stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: TDM on December 14, 2020, 06:39:46 AM
-
We kind of flying the same routine over and over but what if we have a special contest format with random imposed stunt figures where the pattern changes. It can change not only the order but the shape of the maneuvers kid of like free stile imposed schedule. The director depending on how nuts or how far his imagination goes, makes up a pattern before contest shares it with the participants and we go nuts. This would be a contest that tests our ability to adapt to something new and the ability of our models to go where no one has gone before.
Instead of loops you do D shape loops, maybe a horizontal eight with a loop and a triangle pointing left for the outside loop.
The "Freestyle Contest not so Freestyle Contest".
-
This "idea" is raised every 6 months it seems. Never any takers.
-
...
Instead of loops you do D shape loops, maybe a horizontal eight with a loop and a triangle pointing left for the outside loop.
The "Freestyle Contest not so Freestyle Contest".
Ha ha! I see plenty of the D-shaped or egg shaped round and sorta-square stuff already. Like when guys are fishing around to find the bottom of the rounds and flattening the sides during the intersection of the round eights. Brett Buck had a good set of posts on identifying and correcting these consistent mistakes.
-
Local Stunt Legend has it that Paul Walker CD'd a stunt contest at the (long gone) Boeing Space Center back lot. The pattern was the normal pattern, but it was flown backwards. I wasn't there, and don't know how to start with the landing, or finish with the takeoff, but since this was in the pre-electron age, I'd imagine the CG changes and model response would make it interesting, even if the pilot didn't screw the pooch. y1 Steve
-
Local Stunt Legend has it hat Paul Walker CD'd a stunt contest at the (long gone) Boeing Space Center back lot. The pattern was the normal pattern, but it was flown backwards. I wasn't there, and don't know how to start with the landing, or finish with the takeoff, but since this was in the pre-electron age, I'd imagine the CG changes and model response would make it interesting, even if the pilot didn't screw the pooch. y1 Steve
Yes Steve. I did host a contest where there were various patterns
The contestants had their choice.
They had to do 3 patterns. One "normal", one backwards, and one I made up. Until they made their choice, the 3rd pattern was not revealed. It has been a while, but each of the non standard ( backwards and unknown) had a score multiplier. It was something like 1.1 for backwards and 1.15 for the unknown pattern.
Not everyone chose the "different" patterns. If I remember correctly, the winner selected the different patterns.
I enjoyed myself, as did some of the contestants. The interest was not high enough to do it again.
It was held just west of the tennis courts on the north side. Who knows who owns that anymore.
-
I remember that meet.
-
Let's replace the V8 with a vertical square eight. I'm tired of watching bad Vertical Eights. The Horizontal Hourglass is also fun. I've done both. Without crashing, a plus. H^^ Steve
-
I believe that there would be acceptance of a "no overhead" pattern.
You can almost tell how old and worn out a flyer is by how far from overhead the overhead eights are flown.
"Overheads" at 45* are quite common amongst the geriatrics.
Have fun!
BTW, some of the most famous contests "pre PAMPA" , like the Plymouth Internats had unknown patterns prior to the day of the contest. So many maneuvers that landing for fuel was required.
Watch young Daniel do a "bolo wingover"
-
Dorin,
These sound like fun fly events. I dont think I would drive 500 miles for it but locally it would be huge fun! We kind of do something similar with Vintage Combat planes flying the pattern. Entering the outside squares at nearly 120mph is like readying yourself for a prostate exam. I was hoping to actually host a fun fly at this years Nats doing this very thing. Unfortunately, with the 2021 schedule change I will not be attending.
All the best,
Tom
-
vertical FS square bottom triangle on top. Horizontal inside loop with triangle pointing left outside to the left. Clover square bottoms right triangle tops. You can really have fun with this one. Overhead hourglass enter at 45.
How did you do backwards pattern. Really in reverse take off go inverted and do a wing over with 3/4 loop on bottom and continue to fly backwards the rest. That would be absolutely mind twisting crazy. I love it.
-
I flew that PW contest as well. There was in fact a vertical square eight included in the 3rd pattern. Terrifying! I clearly remember Paul's admonition - don't get off slow. Flying the pattern backwards was a brutal fight against entrenched muscle memory. Diabolical!
JP
-
Dejavu all over again. LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~ Check out the old Mirror Meet pattern.Took three flights. H^^
Hi Ty,
The Mirror Meet took two flights normally to finish the pattern.
In one of the original Mirror Meets, the Junior winner did it in one flight.
