stunthanger.com

General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 02:40:21 PM

Title: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 02:40:21 PM
I know the video isn't great. The square 8's had the outside part kinda cut off, but you're not missing much. So, if you got time to watch, let me know what my next step in practicing looks like it should be.

https://youtu.be/JSPWHszYSYo
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 15, 2018, 03:24:39 PM
I did not go full screen as it is hard to judge a pattern when the camera is not stationary.  Much better to judge when viewing from a judges point on the circle.   If you your self watch the videos you can see some glaring points being given up.   The level laps and bottom of maneuvers should be he same. Some maneuvers were oversize mainly the overhead eight.   Any way I saw you have this old man beat as far as scoring.  Get a good coach to work with you live. H^^
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 15, 2018, 03:41:03 PM
I know the video isn't great. The square 8's had the outside part kinda cut off, but you're not missing much.

      No roasting required, but I think you are suffering a bit by flying without experienced coaching or assistance. The video was fine, for the most part. There are a lot of good things about the flight (in particular, the lack of 25-foot bottoms that is common in INT and low Advanced) and it's pretty clean. The turn angles are mostly OK, too.

     But coaching is about finding errors.  I think the reason the square 8 was cut off is highly relevant - most of the flight was *huge*. The inside loops should fit in 45 degrees of circle, but are well over 90 degrees. The square 8 was close to 180 degrees, which is why it got cut off at the end. Your "45" is around 60-70 degrees and the squares are much wider than they are high.

    I would highly suggest that you set out cones, surveyed out at 45 degrees apart on the downwind side of the circle. The easiest way to do this is to set out two of them at 180 degrees, split that in half, then split it again. The fly normally, ignore the cones, and watch the video afterwards, using your cones to measure your flights.  I *do not* recommend you try to fly within the cones by watching for them, at least to start with, because they will come up much, much faster than you will expect, and if you try to jam the maneuver half the size, you will certainly push the airplane beyond the limits. A square loop is supposed to fit between two adjacent cones. Yours will be closer to or even exceed the second cone over.

     You also have a prototypical example of what is shown here:

https://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/incessant-problems-1-hourglass-2nd-corner/msg494948/#msg494948

  Your hourglass looks just like the first drawing, to the extent we can see it.

    I think as you try to shrink it down, you will run into other problems, particularly with engine setup and trim. The engine sounds like it is coming on very hard at times, which is OK if you make the maneuver large enough to recover from it, but will be a problem if it is still changing when the next corner comes up. That's why flying large is so tempting,  everything smooths itself out before you have to do the next element.

      This is not at all an unusual situation. Guys who fly by themselves or without experienced help tend towards large and smooth maneuvers because it's much easier on the airplane, requiring neither tight corners nor perfect engine or trim. With what you have in hand, it may very well yield the highest score you can possibly get in a contest. If you were flying in a contest tomorrow, I would suggest trying to fix only the hourglass (since it should yield a nearly immediate improvement) and leaving the rest of it alone. But even if you perfected everything else about it, you would get stuck in the low-400s score range. The longer you go this way, the harder it will be to correct it.

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Russell on July 15, 2018, 03:56:49 PM
Level flight both upright and inverted is too high a lot of the time, needs to be same elevation around circle.

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 04:17:37 PM
Thanks guys.
Brett, what you're saying is the biggest reason I wanted to get up to the stunt clinic. Get someone to fly my plane. See where it's at, and what it needs trim-wise.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 15, 2018, 06:31:48 PM
Thanks guys.
Brett, what you're saying is the biggest reason I wanted to get up to the stunt clinic. Get someone to fly my plane. See where it's at, and what it needs trim-wise.

   You are always welcome, and as mentioned before, if someone wants to plan something that fits with my schedule, I can do it almost any time.

   But, on the topic of sizes - compare this video to yours:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9u-vpeEyJE&feature=youtu.be

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Steve Helmick on July 15, 2018, 06:59:53 PM
First thing I'd suggest is to buy a tripod and set it at 5'. Also, set it so that the foreground starts just a bit short of the pilot's circle. We see a lot of lawn we don't need to see, and don't see the top of the V8 and Hourglass that we do need to see.

It looks like the grass has a lot of elevation changes? This is not unusual, but you'll need to reference the flat background and ignore the lawn. A bunch of our sites are either tilted (Richmond BC, Roseburg and Salem OR) or have a tilted background (Redmond, OR). Our patch at Centralia/Chehelis Muni actually has a pretty uniform and significant crown to it, which is kinda strange, but way better than a tilt. You need to establish a level flight altitude at the downwind side of the circle and take that as 5', even if you are flying at 2' at the higher side of the circle, or 10' at the lower side...if you see what I mean!

Doing your tricks too big and keeping the plane flying is better than making them as small as most of us ex-combat guys want to do. The inside & outside rectangles need to be pruned, and the hourglass isn't good, but Brett has already written about that. The engine run seems pretty ragged, for some reason, especially late in the flight. What's that all about?  H^^ Steve
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 07:01:40 PM
   But, on the topic of sizes - compare this video to yours:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9u-vpeEyJE&feature=youtu.be

    Brett


Oh my!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 07:08:18 PM
The engine run seems pretty ragged, for some reason, especially late in the flight. What's that all about?  H^^ Steve

That's that old rat race motor wanting to wake up! Haha. It's wierd. But it starts easy and is consistent. I think it's more of a tank thing than an engine thing. Inverted and upright are different, so tuning like this is a reasonable compromise. I gotta make an adjustable tank mount.

Yes, the grass is not level. I'll do a tripod and go-pro next time. My friend Mike was holding my phone for this one.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Steve Helmick on July 15, 2018, 07:39:13 PM
Yep, a hand-held camera and panning with the plane is almost no help at all. Drives me crazy, which doesn't take a lot! I tend to not watch videos like that. The reference plane keeps changing, makes "being judgemental" very difficult. 

My brother took a video of me flying my SV-11 on "Little Lake" just E. of Hwy. 395, near "Cinder Cone", if you're familiar with E. California. From upwind, even! He didn't have a tripod, but did a good job of locking up and not panning, IIRC. That was about 2011. The stuff you CAN see on a well done video is incredibly informative, but the stuff you can see in a poor video is significantly less.   :'( Steve

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Steve Helmick on July 15, 2018, 08:02:25 PM

Oh my!


Yes! OMG is appropriate. I'd very much like to see Igor fly in person. I'd be happy to run score sheets, which is THE best job you can get at any stunt contest. Be there & ready to watch the whole flight. Don't say a word, don't utter a sound.  Observe the pilot carefully, as he gets ready to start the engine, signaling, walking to the handle, right through to the end of the landing roll.  8) Steve
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 15, 2018, 08:53:43 PM

Yes! OMG is appropriate. I'd very much like to see Igor fly in person. I'd be happy to run score sheets, which is THE best job you can get at any stunt contest. Be there & ready to watch the whole flight. Don't say a word, don't utter a sound.  Observe the pilot carefully, as he gets ready to start the engine, signaling, walking to the handle, right through to the end of the landing roll.  8) Steve

   Not far off normal for this level of flying, Wonder Boy himself at the 2016 WC (and almost certainly just like yesterday morning):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=2xGtoU0XWYg


    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 15, 2018, 09:15:26 PM

Oh my!

     I think you can see the difference. Note that as is, you have *no hope* of reliably (or even safely) flying that size maneuvers, hence my caution about trying to fly to the marker cones.

    This is part of why you see so many arguments about engines and props. People who don't realize what it really takes to fly reliably at these sizes simply don't see why you need the kind of performance required. This explains why we have piped 40- 75s in airplane slightly larger than Thunderbirds (or in Jim Aron's case, substantially smaller than Thunderbird).

    It doesn't take expensive equipment to fly these sizes reliably. But you aren't going to do it with vintage-style techniques or approaches.

This is not the greatest flight I ever flew, but it was using a nearly 30-year-old primary stunt trainer and a $47 engine:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=276&v=VS6v8y7F4QA (starting at about 4:20).

      Note wind noise and flags - 15-18 mph. I have flown the same airplane with a Fox 35, in similar conditions, and it is damn near impossible. This was no problem whatsoever, it got away from me in a few spots, but that's because I never practice and it certainly flies *much* differently from my regular airplane. It is also far from the best airplane you could build for this kind of effort - it was put together in about a day and a half and has been crashed about 40 times.

      Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 15, 2018, 09:23:36 PM
I believe I'm starting to get the idea of why some folks would use an LA 46 in a plane that a .25 would fly.
If you could fly my plane, I think you'd understand (and it sounds like you already know) that I don't feel comfortable flying a manuever that tight because I think I'd run out of power. Or, however you describe that feeling.
My best scores have been with my giant ringmaster with a K&B 61. Mostly because it'll pull out of any trouble I could possibly get into. These are some interesting things to ponder.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 16, 2018, 12:09:59 AM
Brett covered most of what I was going to say in his last post.  The importance of a coach cannot be overstated.  I flew with Bob Gieseke before my 35 years in the wilderness. I could do an hourglass with the best of them.  When I came back this year and started flying a slightly larger ship with a 46LA, I was all over the sky with it.  Doug Moon was there to tell me what I was doing wrong and in two flights I was back to doing very nice hourglasses.  With out that advice, I would still be doing them like I had a 38oz plane and a Fox 35. 

