Ted,
I've been pretty "Ruffied Up" after searching as much that's been said about the Ruffy until I came across the discussion below I found under the topic "Old time Stunters vs New Ones" posted in 2009. I have the full size RMS plans and am ready to push the button to place an order for wood but now I'm leaning away. It all makes good sense and I don't need another OTS under performer especially in the areas your describe. Increasing the tail from its approximate 17% to 25% bringing the CG aft and even equalizing the wings holding to 50" still is not going to change it's aspect so where to go???
I have an unopened Brodak Vector 40 kit on the shelf and an OS 46 ready for it. Say good bye to the Ruffy and leave the old kit on the shelf as a reminder of the past. Any final thoughts since your 2009 position?
Steve
Ted your input.....
While I'm a big Lew McFarland fan (especially the awesome Shark), I'm less enamored of the Ruffy. My decision to build the one I flew once or twice at VSC was based largely on nostalgia. I had flown one at my very first Nats in 1959 as a Junior. It was a very cool thing for a young man to do (traveled by train with my brother Gary from Seattle down to the "Smog City" (LA) , met tons of new friends and witnessed many of my teen age heroes in the "Wonderland Park" atmosphere of the work hangar at Los Alimitos (Palmer, a young Werwage, Riley Wooten, Duke Fox and on and on). It was sort of a competitive nightmare (finished sixth after blowing up the Fox practicing the night before the Junior Finals [yes, they had qualifying and finals for Jr. and Sr. back then]) that had enough highlights to obscure any sense of disappointment.
Sorry, at my age you tend to ramble ...
The Ruffy is sort of a poster child for a number of things that proved to not be ideal for a competitive stunt ship. Primarily these are subtle differences that make more modern designs (and a handful of the Ruffy's contemporaries) stand out when faced with less than ideal conditions. Boiled down to their basics, the shortcomings amount to: too small a tail in relation to the wing area and a much too low aspect ratio.
Ostensibly "similar" to the Nobler of roughly the same vintage, IMHO the Ruffy suffers in comparison. I built and flew an "original" Nobler from the Brodak kit with what would appear today to be an inferior (read skinny) airfoil that was short lived (a recreation of its demise is viewable on YouTube) but was among the best flying airplanes I've ever built and flown. After it was squashed I (at the urging of Don McClave) picked up one of Eric Rules terrific laser cut Ruffy kits and put it together for the next VSC.
The comparison over a short period of time was quite dramatic. Both airplanes were roughly the same wing area (550 or so) and weighed in the very low 40 oz range. The Nobler is right around a five to one aspect ratio while the Ruffy was closer to four to one (I'd have to go measure it again but that's pretty close) Both airplanes used the identical power train, a Rustler .40 starting out with a Tornado 10 X 4 three blade prop and 10% nitro fuel. Neither has the now common 25% or so tail volume although the Nobler was significantly larger proportionately and didn't have to be as big because of the higher aspect ratio wing. The Ruffy tail is, frankly, tiny.
About the only trim issue that was necessary (other than minor CG adjustments) to the Nobler was a tab on the end outboard flap to compensate for the overly asymmetrical wing that was ubiquitous in that era. Other than that the airplane flew as though on rails and loved the four pitch prop. It flew for the first time a day or two before official flying at VSC that year and came in a very competitive 2nd or 3rd. It was delightfully balanced and "never" did anything unexpected. There wasn't much "air" at the event as I recall and it didn't live long enough to gain further exposure so I can only state that it "felt" as though it would handle bad air very effectively.
The Ruffy, by comparison, had numerous trim issues that needed to be resolved to make it fly competitively although it did finish somewhere in the top five at its first VSC. Two things jumped out right away. First, it wasn't going to turn corners with one to one flap/elevator ratios. That was totally expected but the plan was to start out with the ship set up like its contemporary and see how it had to be changed.
Second, the same powertrain setup that worked so well on the Nobler was totally overwhelmed by the Ruffy. In the hot air of Tucson I ended up flying the ship on roughly 20% nitro and, initially with a 10 X 6 Tornado but finally with a 10.5 X 5.5 Eather courtesy of Keith Trostle. The reason for this disparity is clearly the low aspect ratio wing which produces more drag for a given amount of lift. Even reducing the flap throw significantly plus adding tail weight the drag was simply too much for the powertrain that performed so well on the Nobler. It would slow down in maneuvers and never had enough torque to accelerate again until it was back in level flight.
There is no doubt in my mind that an Aero Tiger .36 would improve this situation remarkably.
With the reduced flap deflection and the "turbo-ed" Rustler the Ruffy flew "OK" in the competition but required much more attention to do the tricks well. The reduced flap travel made the ship twitchy in corners and difficult to stop at the desired angle. Pull outs at five feet were generally a matter of luck. It would pull out at six or seven feet the first square and trying to finesse the second would bring it out at two feet the second time 'round. The next flight those differences might be reversed.
The tiny tail combined with the low aspect ratio wing made the ship very sensitive to CG changes. As a result it would be sort of sluggish in response at the start of the flight and twitchy at the end of the flight. Again, it was generally difficult to fly well, especially when compared to the smooth predictable response of the Nobler.
Although it's been repeated so often as to sound like a mantra, I've got to repeat that there is a reason the Nobler is considered the Grandaddy of most everything that flies stunt well 60 years later. We've made modest progress in refining George's original genius but under very good to modestly bad conditions the Nobler is still a worthy work horse.
I can't quite say the same thing for the Ruffy ... despite all the fond memories of my first one.
Ted
Topic: Ruffy kit. How does it build and fly (Read 6057 times)