-
Local Stunt Legend has it that Paul Walker CD'd a stunt contest at the (long gone) Boeing Space Center back lot. The pattern was the normal pattern, but it was flown backwards. I wasn't there, and don't know how to start with the landing, or finish with the takeoff, but since this was in the pre-electron age, I'd imagine the CG changes and model response would make it interesting, even if the pilot didn't screw the pooch. y1 Steve
It had to be flown with a canard model. 🤪
-
Vertical triangular eight? Come in at 45 deg, pitch down 60 deg, at 5’ pitch up to 60 deg, then back to horizontal at 45 deg altitude and do an inside triangle to complete. I think one would be enough? LL~
-
Hmmm.. I thought that the hourglass was a triangular vertical eight.
George Aldrich told me that some time after He submitted the modern pattern to the AMA, He submitted a change to the pattern; He wanted to change the Hourglass to a Vertical Square Eight.
The AMA contest board turned him down.
-
This would be an inverted version with the peaks top and bottom. DifficuLt corner in that second turn. Think of a diamond with a cut through the middle. A combat model could do it easily, but a stunt model? Challenge time!😄
-
Has anybody done a perfect pattern yet? Also the judges have a hard enough time with what we have. S?P
-
Has anybody done a perfect pattern yet? Also the judges have a hard enough time with what we have. S?P
June 22, 1982. When I asked my stooge to confirm it, it just sat there and did nothing. HB~>
Ken
-
Back in the late 1950's, when GMA's CLPA pattern first became Official, I was just hacking around. Tried that pattern and got to where I could stumble through it "well enough(?)" to claim I did it. Practice became a bit boring - not that I had it nailed or anything... Tried several variations...
(1) Fly it reversed sequence - last to first...
(2) Flip inverted after takeoff and fly the official sequence from "upside down"...
(3) Fly the reversed pattern from inverted...
Fun, but none of it looked very good and all required too much thought. Stayed with the Official pattern; the variations were more for yucks than for serious. Few in my neighborhood to fly with. None interested in contests, partly because few, if any, had cars available and the New York City transit system didn't go anywhere near announced contest sites.
Made for interesting arrangements to get to usable sites on buses and subways. Making connections when changing to a different 'line' was challenging, and still usually left a moderately long walk to 'the site.' One guy carried field boxes, another fuel, others the models. Had to go at off-hours and days: "civilians" didn't appreciate our mini-mobs... Nor would we appreciate rush-hour crowds...
Wow, that's about 65 years ago...
-
I'm all in favor of it. I've imagined something very similar many times. Also, it might be a good opportunity to take out that plane that flies pretty good, but ultimately is just taking up rafter space for a plane that could fly better. I like thirty manuevers in a hat. You draw your 13, mark your scoresheet for the judges, get a caller to sit beside you, or you just fly high and glance down at the stunt list, and go for it. Especially as a Saturday alternative for classic and OTS.
But then for the bonus round (and if you have a different model you really hate), you try a normal pattern with your off hand. I did one with a ringmaster a year ago. Yikes, still have the plane, but some manuevers were pretty tough to recognize.
We can call it "Freak of the Week," or better yet, "Grab Bag."
-
Back when we competed in Canada they had the old Jim Walker event where you could choose your own trick as a bonus and IIRC they gave it a K factor for difficulty. I liked the Vertical Triangle Eight. It was a hilarious maneuver back in the days of .35MAX engines.
-
Back when we competed in Canada they had the old Jim Walker event where you could choose your own trick as a bonus and IIRC they gave it a K factor for difficulty. I liked the Vertical Triangle Eight. It was a hilarious maneuver back in the days of .35MAX engines.
How is that different from an Hourglass? Unless the flats were at 45 and the points at 5' and DOH. Now that would be fun. I use an upside down outside triangle to unwrap my lines. The 120 at the bottom is easy but at DOH..better have good trim. LL~
Ken
-
For years and years, the Annual "Ringmaster Roundup" had contestants divided into teams who decided among themselves which member flew the OTS pattern, which one flew the 'Modern" pattern and who flew the "Unknown" pattern. The "Unknown" pattern was handed out to the victim the evening before he had to fly it.
Through the years, any and all tricks ever thought of or dreamed up in control line stunt, were buried somewhere in those "Unknown" patterns, which varied considerably year to year. The "Square Four Leafed Clover" had the most angles, altitudes, entries, and exits and descriptions and definitions, arguments and fights.