I have a couple of tips - #1 Watch Igor in those videos.  Notice how he plants his feet, stops rotating and flies the maneuver directly in front of him.  Bret does the same thing only less defined and not as early as Igor.  That is harder to master than you might think but it makes a huge difference in intersections and shapes.  Once set the only thing that should be moving is your arm, even in the overhead 8.  #2 is more of what worked for me than a universal truth.  Ever do lazy eights to kill a tank?  Well the hourglass is really nothing more than a horizontal lazy 8 with flats.  You can get the feel for the slope of the sides and the intersection position doing lazy vertical 8's.  We have some top fliers that like to do outside triangles to unwrap their lines.  I decided to give it a try.  They look hard but they are really easy and (drum roll)  they are the top half of the hourglass.

Ken

One other thing in using the outside triangle is that the hourglass is the only shaped maneuver where you can't see where your next corner needs to be with even your peripheral vision.  Using the triangle for practice helps build the muscle memory to make that 3rd corner correct just as the inside helps with the 1st.  It also helps you mentally find that point in the sky directly in front of you at 45 that is the hourglass intersection.   Another thing to keep in mind when watching the video in slow motion is something you probably don't notice at full speed.  The base and top flat of the hourglass are smaller (by approximately the radius of your turns) than the triangles.  You notice the top but you probably don't notice the bottom. This is because there is no turn at the 45 intersection - but the angles are the same.  Congrats on picking this maneuver as your "test case"  Master it and your confidence goes up - everything gets better.  Expecially the overhead 8 but that is a different story.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 16, 2018, 09:01:28 AM


     You also have a prototypical example of what is shown here:

https://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/incessant-problems-1-hourglass-2nd-corner/msg494948/#msg494948

  Your hourglass looks just like the first drawing, to the extent we can see it.

    I think as you try to shrink it down, you will run into other problems, particularly with engine setup and trim. The engine sounds like it is coming on very hard at times, which is OK if you make the maneuver large enough to recover from it, but will be a problem if it is still changing when the next corner comes up. That's why flying large is so tempting,  everything smooths itself out before you have to do the next element.

    Brett

Ok, I've been thinking about this particular part of this thread. Let's start with the fact that the hour glass needs to go as high as the wing over. Reading the rule book, I understand that, but I don't know how "capable" my plane is of that at this point. Hearing what you're saying and reading through the other thread, what happens to me, when flying this plane is that I feel like I would loose tension up there because of the quick turns. I'll try to get over there after work and just practice hourglass after hourglass and see if I can get it to climb all the way up and still make turn 2.
Thanks a bunch!

"Capable" - in quotes because I really don't know if it is or not.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 16, 2018, 10:45:57 AM
Ok, I've been thinking about this particular part of this thread. Let's start with the fact that the hour glass needs to go as high as the wing over. Reading the rule book, I understand that, but I don't know how "capable" my plane is of that at this point. Hearing what you're saying and reading through the other thread, what happens to me, when flying this plane is that I feel like I would loose tension up there because of the quick turns. I'll try to get over there after work and just practice hourglass after hourglass and see if I can get it to climb all the way up and still make turn 2.
Thanks a bunch!

"Capable" - in quotes because I really don't know if it is or not.

   It should be easier, rather than harder, if you do it right.  If it won't make it, make the corners less sharp (first and second  - first too sharp and you lose speed for the climb). As you are doing it, you might make it through the second corner, but you are completely losing the entire descending leg.

         Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 16, 2018, 12:02:45 PM
Ok, I've been thinking about this particular part of this thread. Let's start with the fact that the hour glass needs to go as high as the wing over. Reading the rule book, I understand that, but I don't know how "capable" my plane is of that at this point. Hearing what you're saying and reading through the other thread, what happens to me, when flying this plane is that I feel like I would loose tension up there because of the quick turns. I'll try to get over there after work and just practice hourglass after hourglass and see if I can get it to climb all the way up and still make turn 2.
Thanks a bunch!

"Capable" - in quotes because I really don't know if it is or not.

You did a respectable wingover carrying a full load of fuel.  The plane should do the same or better near the end of the tank.  There are tricks you can use to make those corners from "the old days" but learning them may be a waste of time unless you plan to fly Classic and really do want to use a Fox 35 just for old time sake.  You won't need it if you get more horsepower but we did use a bit more engine offset, rudder offset, in some cases shorter lines and short prayers just to survive the reverse WO, hourglass and overhead 8.  Have faith, if there is any wind at all it will not come in on you in the 2nd and 3rd turns if you have made the turning point and you don't stall it.

Have fun.  You may have started something here - an On Line Clinic.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 16, 2018, 12:41:28 PM
Some fresh thoughts on Where/How to look while flying


There was recently a thread on Stunthangar with the above title in quotes. I found one post in particular that triggered some thoughts of my own which I felt might be of value for Uncle Jimby’s Stunt Clinic. Dan McEntee wrote the following text which caused me to realize that, my gosh, that’s the way I’ve flown stunt my whole life! I’ll then amplify on why what he says may be valuable to others. Further, why its importance may lead students of stunt to better understand why so much advice you hear from the world’s best stunt pilots has to do with pilot posture and aircraft/powertrain trim!  I thought that making it available via this thread might be of interest to some.  Be aware, the total is about six pages of Ted "streaming".  The first page or so is included below and the entire document will (hopefully) be attached.

Here’s what Dan had to say:

“When you drive a nail in with a hammer, do you look at the hammer head or the nail you are hitting with it? When you drive a car…do you look at the hood of the car…or do you look where you want to drive and steer the vehicle where you need to go?
 
…A well-trimmed model and confidence in its performance helps

…When I am flying at my best, I can "see" the shape I need to fly as I approach the maneuver, then I just trace the shape with the airplane

...More than one airplane has been written off [due to] looking at the model and trying to time the pull out…”   

To Dan’s mental images of nails and vehicles I’d like to add another task we’ve likely all performed at some point in our lives without a lot of thought; one we might need to think about to realize.  A task I feel is very much a template for what excellent fliers do--maybe without ever thinking about it--when they fly those flights that make us all wonder…”how the heck does he do that!”

We’re going to Visualize drawing pictures with chalk on a blackboard!



Ted
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 16, 2018, 11:34:15 PM
While having some trouble today, I realized it felt like I have more up than down. So, I am fixing my rudder and removing the offset, and pulled the LO's. Here's all the up and all the down. I really shot myself in the foot on the controls I guess.
I think there's enough adjustability in the push rods to correct this.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 16, 2018, 11:41:03 PM
(P.S. I've no idea why all the "strikethroughs" showed up in the preamble to this document.  The document download appears to be as originally formatted)

   There's a "leftbracket S rightbracket" at the end of the word "helps". Edit the post and remove that, strikethrough will go away. The problem is that things inside  brackets are interpreted as "tags", which are intended to create the formatting you see. "bracket s closebracket" is the tag to start a section of strikethrough text formatting ("leftbracket /s rightbracket" would end it, ending the section). I can't type it directly, because it will do the same thing to me.

     These "HTML tags" are essentially a language for formatting web pages, and it's the fundamental way your computer knows how to make things look the way they do. Actually, real HTML tags use triangular brackets (like "less than symbol s greater than symbol") Sparky's board uses square brackets but mostly the same tags, and most HTML tags will work here (like "leftbracket quote rightbracket" that you use all the time).

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 17, 2018, 07:50:52 AM
While having some trouble today, I realized it felt like I have more up than down. So, I am fixing my rudder and removing the offset, and pulled the LO's. Here's all the up and all the down. I really shot myself in the foot on the controls I guess.
I think there's enough adjustability in the push rods to correct this.
I am curious how you noticed you had more up than down.  Was it while flying or simply visual?  You should not be using full control to make any corners.  This is a subject that is far from settled but I like a bit more control movement than it takes to hit the pressure wall.  For me this usually comes out to a bit under 45 degrees on the elevator and around 30 on the flaps.  If you take Ted's advice you will never come even close to even being tempted to use it but it will be there in an emergency.   One other side note.  The only way to truly know if your plane turns the same inside and out is to let someone experienced in flying other peoples planes fly it.  It is really hard to tell the difference between the plane turning and your turning it.

Good luck!

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 17, 2018, 08:32:45 AM
I am curious how you noticed you had more up than down.  Was it while flying or simply visual?  You should not be using full control to make any corners.  This is a subject that is far from settled but I like a bit more control movement as it takes to hit the pressure wall.  For me this usually comes out to a bit under 45 degrees on the elevator and around 30 on the flaps.  If you take Ted's advice you will never come even close to even being tempted to use it but it will be there in an emergency.   One other side note.  The only way to truly know if your plane turns the same inside and out is to let someone experienced in flying other peoples planes fly it.  It is really hard to tell the difference between the plane turning and your turning it.

Good luck!

Ken

While flying, it took more handle movement to do outsides than insides. Especially noticeable in the figure 8. It's always felt like that so I ignored it.
There's far less down than up, so the entire modulation of the elevator feels softer, not just at the extremes. If I'm explaining that right.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 17, 2018, 10:16:02 AM
While flying, it took more handle movement to do outsides than insides. Especially noticeable in the figure 8. It's always felt like that so I ignored it.
There's far less down than up, so the entire modulation of the elevator feels softer, not just at the extremes. If I'm explaining that right.
If you have eliminated handle bias then that definitely is one way to tell.   If your flaps and elevator both hit -0- at the same time the cause is is probably the design, the bellcrank, or the handle.  The handle can be the cause or the cure but if you are going to take Ted's advice it would be better if it was neither.  It appears from your pictures that you have more than enough control movement to do a decent corner if you are not too nose heavy.  The amount of total up vs down is only an issue if you are pegging the controls or have a flexing pushrod but it is a symptom of a misaligned bellcrank.  Since the weak pushrod has the opposite symptom we can rule that out.  Two things happen when the bellcrank is not aligned properly.  First the amount of up vs down is different and second which is worse, the rate that the surfaces move for a given input is different.  Before I did anything else to the plane I would get this right.  Fortunately you have a profile so it is really easy fix.   I sincerely hope you have adjustable connections.   Since you can't see the bellcrank you have to keep adjusting the flap linkage till equal movement of the leadouts produces equal flap movement. That should pull the bellcrank into alignment.  This may be your whole problem so I would fly it again.  The next step is to lock the flaps at zero and adjust the elevator up a little bit at a time till it turns the same.  You may need to tweak your handle a bit when you are done since your natural level setting will change.

