching off and on in modes, how altering the compression, fuel, venturi size, prop, tank type, tank height,(and... and.. and...) how these tuning methods can be after much guesstimation recipeed (sp) to work on a given field at given temperatures... to deliver a near optimum stunt run...

It's 4:30 am on the right coast time for delusions and insights. Here's my thinking at the moment. Our 2 stroke power plants are comparatively simple in design. We are attempting to make these simple engines do very complex things. Up power, lower power in micro seconds, responding in specific ways to big differences in loads, a wide variety of loads, ridiculous challenge. Impossible. Certainly in the abstract. What would the vector analysis look like if we tried to make an accurate diagram of all forces that actually act on an engine/fuel delivery system in, let's say, a loop. Arrows, every which way. Then add the indeterminacy of a given days barometric pressure, relationship to sea level, temperature, humidity, fuel mix. On and on.

So. What's up. What do we do. How do we handle the near impossible complexity of simple, pragmatic technologies. Like throwing rocks. Or boomerangs. Or designing dug out canoes. Or designing sailing ships to go up the Nile. Or.  Seems to me we do what we've always done. Trial and error, educated guessing, in other words experience as teacher. Which means, some of us will turn out to have a better feel, a better intuition, a better way to balance out this complexity, so that a workable, doable, effective solution is derived. An effective solution is not the same, in fact it often is contrary to, a philosophical debate of abstractions.

My conclusion. Find a mentor who makes the sh-t work. This is different from taking advice from someone who SOUNDS convincing. Often the folks who make SH-T work may or may not be able to explain why the SH-T works. In fact they may be dead wrong in their explanations... But they have a feel, an intuition, an internal math(?) physics(?) brilliance(?). Listen to them. Try their approach. Then try their approach again.

My thought for the person who started the thread. Sounds like you've got some mentors around who know their SH-T...
« Last Edit: June 01, 2012, 05:15:31 AM by Dennis Moritz »

Offline Doug Knoyle

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 95
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #66 on: June 01, 2012, 01:01:57 PM »
That may happen, particularly if I make it through the next few contests without crashing.  I think a full-bore whap into asphalt may be more expensive with an electric plane than with a slime-powered one.

I have all I need except the batteries and a timer, so my initial expense may be less than a new motor if I get cheap batteries.
What motor (what is the KV, suggested prop, WATTs, etc) and controller do you have?  If it is right for the Twister, you can complete the setup for < $50.
AMA 60591

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #67 on: June 01, 2012, 01:33:32 PM »
What motor (what is the KV, suggested prop, WATTs, etc) and controller do you have?  If it is right for the Twister, you can complete the setup for < $50.

I've got a Phoenix 45 and an eFlight 15, kv = 950 (or so), max power = 425.  I can't remember the recommended prop, but the numbers say that it'll do just fine if I can keep the weight down to 38 ounces.

So I really just need a couple of 4-cell batteries of around 2500mAh, and a timer.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #68 on: June 01, 2012, 02:11:32 PM »
Cheap motors. Cheap batteries. Not recommended by my e-mentor.

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #69 on: June 01, 2012, 02:20:58 PM »
eflight  and castle are not cheap just for the record
For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #70 on: June 01, 2012, 02:51:51 PM »
I wouldn't think of using el-cheapo batteries if I didn't crash all the time.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #71 on: June 01, 2012, 04:20:10 PM »
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #72 on: June 01, 2012, 04:26:19 PM »
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.
Doug is trying to talk me into electric.  I almost certainly won't go there with this plane, although I might with the next one I build.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #73 on: June 01, 2012, 04:48:36 PM »
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.

Y'know, I had to think about why I find this response interesting.

So far there have been 19 different powerplants suggested in this thread (21 if you count "piped FP 25" and "modified FP 40" as different from 'regular old').  At no point in the discussion have you suddenly announced that I'm wasting your time until the second or third time that electric power is brought up.

So -- which of the other 18 (or 20) powerplants would you have said were "wasting your time" if I were to seriously consider them?  I'm curious.  Can I only choose something that you have mentioned if I want to avoid offending you?  If that's the rule for everyone I've got to build a whole lotta planes to keep everyone happy!
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #74 on: June 01, 2012, 06:15:23 PM »
If that's the rule for everyone I've got to build a whole lotta planes to keep everyone happy!

Tim, you gotta build a whole lotta planes just to have a fleet to survive the summer dude,, LOL H^^
For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12829
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #75 on: June 01, 2012, 06:49:52 PM »
Tim, you gotta build a whole lotta planes just to have a fleet to survive the summer dude,, LOL H^^
Well, yes.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #76 on: June 01, 2012, 07:05:14 PM »
Tim, I suggested that you use whatever the folks around you make work. Doesn't sound to me like I needed or expected you to do what I do. Good luck. Have fun.

Offline Steve Helmick

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 9955
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #77 on: June 01, 2012, 07:55:51 PM »
Well...have the aforementioned F.Twister with a Magnum XLS .36 at 50 oz or so, and had a 38 oz Skyray with a .25LA (both with .272" venturi, OBTW). I'd say that a 30 oz F.Twister would do ok with the .25. The sweet ol' Magnum .36 (probably 16 gallons through it by now, and as many as 13 one-flip starts in a row) would appreciate a 38 oz load to pull. If I was building an F.Twister for a .46LA, I'd stretch the wing a rib bay on each tip, and shoot for 40 oz. Otherwise, keep it simple to keep it light.  H^^ Steve
"The United States has become a place where professional athletes and entertainers are mistaken for people of importance." - Robert Heinlein

In 1944 18-20 year old's stormed beaches, and parachuted behind enemy lines to almost certain death.  In 2015 18-20 year old's need safe zones so people don't hurt their feelings.

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #78 on: June 02, 2012, 06:27:23 AM »
Tim. I've been there. Get it. There are, oddly enough, so many solutions and possibilities in our old time hobby, CL stunt. Bench flying (?), weighing these alternative approaches, thinking them through, thinking them through differently, part of the fun. Best.

Offline phil myers

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #79 on: June 02, 2012, 06:57:00 AM »
What is the wingspan of the F/Twister and the standard Twister. And a normal, finished weight,(for both). Just curious. BTW ,I finished an extended Mercury Cobra-45" (flapped) instead of  40.5" came out at 34oz with an Enya ss30. 4.3 sec laps -55ft lines
Phil

Offline john e. holliday

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22794
Re: LA 25 in a Fancherized Twister?
« Reply #80 on: June 02, 2012, 09:07:34 AM »
Tim, you need to change your mind  set.   I have to once in a while.   Why are you crashing?   It can't be the plane design as there are people flying the design without crashing.   At a stunt clinic, was told that we need to work on certain things in stunt.   Sure I can fly the whole pattern and make it look reasonable.  My problem is consistency in level flight and bottoms.  The easiest maneuvers is what we usually give up the most points on.   The reverse wing over is what sets the pattern in most judges eyes, is what I was told.  Was told that at a practice session do several reverse wing overs before starting the pattern.   Don't worry about the four leaf clover until you get the RW right.   But, quit thinking about crashing.   From what I have read you do a decent pattern.  Just need to quit thinking about crashing.   VD~
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here