The Three-point Snow cone was tough, too. Some thought the "cone" part wasn't a complete circle, just a half-circle sitting on an inverted triangle! Judging was difficult, for certain.
Usually the Champion Team was determined by the highest "Team Pursuit" score when all was tallied.
The American Team was always the winner, if my memory serves me correctly.
MOTR dale gleason
-
Apparently, some have had some success with individual events with non-standard patterns.
Perhaps potential participants are people who are SERIOUS about "stunt". Anything else is uninteresting.
In early times of Control Line, there were events or demonstrations where people flew things that were unexpected to the audience. It would be cool if something like that could happen again. Perhaps with the same idea as R/C Freestyle events: everybody makes their own program. Just fly something that will impress. Precision is good but doing something original might be even better.
I recall a R/C contest during a small airshow. Some flew (then) fashionable "3D" programs choreographed to some music, but a couple of guys went with fast powered gliders. A well known R/C pilot flying a jet powered glider won the whole thing.
-
How is that different from an Hourglass? Unless the flats were at 45 and the points at 5' and DOH. Now that would be fun. I use an upside down outside triangle to unwrap my lines. The 120 at the bottom is easy but at DOH..better have good trim. LL~
Ken
Ken, you fly at 45, do an outside downward triangle, when you complete the outside triangle you do an inside on top of it.
The judging on Jim Walker is unique - they judge the model and not the pilot. If you fly a shaggy figure but it's really tough on the bird you can get max points. It's a fun event.
Chuck
-
How about all square maneuvers, rotated 45 deg. Diamond shaped
-
About the only way for a contest like you guys are suggesting is to put together some rules, find a CD, and put on a contest. (or Fun Fly) Otherwise, it's just talk.
The St. Louis club and the Tulsa Gluedobbers ran Freestyle Stunt for a few years. The TGD cancelled the event for lack of entrants.
The TGD also ran the Mirror Meet for 3 years. It was also cancelled for lack of entrants.
I don't know if Saint Louis is still doing the Freestyle event or not.
Good Luck.
-
It would be neat to trace all such freestyle figures in video.
-
This "idea" is raised every 6 months it seems. Never any takers.
As evidenced by several of the above posts, there have been "free style" events held with variations of the many "different maneuvers" being proposed. As De Hill just explained, several events have been held and then faded away for lack of interest. Same as several other attempts around the country over the years. There are several problems with these ideas, as intriguing as they may sound. Any time a "new" maneuver is proposed, there will need to be some standard or definition on how it will be flown AND judged. Unless it is some sort of "free style" maneuver with no definition, then the subjective part of applying a score by a judge becomes even more subjective. In reality, all of the maneuvers that have described here are little more than a series of loops, or turns with various degrees of "sharpness", placed in different parts of the circle which are not that much different than what we have in the current pattern.
Now, if the "stunt envelope" is to be expanded beyond our typical loops and "sharp turns", then come up with maneuvers that really tax the ability of "current designs". For instance, do a square vertical eight with the top at or below 60o. Do any of the horizontal eights within 60o. This would be interesting because few even come close to doing even horizontal round eights within the 90o specified by the rule book. Do an inverted triangle with the top at or below 30o, the lower the top turn, the more points awarded. Do a "key hole" or mushroom which is started with a vertical climb, then at 45o elevation, do a sharp inside turn immediately followed by a complete outside loop, where the top of the maneuver is at 90o or less, then at the midpoint where the outside loop began, do a 90o turn straight to the ground, pulling out with another sharp turn at 5 ft. Few designs currently being flown cannot do this without serious compromise of the shape. A really good and light 1/2A stunt ship on at least 50' lines can come close. So can a combat ship. In fact, if the maneuvers are to be flown with 30o and 60o requirements rather than the current 45o and 90o degree parameters, an entirely new design approach would evolve. I do not think that the stunt world is ready for that. Indeed, there are many maneuver that can be imagined, but unless they are little more than the current series of loops and sharp turns placed on our hemisphere, what is the challenge?
Now, we can turn to ask how much interest is there for this anyway? As has been already suggested in this and other threads, there have been events over the years to try out some variation to this idea that have not been continued for lack of interest/support. I am not trying to discourage anyone or any group from trying to hold such an event. In fact, such an initiative should be encouraged. Come up with with a set of maneuvers with understandable parameters, organize a contest, then tell us how it works out. It does not take a formal rule change to hold a special event with local rules.