Hope some of this is of value - Ken

As I was re-reading this it hit me that we have overlooked upthrust in the engine.  The symptoms would be similar to the misalligned bellcrank.  It would feel like it takes more control to turn outside than inside.  I am not that familiar with the Twister since I have never owned one so I am not sure if the design specifies up or down thrust or if there is stab incidence.

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 17, 2018, 10:57:19 AM
  snip
     These "HTML tags" are essentially a language for formatting web pages, and it's the fundamental way your computer knows how to make things look the way they do. Actually, real HTML tags use triangular brackets (like "less than symbol s greater than symbol") Sparky's board uses square brackets but mostly the same tags, and most HTML tags will work here (like "leftbracket quote rightbracket" that you use all the time).

    Brett

Thanks Brett...not that I fully understand it!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Joe Ed Pederson on July 17, 2018, 12:34:12 PM
 Brett,


You wrote: "This is not the greatest flight I ever flew, but it was using a nearly 30-year-old primary stunt trainer and a $47 engine:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=276&v=VS6v8y7F4QA (starting at about 4:20). "

 

What was the $47.00 engine?

Joe Ed
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 17, 2018, 01:05:30 PM
Ken,
There's no handle bias, it's a hard point handle.
The elevator and flaps are 0-0 together when the lead out's are held together (zeroed on the bench).
Everything that connects to the flaps and elevator are adjustable.

I'm thinking I get how to fix it, but then my lead out's won't be centered? Like measure up and down in degrees, split the difference and then re-neutralize. Then I'd have to cut and redo one lead out. Does that sounds reasonable?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 17, 2018, 01:28:50 PM
The elevator and flaps are 0-0 together when the lead out's are held together (zeroed on the bench).

What I'm mostly sure of: Unless the motor, wing, and stab are all on the same line, flaps & elevator at 0-0 may not be the best setup.  The usual setup with the motor in the middle, wings lower, and tail higher, makes the flaps 'want' to trail down a bit.  Also, (and I'm even less sure of this part!) the gyroscopic forces on the prop when it's spinning its way and the plane is forcing it to precess in a circle tend to affect that "ideal" flap trail.

What I'm way more sure of: The specifics of how to trim for equal turn on insides and outsides are in Paul Walker's trim article (http://flyinglines.org/pw.trimflow1.html).  I usually start by comparing level to inverted flight and proceeding to tweak flaps.  If you haven't at least gone through the first chapter (that's the link I posted), then stop now, and devote some time to trimming.  Read that trim article carefully, as if it were a book titled "How to Succeed at Control Line Stunt".  Re-read the parts you don't get.  Then go trim your plane.  Then re-read, re-trim, etc.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 01:50:15 PM
Thanks Brett...not that I fully understand it!

   You can easily fix the original post, just edit it and remove the brackets you put in on "help(s)"

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 01:54:35 PM
Brett,


You wrote: "This is not the greatest flight I ever flew, but it was using a nearly 30-year-old primary stunt trainer and a $47 engine:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=276&v=VS6v8y7F4QA (starting at about 4:20). "

 

What was the $47.00 engine?

   OS 20FP, purchased new in about 1993 from PECS Hobbies in Mountain View California, and run extensively since then (including a few minutes on a mixture of gasoline, Wesson Oil, and a bit of Ys2020 just to make it fire).  It is superior in run quality to all vintage engines, and most current engines, aside from piped full-stunt systems like the 40VF, PA, Ro-Jett and more effective as a stunt power plant to all vintage engines 35 and below.  The last version of the 25LA is even better.

   Here is the list of the modifications required to make it run so well:

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 01:58:16 PM
Ken,
There's no handle bias, it's a hard point handle.
The elevator and flaps are 0-0 together when the lead out's are held together (zeroed on the bench).
Everything that connects to the flaps and elevator are adjustable.

I'm thinking I get how to fix it, but then my lead out's won't be centered? Like measure up and down in degrees, split the difference and then re-neutralize. Then I'd have to cut and redo one lead out. Does that sounds reasonable?

   If you end up uneven, then use different-length connectors to square it back up.

   Before that, check that the rate of travel up and down is the same, and bias the position or angle of the elevator horn fore/aft to get the rate the same.   IOW, check that when the flap is 20 degrees up, the elevator is really 20 degrees down and vice-versa. It's possible/likely that the elevator travels up faster than down, in which case , you want to move the elevator horn forward.

     Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 17, 2018, 02:08:03 PM
Ken,
There's no handle bias, it's a hard point handle.
The elevator and flaps are 0-0 together when the lead out's are held together (zeroed on the bench).
Everything that connects to the flaps and elevator are adjustable.

I'm thinking I get how to fix it, but then my lead out's won't be centered? Like measure up and down in degrees, split the difference and then re-neutralize. Then I'd have to cut and redo one lead out. Does that sounds reasonable?
I didn't see Brett's post before I posted this so some of it will be redundant...sorry.

You should be able to fix it at the flap horn.  The important thing is to get the pushrod and bellcrank arm to be as close to 90 degrees with each other as possible.  If you can disconnect it at the flap horn you can use the leadouts to find center by pulling on one and marking the other at the wingtip then reversing and marking the first one.  When you put the marks together the bellcrank is as straight as you are going to get it without surgery.  If the flaps are not at zero with the marks alligned then you adjust the flap connector (hopefully it is a ball link) to make the flaps zero at that point.  You are right though, your leadouts are not going to match but that should be an easy handle adjustment.  Lots of folks use different leadout lengths to keep the connectors from hitting each other.

When you say Hard Point does that mean that you cannot adjust even the bias?  If that is the case you may want to hold off till you can get a set of variable length line connectors or a new handle.  You can't cut and wrap just one leadout if you can't adjust the handle,   and if you can adjust the handle you don't need to cut the leadout.  Catch 22
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 17, 2018, 02:20:43 PM

When you say Hard Point does that mean that you cannot adjust even the bias?  If that is the case you may want to hold off till you can get a set of variable length line connectors or a new handle.  You can't cut and wrap just one leadout if you can't adjust the handle,   and if you can adjust the handle you don't need to cut the leadout.  Catch 22

Zero handle bias.  Vertical.   It may take some mental recalibration to become accustomed to a truly vertical handle.  Make the mental recalibrations.

Hard point handles have no cables to adjust neutral.  Lines are directly connected to the handle via clips.  Adjust neutral with different length line clips. 

If you have staggered length leadouts, you make one line correspondingly shorter and fine tune neutral with different length line clips.

With the Derek Moran line clip bender available from Jim Lee, you make clips with 1/16 length increments.  (1/32" increments if you ask for it)

There are several good options for this type of handle on the market.  Paul Walker has developed a very light carbon handle.  Kaz Minato offers a nice aluminum handle.  Tom Morris and Brodak offer hard point handles. The Fancher Handle is probably the most well known and widely used variety of the breed. 
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Joe Ed Pederson on July 17, 2018, 02:44:32 PM
   OS 20FP, purchased new in about 1993 from PECS Hobbies in Mountain View California, and run extensively since then (including a few minutes on a mixture of gasoline, Wesson Oil, and a bit of Ys2020 just to make it fire).  It is superior in run quality to all vintage engines, and most current engines, aside from piped full-stunt systems like the 40VF, PA, Ro-Jett and more effective as a stunt power plant to all vintage engines 35 and below.  The last version of the 25LA is even better.

   Here is the list of the modifications required to make it run so well:

Brett,

I assume there was supposed to be a website link at the end of the last sentence.   Could you try sending that website link again?  Thanks.

Joe Ed
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 17, 2018, 03:13:33 PM
I assume there was supposed to be a website link at the end of the last sentence.   Could you try sending that website link again?  Thanks.

There's almost absolutely nothing like the Brett Buck Tune Up for a 20FP.  In fact, the BBTU is -- almost absolutely nothing.  Don't change anything on the engine.  Leave the venturi stock.  Leave the muffler stock.  Leave the whole thing exactly the way it came out of the box.  Don't open it up and adjust anything.  Don't open it up at all.  The one non-nothing thing is to slap an APC 9-4 prop on it.  Lean it to peak, richen until you can hear it slow down a bit (about 500 RPM), and launch.

Brett has a much longer list of things to not do -- just imagine him in a crowd of people suggesting every insane thing that's ever been inflicted on an engine, and him saying "no, don't do that" and you have the essence of the BBTU.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 03:55:22 PM
Brett,

I assume there was supposed to be a website link at the end of the last sentence.   Could you try sending that website link again?  Thanks.

Joe Ed

  That was intentional, the modification is to modify the engines position from inside a box to bolted to an airplane. Use everything exactly as it came from the factory in all regards. Only the "OS Engine" decals are optional.

   Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Joe Ed Pederson on July 17, 2018, 05:01:07 PM
Thanks Brett.

 In addition I remembered after I posted (Senior moment) that I had printed an article you wrote on the OS FP .20 and OS .25 in the Nov/Dec 2014 Stunt News that described just what you learned about these two engines.

Joe Ed
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 17, 2018, 05:06:01 PM
Zero handle bias.  Vertical.   It may take some mental recalibration to become accustomed to a truly vertical handle.  Make the mental recalibrations.

Hard point handles have no cables to adjust neutral.  Lines are directly connected to the handle via clips.  Adjust neutral with different length line clips. 

If you have staggered length leadouts, you make one line correspondingly shorter and fine tune neutral with different length line clips.

With the Derek Moran line clip bender available from Jim Lee, you make clips with 1/16 length increments.  (1/32" increments if you ask for it)

There are several good options for this type of handle on the market.  Paul Walker has developed a very light carbon handle.  Kaz Minato offers a nice aluminum handle.  Tom Morris and Brodak offer hard point handles. The Fancher Handle is probably the most well known and widely used variety of the breed.

I don't want to get too off subject but what is the advantage of the hard point vs the fully adjustable handle?

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 17, 2018, 05:16:25 PM
I don't want to get too off subject but what is the advantage of the hard point vs the fully adjustable handle?

Ken

Immediate response. 
No dullness of feeling.
No induced spring action from the cable. 
No cable to fail.
Less overhang for less effort. (generally)
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 17, 2018, 05:52:14 PM
Brett,

I assume there was supposed to be a website link at the end of the last sentence.   Could you try sending that website link again?  Thanks.

Joe Ed

Actually Joe Ed, you'd just been victimized by Satellite Scientist humor (of which there are several very large volumes, each composed mostly of signs, symbols and #s or, as in this case, wide open "space").  You've gotta be careful with Brett. Like Jaws, just when you think you're safe he'll reach up and getcha!

Ted
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Joe Ed Pederson on July 17, 2018, 08:36:46 PM
Ted,

What a fun place to be.   I appreciate dry humor . . . I just don't always catch it the first time around.  :! 

Joe Ed
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 09:03:44 PM
Thanks Brett.

 In addition I remembered after I posted (Senior moment) that I had printed an article you wrote on the OS FP .20 and OS .25 in the Nov/Dec 2014 Stunt News that described just what you learned about these two engines.

Joe Ed

  Sorry, I just couldn't help myself. I have typed or pasted the same thing in so many times now, I have gotten sick of it, and I know (because they tell me) everyone else is, too.

   It is a frustrating situation because almost *no one* actually believes me. They try a 20FP or similar, come to me saying it doesn't work, then I find that they have "improved it" by modifying or changing something. The solution in all cases is to *put it back the way it came*. When I do that, suddenly, all the problems are solved, and they think I am some sort of super-guru - when all I did was put it back to the way the factory shipped it, which they could have easily done themselves had they *just left the damn thing alone*!

     Engines and stunt powerplants have been a solved issue at any level for about 25 years now, to the point that there engines/motors are no longer much of a distinguishing or determining factor in success. That's *wildly* different than the way it was before -  I know, I did it then, too. I would say it is to the point that most of the randomness has been taken out of the results - leading to the sort of "lost energy" Ted was referring to in the other thread. The vast, vast majority of common knowledge and "hop-up" tips are ridiculously wrong and counterproductive. There is no reason to struggle with 50's-style approaches, but that's what I see almost continually.

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 17, 2018, 09:31:51 PM
   It is a frustrating situation because almost *no one* actually believes me. They try a 20FP or similar, come to me saying it doesn't work...

Those are the ones who didn't listen.  The ones who did are too busy having fun to come complain to you.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 17, 2018, 10:52:20 PM
Crisis averted. Sorry guys. I can't believe I've never noticed this.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 11:14:33 PM
Crisis averted. Sorry guys. I can't believe I've never noticed this.

  D'OH!

    Brett

p.s. If you move the pushrod to the other side of the horn, you might miss the inner edge completely, no more cut-outs.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 11:19:11 PM
I don't want to get too off subject but what is the advantage of the hard point vs the fully adjustable handle?

    Those two are not mutually exclusive, but hard point handles have much less compliance than cable-based handles, particularly the Baron-style cable handles. Meaning the response is much more immediate, you move your hand, the controls move right then, not after the compliance has been taken up.

     Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 17, 2018, 11:29:19 PM
   There's a "leftbracket S rightbracket" at the end of the word "helps". Edit the post and remove that, strikethrough will go away. The problem is that things inside  brackets are interpreted as "tags", which are intended to create the formatting you see. "bracket s closebracket" is the tag to start a section of strikethrough text formatting ("leftbracket /s rightbracket" would end it, ending the section). I can't type it directly, because it will do the same thing to me.

     These "HTML tags" are essentially a language for formatting web pages, and it's the fundamental way your computer knows how to make things look the way they do. Actually, real HTML tags use triangular brackets (like "less than symbol s greater than symbol") Sparky's board uses square brackets but mostly the same tags, and most HTML tags will work here (like "leftbracket quote rightbracket" that you use all the time).

    Brett

I'll be.  Finally figured out what you were talking about and now my satellite comments are no longer germane and have been eradicated; as have the unwanted lines.  Rokit Science is magic!  y1 y1
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 17, 2018, 11:46:12 PM
    Those two are not mutually exclusive, but hard point handles have much less compliance than cable-based handles, particularly the Baron-style cable handles. Meaning the response is much more immediate, you move your hand, the controls move right then, not after the compliance has been taken up.

     Brett
I am going to have to try one.  I used to fly using the large red EZ-Just.  Everybody told me I needed one of those fancy new fully adjustable ones.   Not sure I don't like the EZ-Just better.  Fancher's handle seems to have enough adjustment to allow for minor line length differences and I assume somebody makes the different size clips. I think I will give that a try before I get too used to the wire ones.

Thanks - Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 17, 2018, 11:52:57 PM
\ Rokit Science is magic!  y1 y1

    This is about as far from science as it gets - it's computer science, which is a science in the same sense that a refrigerator is a species of dinosaur.

   Below is a snip of the code it takes to generate your post, everything you see in between the <> brackets is a "tag". They are instructions to the computer to make the things appear. There seems to be a lot of it, but the entire thing (thousands of lines) is very compact in internet terms, so easy to download. Your web browser knows how to read the instructions, and does most of the work of making it show as it does. This approach minimizes the amount of data that has to be transmitted. The language itself is called HyperText Markup Language, or HTML.

     Essentially, you are downloading not a "web page" as you see it, but a relatively compact computer script/program that your browser knows how to execute that generates the web page locally on your machine.

   Sparky's software knows how to generate new source code based on your inputs (note that only a tiny fraction of it is things you type), and creates links and updates the page source. When you click a link, the page source text file is downloaded, your browser "renders" it as you see using your processing power.

     The problem was that when you posted your response, you inadvertently used one of the tags (the strikethrough tag) as part of your text. Being a computer, it was stupid and just did what you (accidentally) told it to do.

      Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 17, 2018, 11:54:02 PM
  D'OH!

    Brett

p.s. If you move the pushrod to the other side of the horn, you might miss the inner edge completely, no more cut-outs.

Information received and action executed.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 18, 2018, 12:12:43 AM
I am going to have to try one.  I used to fly using the large red EZ-Just.  Everybody told me I needed one of those fancy new fully adjustable ones.   Not sure I don't like the EZ-Just better.  Fancher's handle seems to have enough adjustment to allow for minor line length differences and I assume somebody makes the different size clips. I think I will give that a try before I get too used to the wire ones.

Thanks - Ken

At Ted's behest, I have uploaded the info pack from his handle.  This info and that from Paul Walker's trim chart should be used to get your handle set correctly.

Lots of good ways to go about ditching the cable.  My handle offering (ie, Ted Fancher's) is one among several good choices.  The Fancher Handle basically mirrors the exterior dimensions of the Hot Rock(s).  So if you're comfortable with that shape, you'll be right at home.  I do offer separately an optional full set of clips that gives 5/8 of adjustment in 1/16 increments.  One should invest in a line clip bender, though.

Paul's feather weight carbon handle was used successfully by Dave Fitzgerald to win the Walker Cup this year and to carry Paul and Chris to top 5 finishes as well.  If Howard used the same handle that I saw at the NWR, then at least one Fancher handle was used by a top 5'er.  I think Derek uses a Kaz MNT hardpoint handle.   I do know several of my Fancher handles are being used this year at the FAI Worlds in Landres, as I have shipped them all over the globe. 

(Please pardon my shameless infomercial and thread drift.  Hopefully I plugged everyone elses product equally well)
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 18, 2018, 10:58:18 AM
    This is about as far from science as it gets - it's computer science, which is a science in the same sense that a refrigerator is a species of dinosaur.

   Below is a snip of the code it takes to generate your post, everything you see in between the <> brackets is a "tag". They are instructions to the computer to make the things appear. There seems to be a lot of it, but the entire thing (thousands of lines) is very compact in internet terms, so easy to download. Your web browser knows how to read the instructions, and does most of the work of making it show as it does. This approach minimizes the amount of data that has to be transmitted. The language itself is called HyperText Markup Language, or HTML.

     Essentially, you are downloading not a "web page" as you see it, but a relatively compact computer script/program that your browser knows how to execute that generates the web page locally on your machine.