Keith
-
It is hard enough to get our top fliers to enter Classic and Profile as it is. Adding another event would not increase participation. Personally I don't mind flying three different ships in 2 days but I am not typical on that issue. If we were to add "freestyle" it would have to be after PA and that cuts into the mad scramble to get on the road home. I would be more inclined to add another maneuver or two to the pattern just to watch all of the IC guys cutting up their planes to put in a larger tank. LL~
Ken
-
Ehhhhhhh..........
Do something exciting.
Have everyone do the maneuvers upwind.
-
You can just delete the two level laps between maneuvers, now that would be interesting.
-
... Any time a "new" maneuver is proposed, there will need to be some standard or definition on how it will be flown AND judged. Unless it is some sort of "free style" maneuver with no definition, then the subjective part of applying a score by a judge becomes even more subjective....
Subjective would be just fine. Who flies the flight path that is the most entertaining.
I believe, in figure skating, that is called "Artistic Impression" as opposed to "Technical Merit".
You can just delete the two level laps between maneuvers, now that would be interesting.
Can't do that. The Judges could never keep up. (not sure which smiley to insert)
-
Subjective would be just fine. Who flies the flight path that is the most entertaining.
I believe, in figure skating, that is called "Artistic Impression" as opposed to "Technical Merit".
Can't do that. The Judges could never keep up. (not sure which smiley to insert)
That's why it would be interesting, not only a challenge for the pilot but it certainly keeps the judges on their toes. Excitement galore on both sides of the flight >:D n~ >:D
-
Subjective would be just fine. Who flies the flight path that is the most entertaining.
I believe, in figure skating, that is called "Artistic Impression" as opposed to "Technical Merit".
Can't do that. The Judges could never keep up. (not sure which smiley to insert)
I have been an advocate since the 70's of making the Pattern points a range giving the judge a way to give the pattern an overall impression. Things like consistent heights and elevations, proper and smooth exits, etc. I like the idea of adding a freestyle maneuver at the end so long as the judges are given a sketch of it before so they know what to expect. Most engine/tank arrangements can stand one more maneuver and it is just a timer setting for electric. No need to add another change in the available scores.
Ken
Ken
-
Christmas tree maneuver. Vertical eight with two triangles in normal position on top of each other or trace the outside contour.
What great responses we have here and it just sounds the more nuts this is the more fun we can have with it. I like the idea of tracing the pattern backwards, take off go inverted and trace the whole pattern backwards, then flip in normal flight for landing.
-
I think that to set up more radical maneuver patterns, it would be necessary to get rid of appearance considerations. I doubt a conventional configuration could do some of the maneuvers proposed. Slow combat models certainly can do it all. Modifications would smooth out the turns and corners to make a good pattern. Some cosmetic stuff could be done I guess.
The Doodle Streak might be a good starting point if lightened up. It turns well without bounce on corners. Built lighter with a hotter combat engine, it should do the full pattern easily under 30 deg or less. Possibly 15 deg maneuvers which combat models easily do.
-
Light modern ships are capable of doing the pattern under 30 degrees. I have done it for "grins". My question is ... why?
Ken
-
This would be an inverted version with the peaks top and bottom. DifficuLt corner in that second turn. Think of a diamond with a cut through the middle. A combat model could do it easily, but a stunt model? Challenge time!😄
Lessee?? A reverse hourglass would start with a vertical climb from your right, a 60ish degree turn to often bumbled dive to the right, to inside triangle turns to the upper right corner, followed with a 60ish outside return to the wingover and recover to level flight.
I'll have to try that with my combat stunter, it has a muffler on it to make it a bit more sluggish. This should be fun.
The regular pattern is not hard though, although its pretty sloppy.
I've had the best luck with the cloverleaf. It's one maneuver where you can just plant your feet and fly it inn front of you. No backbreaking leans to your back, no twisting around, no short little angular turns. Just look at one spot and fly the whole thing with peripheral vision.
-
Overhead Hourglasses are Far Out . !
-
Light modern ships are capable of doing the pattern under 30 degrees. I have done it for "grins". My question is ... why?
Ken
Because it is there.
Say again, why did you do it?
-
Because it is there.
Say again, why did you do it?
I test the limits of all of my planes before competing with them. Only done the full pattern that low with the one in my Avatar. Getting the Reverse Wingover under 30 was a real test LL~
But you are right, we do things just so we can say we did them but for competition, no - unless I owned a Hobby shop LL~
Ken
-
An appearence points winning ship might not be ideal for a contest where you are encouraged to do crazy stuff. C/L combat fliers usually bring lots of affordable (read: expendable) models to a contest....