   Sparky's software knows how to generate new source code based on your inputs (note that only a tiny fraction of it is things you type), and creates links and updates the page source. When you click a link, the page source text file is downloaded, your browser "renders" it as you see using your processing power.

     The problem was that when you posted your response, you inadvertently used one of the tags (the strikethrough tag) as part of your text. Being a computer, it was stupid and just did what you (accidentally) told it to do.

      Brett

Uh. OK. Thanks  ??? :-\ :o ;D

p.s.  You do understand, my friend, that me reading the attachment to your message was like trying to digest the Kama Sutra written in Sanskrit, don't you?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 18, 2018, 11:30:25 AM
I just wanted to note that it was at my request that Brent posted the material included in the hard point handles he has made available to others.

The sole reason I suggested it was to get the information starting about 2/3 of the way down the first page through to the end where there is a fairly comprehensive discussion of what I felt at the time and still subscribe to are the advantages of a hard point handle and how to best take advantage of them.  I encourage readers serious about improving their entry into the sport to read it carefully.  (The first two thirds of the first page are primarily construction tips)

As always when I discuss "my" handle I feel it appropriate that I share how I came to "develop" it.

At the World Championships in Shanghai in 1994 I was on the team and Paul was flying as defending World Champion and, as team mates I frequently caddied him on and off the circle for practice and official flights.  Constantly aware of different stunt "gadgets" I was struck by Paul's rudimentary hard point handle...all parts fixed with multiple up and down line attach points to permit sensitivity adjustments.  He varied "neutral" as needed by utilizing line clips of different lengths (such as are still available from Brent and others).

Knowing full well that Paul never does "anything" for no reason I mentally stole his ideas and the "Fancher" handle is based on the "hard point" attachment supplemented by a handfull of ideas I felt would retain the advantages of the hard point plus allow additional fine tuning features such as the overhang adjustment and limited neutral adjustments achieved by adjustable length line attach point "arms" (I stressed "limited" as gross differences...more than, say, an 1/8" or so, should never be utilized since large changes will make the "feel" of inside versus outside maneuvers different...the opposite of what we're after to fly well).

In other words, I only steal from the best...or, this year anyhow...the second oooops...third best.  Sorry Derek! >:D

If anyone wants more details on the information in Brent's post just ask.

Ted
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: dale gleason on July 18, 2018, 11:41:09 AM
Like most pilots, I don't read Sanskrit, only look at the pictures....

dg
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 18, 2018, 11:52:16 AM
Like most pilots, I don't read Sanskrit, only look at the pictures....

dg

Cute, Dale!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 18, 2018, 12:35:04 PM
Uh. OK. Thanks  ??? :-\ :o ;D

p.s.  You do understand, my friend, that me reading the attachment to your message was like trying to digest the Kama Sutra written in Sanskrit, don't you?

    It was offered to give you some idea what is going on behind the scenes, that makes all this stuff go, and how fundamentally simple the it is (details notwithstanding). When you write a response, all those icon buttons at the top are there to give you easy access to the tags without having to know the syntax. You use them all the time, you used the {color = green} tag in your original post, and use the {quote} tag all the time.

   Brett

   
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 18, 2018, 02:40:27 PM
Immediate response. 
No dullness of feeling.
No induced spring action from the cable. 
No cable to fail.
Less overhang for less effort. (generally)
Ok - your shameless marketing and convincing logic has beat me into submission and I have ordered a one of your "Hard Point" handles.  You should have a PM by now.  Does the certificate guarantying a 100 point increase in scores come with the handle or will that be by Email?

Ken 
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 18, 2018, 02:43:32 PM
Ok - your shameless marketing and convincing logic has beat me into submission and I have ordered a one of your "Hard Point" handles.  You should have a PM by now.  Does the certificate guarantying a 100 point increase in scores come with the handle or will that be by Email?

Ken

Mine did. Lol. Even my dumb @$$ felt an immediate change. I need to order more also.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ted Fancher on July 18, 2018, 05:31:06 PM
Just a general comment for Dane but pertinent for all.

When building/assembling a stunt ship always aim for more deflection than you think you'll need.  I always insure I have ~45 degrees of flap and elevator "accessible" before it leaves the shop.

The reason is simple: if you have it and don't need it you've lost nothing.  If you need it and can't get it you're in a world of hurt!

Ted
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 18, 2018, 11:01:29 PM
Immediate response. 
No dullness of feeling.
No induced spring action from the cable. 
No cable to fail.
Less overhang for less effort. (generally)
PayPal for the clips is on the way.  Enjoyed talking with you today.  The "I" flew on a Fox35. I am 17 in that pix.  "II" and "III" were a bit smaller and went through several McCoy 35's.  The profile in the Pix is what I am flying now.  It is a slightly smaller profile of the "IV" which will host the OS46FX and be my PA machine ( If it survives the new handle!)

Ken

Sometimes putting things side by side tells you something.  I like the "I" better than the "IV".  "I" has a bad stab/elevator ratio which I should not alter for Classic  but maybe I make IV look like I and just fix the stab and airfoil...
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 12:15:11 AM
Ok, as Ken suggested, this has kinda turned into an online clinic for my plane and getting it to fly through the pattern a little better for me. So here's the tweaks so far....
1) Pitch control correction. Minor building error. Up and down are equal now, flap to elevator rates seem equal also.
2) Engine run inconsistencies - tank issue. Vent was at the top of the tank. Inverted flight meant the vent was immersed, upright flight the vent was open to atmosphere. That can't be good. Plumbed tank for uniflow.
3) Bringing Paul Walkers trim article to the field with me. Hopefully a test flight tomorrow.
4) Go-pro and tripod ready for next test flight.

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 19, 2018, 07:38:08 AM
Ok, as Ken suggested, this has kinda turned into an online clinic for my plane and getting it to fly through the pattern a little better for me. So here's the tweaks so far....
1) Pitch control correction. Minor building error. Up and down are equal now, flap to elevator rates seem equal also.
2) Engine run inconsistencies - tank issue. Attached pic of how it was. Vent was at the top of the tank. Inverted flight meant the vent was immersed, upright flight the vent was open to atmosphere. That can't be good. Plumbed tank for uniflow.
3) Bringing Paul Walkers trim article to the field with me. Hopefully a test flight tomorrow.
4) Go-pro and tripod ready for next test flight.
Sorry I hijacked your thread over my handle issues.  Can't wait to see what it flies like now.  Having a ship capable is step #1.  On the tank issue - you hit the cause on the head but, there are two acceptable solutions and one will probably work better than the other.  Plan "A" is uniflow.  Probably best if you can make it work. Personally I have never had much success with Uniflow on a clunk.  Probably me.  If they just made a uniflow pickup fitting!  You can add muffler pressure to unifow if propwash doesn't give you the desired fix. Plan "B" is simple muffler pressure with the pickup in the upper forward inside corner of a tank that is at least 1oz larger than the amount of fuel you plan to use.   Try this only if the Uniflow doesn't work out. Either way you might consider adding a vent tube to the inside front corner that you cap off after filling to keep your engine from filling up with fuel. 

GOOD LUCK!

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 19, 2018, 08:53:09 AM
2) Engine run inconsistencies - tank issue. Attached pic of how it was. Vent was at the top of the tank. Inverted flight meant the vent was immersed, upright flight the vent was open to atmosphere. That can't be good. Plumbed tank for uniflow.

I run non-uniflow clunks with muffler pressure on most of my profiles.  If the uniflow tank doesn't give satisfaction, try muffler pressure.  For that matter, take some fuel tube with you, and try muffler pressure to the uniflow.  Note that it will change your needle setting, dramatically.

Is the tank height adjustable in a consistent and repeatable manner?  If it's located in the up/down direction by the tank hooks, consider opening up the distance by at least 1/8" and then holding the tank in place with balsa shims.  I've gone to carrying my tanks on a tray (plywood or thin aluminum with lots of holes) with slotted screw-holes.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 09:17:55 AM
I run non-uniflow clunks with muffler pressure on most of my profiles.  If the uniflow tank doesn't give satisfaction, try muffler pressure.  For that matter, take some fuel tube with you, and try muffler pressure to the uniflow.  Note that it will change your needle setting, dramatically.

Is the tank height adjustable in a consistent and repeatable manner?  If it's located in the up/down direction by the tank hooks, consider opening up the distance by at least 1/8" and then holding the tank in place with balsa shims.  I've gone to carrying my tanks on a tray (plywood or thin aluminum with lots of holes) with slotted screw-holes.

Well you see the thing is this. I built this before I ever considered giving stunt a real shake. So there's some things that are half @$$-ed at best. Not the build quality, but for example, the tank. Not adjustable at all. So! I made the vent line in the middle have the ability to adjust up and down.
Second, well maybe more important.... the engine is border line not enough. I hate to admit that because I love small engines. But that might be the case. Let's see if I get the run better how true that is.

Ken, hijack away. These things wander all over the place. It's all been great discussion and a lot of fun anyway. Where are you in Texas? I got family I see regularly out there often. Dallas area and Houston area.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 19, 2018, 09:50:14 AM
Second, well maybe more important.... the engine is border line not enough. I hate to admit that because I love small engines. But that might be the case. Let's see if I get the run better how true that is.


   What engine is that, an iron-liner 25SF (with what appear to be a huge venturi)?   Based on the video, you aren't coming close to running out of power, the engine is 4-stroking for most of the flight. You can get much better performance by reducing the pitch and running the engine faster and in a 2-stroke. That will also smooth it out. You might have to adjust the venturi size (smaller) to keep it from going "over the top".

   You are getting a lot of advice, with a lot of changes. Make them *incrementally*. You fixed the control travel issue, test that, with no other changes, then work carefully towards the other changes, testing and optimizing each one over multiple flights. If you try to do multiple changes at once, you could easily wind up with multiple issues and have no way to fix them or even know which one was the problem or which ones are interacting with each other. Those with lots of experience can make multiple changes and know which changes affect the other changes, but lacking that, you could just create a confusing mess.

      BTW, the first thing mentioned is the last one you are going to be able to fix. Reducing the sizes is something you do over a season, or multiple seasons, before you are comfortable and consistent with it. Be aware of it, but that clock in your head will not easily be altered and will demand much more of the airplane performance than what you are doing.

     Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 19, 2018, 09:52:14 AM
I've gone to carrying my tanks on a tray (plywood or thin aluminum with lots of holes) with slotted screw-holes.
Every time I think I have come up with a new Idea I find out that somebody did it first!  I use balsa wedges to get the height on my tray then I MonoKote them in. Your way is probably better.  Forgive the finish, this plane is 100% MonoKote.

The last pix is for Dane.  This is what I was talking about in my last post looks like.  Simple muffler pressure.  6oz tank and a pattern run is 3.5 to 3.75oz depending on the weather.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 19, 2018, 10:06:05 AM
Well you see the thing is this. I built this before I ever considered giving stunt a real shake. So there's some things that are half @$$-ed at best. Not the build quality, but for example, the tank. Not adjustable at all. So! I made the vent line in the middle have the ability to adjust up and down.
Second, well maybe more important.... the engine is border line not enough. I hate to admit that because I love small engines. But that might be the case. Let's see if I get the run better how true that is.

Ken, hijack away. These things wander all over the place. It's all been great discussion and a lot of fun anyway. Where are you in Texas? I got family I see regularly out there often. Dallas area and Houston area.

Dallas - We fly at Hobby Park in Garland mostly Sat & Sun AM this time of year.  Ever in town shoot me an EMail and I will see if there will be any of us out there.  Summers here give us a 3 hour window in the AM before your wheels melt.  Well maybe 4 hours.

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 10:16:32 AM

   What engine is that, an iron-liner 25SF (with what appear to be a huge venturi)?   Based on the video, you aren't coming close to running out of power, the engine is 4-stroking for most of the flight. You can get much better performance by reducing the pitch and running the engine faster and in a 2-stroke. That will also smooth it out. You might have to adjust the venturi size (smaller) to keep it from going "over the top".

     Brett

That is a pic before VSC. Jim Lee and Chris McMillan got my venturi "right-er". I've always felt the tank was an issue. So, that was a wishlist item. The control and the tank is the only change right now. I will not alter the way I fly (I'll keep them big) so I can see what's the difference.
Thanks!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 19, 2018, 01:34:03 PM
That is a pic before VSC. Jim Lee and Chris McMillan got my venturi "right-er". I've always felt the tank was an issue. So, that was a wishlist item. The control and the tank is the only change right now. I will not alter the way I fly (I'll keep them big) so I can see what's the difference.
Thanks!

    In the video, it still sounded  too large for the RPM you are running. Running it faster (by using less pitch) or making the venturi smaller are the two directions I would look into. The former will yield more performance, probably.

    But, as above, this is essentially a learning process, and not a race. This is why you should look with extreme skepticism on anyone who claims to evaluate 6 engines in an afternoon or similar (and one fairly infamous reviewer has definitely done that). With a lot of experience you can sort through "promising" vs "unpromising" in a few flying sessions, but evaluating one workable system VS another could take several seasons.

   Excellence is a journey, not a destination.

   Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 02:17:12 PM
Oh sorry, I missed the engine part, it's a magnum 28 pro. The ball bearing engine. Running a 9x4 on 20% excaliber fuel.
In the effort to follow your advice of not doing too many things at once, I'm going to leave that alone and see what changes the improved controls yields. I think we can comfortably say it can get through the pattern with this much power. Does that sound like a reasonable approach?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 19, 2018, 04:34:49 PM
Oh sorry, I missed the engine part, it's a magnum 28 pro. The ball bearing engine. Running a 9x4 on 20% excaliber fuel.

That should be a reasonable engine.  I'm not sure if Brett was hearing too fast or too slow (I should watch the video with sound on...).
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 19, 2018, 05:10:37 PM
Oh sorry, I missed the engine part, it's a magnum 28 pro. The ball bearing engine. Running a 9x4 on 20% excaliber fuel.
In the effort to follow your advice of not doing too many things at once, I'm going to leave that alone and see what changes the improved controls yields. I think we can comfortably say it can get through the pattern with this much power. Does that sound like a reasonable approach?

Do you have a tach?  What RPM are you launching at? 



Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 19, 2018, 05:23:12 PM
That should be a reasonable engine.  I'm not sure if Brett was hearing too fast or too slow (I should watch the video with sound on...).
I just listened to it for the 1st time with the volume up enough.  Sounds just like a bearing engine running a bit rich and it is making noises that it doesn't like the prop you gave it.  The only time I heard it break into it's power envelope was at the end of the tank.  I also think that some of what we hear on the video is Doppler.  Lower pitch prop and let it run faster.  BB's want to run fast.

Something I forgot to follow up on earlier.  Don't do anything about it now but, are you using full control to make your corners?  Don't mis-understand, your corners are more than tight enough for now but you don't want to get used to giving it more control than it needs which is very easy to do on corners.  You can tell by watching the bow in your lines in a corner.  If one line bows more than the other you are probably using full control.

Enough, go fly!

Ken

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 05:31:52 PM
Do you have a tach?  What RPM are you launching at?

Just enough to get it off the ground, not enough to make it run hot.  ;D
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 19, 2018, 05:54:15 PM
Just enough to get it off the ground, not enough to make it run hot.  ;D

Do you have an APC 9x4 you could try?  They are one of those magic props that just work. 

When you say 20% fuel, does that mean 20% oil or 20% nitro?

That venturi looks awfully big on that engine.  Do you know what size it is?  What needle valve assembly is it?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 06:23:26 PM
I only run APC 9x4, and that's not the venturi I run. That's an old pic just to show how the tank was.
Here's from right now, at the completely empty airfield.
I came out to test / practice and can not. Maybe next time.

I erased that other pic. It didn't serve the purpose I intended.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Steve Helmick on July 19, 2018, 06:28:03 PM
For future engine/prop tuning...Mike Haverly has run his Magnum .28 quite a bit in a Barnstormer, and used a 10-4 APC. They also make a 9.5 x 4.5 that might work, and a 10-3. I tried the 10-3 on my Magnum .25, but couldn't get enough speed out of it. Might work on a .28, tho.

Also, I truly despise spinners with plastic backplates. Too much chance of throwing the prop on a slight backfire, etc. The Great Planes plastic spinner with the aluminum backplate is excellent, especially if you retap the screw holes 4-40 and use socket head cap screws. Most aluminum spinners are useable, but some are cast and I had one (Chinese) that had the backplate crack...junk. Randy Aero's are the best, IMO. Tru-Turn and Dave Brown's are fine.

While we're talking about Randy Aero...I despise those OS NV Assy's, and wouldn't consider using one. Randy's are THE best. I don't like the clicker, don't like assembling them, and they have a failure mode where they can look fine, but not work worth a darn. I want stuff that looks broken when it's broken! Easier to throw out, which is a plus.  H^^ Steve 


Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 19, 2018, 09:30:59 PM
I only run APC 9x4, and that's not the venturi I run. That's an old pic just to show how the tank was.
Here's from right now, at the completely empty airfield.
I came out to test / practice and can not. Maybe next time.

I erased that other pic. It didn't serve the purpose I intended.

You may want to reconsider the 9x4 even if it's normally all you run. 

Even if it's a sprinkler type, that venturi looks like it's way too small (so on the good side, you have the problem bracketed!)

If APC made it, I'd say try a 10x3.5.  But they don't.  They make a 9.something x 3.75 that may be worthwhile to try, though.

Why no practice -- no stooge?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 19, 2018, 09:46:02 PM
You may want to reconsider the 9x4 even if it's normally all you run. 

Even if it's a sprinkler type, that venturi looks like it's way too small (so on the good side, you have the problem bracketed!)

If APC made it, I'd say try a 10x3.5.  But they don't.  They make a 9.something x 3.75 that may be worthwhile to try, though.

Why no practice -- no stooge?

Correct sir. Nothing to help launch today. Usually I have my wife, or kids, or just lucky enough for someone to be at the airfield. I guess the 115 degree weather scared everyone off. Lol.
I'm not saying my prop selection is correct or any of that stuff. Just giving the most current information about my set up. I figure if I'm asking for help, I better help with full disclosure!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 19, 2018, 10:23:35 PM
Correct sir. Nothing to help launch today. Usually I have my wife, or kids, or just lucky enough for someone to be at the airfield. I guess the 115 degree weather scared everyone off. Lol.
I'm not saying my prop selection is correct or any of that stuff. Just giving the most current information about my set up. I figure if I'm asking for help, I better help with full disclosure!

Get a stooge!  You're a piece of plywood and some metal bits away from being independent!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 20, 2018, 09:15:12 AM
Get the stooge from Brodak MFG.  Expensive but worth every penny when flying tike gear multi engine planes.  I still have my stooge Bobby Hunt sold at one time. H^^
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 20, 2018, 10:49:20 AM
Get the stooge from Brodak MFG.  Expensive but worth every penny when flying tike gear multi engine planes.  I still have my stooge Bobby Hunt sold at one time. H^^

Four "L" brackets, two rubber bands, a piece of piano wire, a 10 x 12" piece of plywood and a 10lb barbell weight or tent peg for grass and you have a stooge that will impress all that see it - namely you.  Or get one from Brodak, they are better looking. Every serious stunt flier has one in their trunk.  One thing you need to perfect before you start "stooging" is landings.  You need to land where the stooge is not where the plane wants to.  If you can't pull that off, put a stake in the ground you can hook your safety lanyard on to walk the plane back to the stooge without hosing your lines.  Use a wire tent peg that you can pull out and stick in on each flight.  You don't want it sticking up while you are flying!

The fact that you want to fly and can't is a sign that you have the Stunt Bug.  There is no known cure.

Ken 
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 22, 2018, 02:23:18 PM
Ok. So we all went out and flew today. There's was 4 of us.  From 0800 to 1230. I don't really count flights, but I got about 8 full patterns in today, plus some warm up, engine tune flights. I had a pretty nice camera set up, and tried to record the last pattern. I thought it was a decent flight, but the camera shut off after only 1 min. Ugh.

I like the new tank set up. Much better quality run I think.
And on the controls, The up and down are equal now. That made an enormous difference. I just wanted to fly all day! I'm down to one gallon of 20% now!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 22, 2018, 03:23:45 PM
I'm glad we could be of help.  Post your tank setup -- the more ideas there are floating around out there, the more there are to choose from when I need something new.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 24, 2018, 07:57:21 AM
I'm not sure that I would recommend this to anyone. I'm posting a pic because Tim is a cool dude and asked me to do so. *Disclaimer *I don't advocate emulating my set ups, unless you're using the definition as to surpass my set up.

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 24, 2018, 08:10:44 AM
Every time I think I have come up with a new Idea I find out that somebody did it first!  I use balsa wedges to get the height on my tray then I MonoKote them in. Your way is probably better.  Forgive the finish, this plane is 100% MonoKote.

The last pix is for Dane.  This is what I was talking about in my last post looks like.  Simple muffler pressure.  6oz tank and a pattern run is 3.5 to 3.75oz depending on the weather.

The more I look at your set up on that tank, the more I want to take my tank off and build a little slider table like Tim mentioned. That's really neat! If my current tank works out, I'll leave it. But there's always options.

What engine is that pictured that you say you run about 3.75 oz fuel for the pattern?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 24, 2018, 09:19:15 AM
The more I look at your set up on that tank, the more I want to take my tank off and build a little slider table like Tim mentioned. That's really neat! If my current tank works out, I'll leave it. But there's always options.

What engine is that pictured that you say you run about 3.75 oz fuel for the pattern?
Dane:

That one is an OS46LA.  They are famous for their miserly fuel consumption.  There are probably a lot of people who have dropped them into old 35 size ships simply because they didn't have to put in a bigger tank!  They are up there with the OS35s and Fox 35 as one of the best non-piped stunt engines ever made.  I actually had an overrun at a contest recently with only 3.25 on board -weather & a bit lean.  FYI, I use the big OS Muffler for nose weight.

Glad you are getting better engine runs and the plane is flying better!

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 24, 2018, 10:20:44 AM
I'm not sure that I would recommend this to anyone. I'm posting a pic because Tim is a cool dude and asked me to do so. *Disclaimer *I don't advocate emulating my set ups, unless you're using the definition as to surpass my set up.

AFAIK that's the right way to do a uniflow on a clunk tank.  To the point where the next time someone asks I'll look for that drawing.

The more I look at your set up on that tank, the more I want to take my tank off and build a little slider table like Tim mentioned. That's really neat! If my current tank works out, I'll leave it. But there's always options.

This is the best picture I could find on short notice.  Note that the tank is on the inboard side, which I've really come to like -- but you can do the same thing on the outboard side behind the engine:

(https://stunthanger.com/smf/building-techniques/build-cartoon-scale-mooney-mite/?action=dlattach;attach=245097;image)
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 24, 2018, 10:27:23 AM
Dane:

That one is an OS46LA.  They are famous for their miserly fuel consumption.  There are probably a lot of people who have dropped them into old 35 size ships simply because they didn't have to put in a bigger tank!  They are up there with the OS35s and Fox 35 as one of the best non-piped stunt engines ever made.  I actually had an overrun at a contest recently with only 3.25 on board -weather & a bit lean.  FYI, I use the big OS Muffler for nose weight.

Glad you are getting better engine runs and the plane is flying better!

Ken
Oh my. That's great fuel economy. I'm running 3.75 oz fuel through my little 28 for the pattern.
This has been a great thread for me. I feel like I'm nailing down some important things on this plane. I want to use this to learn trimming stuff for when I build my Stuka.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 24, 2018, 11:19:50 AM
Oh my. That's great fuel economy. I'm running 3.75 oz fuel through my little 28 for the pattern.
This has been a great thread for me. I feel like I'm nailing down some important things on this plane. I want to use this to learn trimming stuff for when I build my Stuka.

Not unusual for that engine.  There are a bunch of them around here and they all that economical.

Don Still's Stuka?  Incredible plane.  It is on my "Bucket List"

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 24, 2018, 11:41:59 AM
I have a hand me down Still's Stuka. Yet to be flown. I gotta stick an engine in it. But I was going to measure the tank with a syringe. That'll tell me me if there's enough fuel to fly the pattern with my engine choice.

The Stuka I'm building is the Hi Johnson Stuka. 59" gull wing and all. It'll be electric powered and classic legal. Hopefully done for next VSC.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 24, 2018, 11:56:52 AM
I have a hand me down Still's Stuka. Yet to be flown. I gotta stick an engine in it. But I was going to measure the tank with a syringe. That'll tell me me if there's enough fuel to fly the pattern with my engine choice.

The Stuka I'm building is the Hi Johnson Stuka. 59" gull wing and all. It'll be electric powered and classic legal. Hopefully done for next VSC.
Beautiful ship but I still love the Still Stuka.  When you drop in an engine let me know what it is.  I don't have anything under a .35 right now and the modern engines around .25 are way too powerful for that tinny plane. I saw Still flying one in 1964 with a Fox 25.  Serious corners.

Ken
Title: dupe...
Post by: Brett Buck on July 24, 2018, 11:58:12 AM
ignore, duped somehow during editing
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 24, 2018, 11:58:46 AM
I have a hand me down Still's Stuka. Yet to be flown. I gotta stick an engine in it. But I was going to measure the tank with a syringe. That'll tell me me if there's enough fuel to fly the pattern with my engine choice.

  Figure 1.75-2.0 ounces, I think, since the 20FP might have condensed spontaneously out of the ether just to go in a Don Still Stuka. 2.5 for margin.

   Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 24, 2018, 12:39:10 PM
That one is an OS46LA.  They are famous for their miserly fuel consumption.  There are probably a lot of people who have dropped them into old 35 size ships simply because they didn't have to put in a bigger tank!  They are up there with the OS35s and Fox 35 as one of the best non-piped stunt engines ever made.  I actually had an overrun at a contest recently with only 3.25 on board -weather & a bit lean.  FYI, I use the big OS Muffler for nose weight.

The 46LA will burn fuel commensurate to what's needed by the plane.  My 54 ounce Twister needs 4 oz for the pattern, my hand-me-down Walker Atlantis needs 6.  I'm sure that a reasonable-weight Twister would use more like 3 1/2 or 3 1/4.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 25, 2018, 09:03:39 PM
Well I'll just put this out there because I took the time to record something. Today was a joke. In the sense that this video is kinda funny. Apparently I need more wind practice. However, it was windy at VSC. And I did ok-ish. I got blown out several times today. It was really wierd. Everytime I bail out in the video, it's because the lines went really slack for some bizarre reason. Anyway, just a video test. I'll need to reposition the camera.

https://youtu.be/5KNHFmL-TDA
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 25, 2018, 11:54:50 PM
Dane:
Engine sounds a whole lot better.  Plane shouldn't be coming in at you where it did unless you have a warp, weak flap or you are placing the maneuvers too far into the wind.  Excellent judgement to abort when you did and how you did it.  The most important step in learing stunt is knowing how to take your airplane home in the same condition it was when you arrived at the field.

Ken

Follow Up:  I had a chance to watch this in slow motion.  What appears to be happening is an immediate loss of line tension when you give it rapid down control near the 45.  This is a symptom of a weak inboard flap.  It should show up in both inside and outside turns as a lessening of tension when you give it control but for some reason it is always worse outside.  I have had this happen to me several times in the past on profiles with the flap horn mounted on the flap.  I don't do that anymore.  All of the handle force is directed to the outboard flap and the plane will roll in if the connecting horn is at all weak.  That is one of the reasons I always put my controls on the inboard side.   Hold your outboard flap firm and see if you can move the inboard without using too much pressure.  If it moves, this could be your tension problem....or not.

One more thing - it appears that you are still concerned that you do not have enough down to an outside corner.  Perfectly natural had healthy.  Part of trimming is to adjust the turning speeds but it is also to learn it's limits.  I test my outboard turning limits initially from inverted flight so I am not turning towards the ground until I know how tight it will turn and what it does.  Others may have better methods, that is just mine.

Good Luck
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 26, 2018, 10:42:04 AM
You may be on to something there with that flap horn situation. Maybe that's why it shows up in the wind more than anything? Also, you said something a few days ago about you thought I was moving my hand a lot to make a corner. I really do. It's like everything I can do to get it to turn. I'm gonna move my elevator down a hole and see if that's gooder.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 26, 2018, 02:13:08 PM
Good advice from Ken.   I watched the video and now that I have stopped laughing you are smart to bail out when things don't go right.  I have had 3 planes that didn't go home because of tricky air at our field.   Mainly engine quiting in a bad spot and not enough wind to keep lines tight.   I flew my DOC Special Tuesday evening in a light breeze and discovered that it flies better with a richer engine setting.  Using a Fancher handle it was turning when I wanted it to.    Have you checked to see if your loops are the same inside and outside from level flight?  Any way it was fun watching you on that video.   Let us know about the flaps and hopefully you have better air next time out. H^^
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 26, 2018, 05:17:58 PM
Doc, since I don't get to fly with you guys on here, I like to post my videos good or bad. That way you can see what shenanigans I'm up to! There's one part where I showed you I can still run!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 26, 2018, 10:47:59 PM
Well team, today marks the end of my trusty twister. I'd like to pretend I'm not the kind of guy that crashes often (combat is a different story) but it happened. I've felt this plane can't make outside turns very well. At the end of this flight, I was doing figure 8's and stuff to run the tank out. I looped 'er round, and applied the down. But the down, she did not do. And a pile of balsa was all that remained.


https://youtu.be/1HNQRE4A0O8
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 26, 2018, 11:45:09 PM
Well team, today marks the end of my trusty twister. I'd like to pretend I'm not the kind of guy that crashes often (combat is a different story) but it happened. I've felt this plane can't make outside turns very well. At the end of this flight, I was doing figure 8's and stuff to run the tank out. I looped 'er round, and applied the down. But the down, she did not do. And a pile of balsa was all that remained.

Something broke loose.  You can see it start the outside turn then turn inside and...plop.  You didn't kill it, it committed suicide!

Just an FYI. A flapped plane's controls will reverse if you lose elevator.  It is actually still flyable if you recognize what happened in less that the .01 seconds it takes to re-kit itself.

Engine OK?
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 12:03:17 AM
Yeah the engines cool. That grass is surprisingly soft. We've all hit the ground out there, changed a prop and got right back in the air. This didn't even bend the needle! But it nosed in straight. Really did a number on the wing.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brent Williams on July 27, 2018, 12:10:53 AM
RIP Twister! Sorry to see that! 





Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 27, 2018, 12:15:34 AM
Yeah the engines cool. That grass is surprisingly soft. We've all hit the ground out there, changed a prop and got right back in the air. This didn't even bend the needle! But it nosed in straight. Really did a number on the wing.

   That's fixable, the second wipeout on the Skyray was worse than that, and it would certainly take less time than building a new one.

   Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: James Holford on July 27, 2018, 05:36:47 AM
Oh no Dane. I can say the HD quality is stellar tho. 

 Now you can build another!!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Tim Wescott on July 27, 2018, 08:55:08 AM
It sounds like something was getting ready to go, and it went in the middle of an outside loop.

I'm with Brett -- that's fixable, almost certainly in less time than building a new Twister.  Especially if you don't try to refinish it -- just patch the covering with whatever comes to hand and call it honorable battle scars.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 09:13:00 AM
It sounds like something was getting ready to go, and it went in the middle of an outside loop.

I don't like to make excuses, but that's exactly what it felt like. In that video, where it dived in, it looked like I pulled up, but I was in fact pushing down pretty hard.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Mike Haverly on July 27, 2018, 10:22:37 AM
I don't think anything let go, or at least until it hit the ground.  Finish the pattern and fly level!  A couple of unwind loops are understandable but all that screwin' around to burn fuel often will end up like the video.  I've been chewed out more than once for the same thing.  Adjust the fuel load to match your flight time.  I've seen some respected high end pilots have similar problems.

Outsides didn't look that bad to me other than the fact you start a little low and hammer it pretty hard.  You fly at altitude, it needs a chance to fly!  FWIW entrance to clover needs to be higher also.

Rebuild and carry on.  All of the pieces are there and good size at that.  Beauty isn't important at this stage.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Mike Haverly on July 27, 2018, 10:27:43 AM
I looked again.  Entry height was OK, hammering the bottom is evidenced by the bobble.  Second time through was smaller, not unusual because of the feeling of needing to maintain a size.  Shape at this point is much more important.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Brett Buck on July 27, 2018, 10:47:19 AM
I don't think anything let go, or at least until it hit the ground. 

  Maybe not, but my assessment was similar- at about 15 feet headed rapidly towards the ground there was a positive/inside change in direction. I expect it could be a input correction, consciously or not, trying to save it, but far, far too late.

    Doesn't matter, put it back together, it can be flying by Sunday. It's a little more than I would have attempted at the field -  the wing could be fixed in about 1/2 hour using my repair box contents, but the fuselage would require some slow epoxy and multiple steps, and some paint.

    Brett
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 27, 2018, 10:49:54 AM
Yeah the engines cool. That grass is surprisingly soft. We've all hit the ground out there, changed a prop and got right back in the air. This didn't even bend the needle! But it nosed in straight. Really did a number on the wing.
Really does look like a "Phoenix" short kit.  MonoKote will hide just about anything and clear Gorilla packaging tape is fuelproof and really strong.  Apologize to your engine and get back in the air.

Ken

PS - Just out of curiosity, was your elevator pushrod still connected to the flaps when the crash truck arrived?  It has been a very long time ago but I have had 2 clevises strip on the elevator horns and both planes did exactly what yours did.  The exception was that I was high enough on the 2nd one to control the crash with just flaps.  I know they are popular and super easy to adjust but I get super nervous now with any control connection that can come undone in flight.  We all underestimate the forces we put on those pushrods.
 
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 11:11:41 AM

PS - Just out of curiosity, was your elevator pushrod still connected to the flaps when the crash truck arrived?  It has been a very long time ago but I have had 2 clevises strip on the elevator horns and both planes did exactly what yours did.  The exception was that I was high enough on the 2nd one to control the crash with just flaps.  I know they are popular and super easy to adjust but I get super nervous now with any control connection that can come undone in flight.  We all underestimate the forces we put on those pushrods.

The elevator push rod was disconnected at the flap horn, and the pushrod was straight like it hadn't been hit. The little retaining device for the ez-just was missing.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 11:15:27 AM

Outsides didn't look that bad to me other than the fact you start a little low and hammer it pretty hard.  You fly at altitude, it needs a chance to fly!  FWIW entrance to clover needs to be higher also.

Rebuild and carry on.  All of the pieces are there and good size at that.  Beauty isn't important at this stage.

10-4. Thanks Mike. Message received, no shenanigans after the pattern.

Now, the outside started low? I really need to fly with someone. That felt like I was flying REALLY high. I'm just gonna drive somewhere on a weekend and get some help in person. I'll try to adjust what you're saying. I can fly my PF today and see where that gets me.
Thank you.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 27, 2018, 11:16:25 AM
The elevator push rod was disconnected at the flap horn, and the pushrod was straight like it hadn't been hit. The little retaining device for the ez-just was missing.
Game, Set and Match.

Ken

My lesson came at the expense of a freshly finished Skylark.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 27, 2018, 11:16:59 AM
Yes it looked like something  let go from what I could see.     Rebuild what you have and fly.    H^^
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 11:17:59 AM
Game, Set and Match.

Ken

Yes and before you say it, I'm a ding-a-ling for trusting those little plastic push on retainers. Haha! !
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Ken Culbertson on July 27, 2018, 11:24:15 AM
Yes and before you say it, I'm a ding-a-ling for trusting those little plastic push on retainers. Haha! !

We all have at least one "been there done that" skeleton in our closets.  You are not supposed to ask why I let it happen twice!

It wasn't the screwing around that caused the crash but it is not a good idea to do more than unwrap your lines.  Depending on your footwork, that will be either 2 or 3 outsides.  Measuring your fuel helps keep you honest but it also trains you on how weather and needle setting affect the fuel requirements.  Comes in handy at a contest when someone is watching.  Look at it this way, it was ready to go and if you had not crashed at the end of that flight it probably wound have given way in the Reverse Wingover next flight.  That could have cost you your engine!

Ken
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 27, 2018, 11:35:12 AM
Now you know why I use ball links or Z bends in the control system. H^^
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Mike Haverly on July 27, 2018, 11:37:47 AM
Dane, see my second post.  Not too low, just a little too violent!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 11:44:36 AM
Dane, see my second post.  Not too low, just a little too violent!

Correction, see that now. Ok I know I gotta work on that. That's where I've been whining about the control on this plane. My insides seem to turn. My outsides seemed to take more than what I could give it.
During my NTSB report, I found that I would never have as much down as up because when I lined up the lead out's and rods, the bellcrank was way off. Like not 90 to the ribs when everything was neutral. I built the PF better so I'll change the gear and practice with that during the twister repairs.
Again, thanks for the input.
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: john e. holliday on July 27, 2018, 11:51:34 AM
Another call for adjustable push rods so bell crank can be set at its neutral. S?P
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Fredvon4 on July 27, 2018, 11:58:17 AM
Dane brother...slip that sucker in the trash and finish the one built for me and practice practice practice....seriously

Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Dane Martin on July 27, 2018, 12:03:05 PM
Dane brother...slip that sucker in the trash and finish the one built for me and practice practice practice....seriously

Well it's your PF. Lol!
Title: Re: Roast me! Pattern video critique request
Post by: Fredvon4 on July 27, 2018, 12:42:31 PM
Fly it brother I am never gonna get it in the air...seriously!