Worlds Engine Question

[Dick Pacini]

Did anyone tabulate how many PA entrants had electric power?  Also, what did the top 3 have?

[Paul Taylor]

From what I hear the majority was electric. Mainly due to the availability of fuel and noise in other countries.

Not sure on the winners. I do know Orestes is electric.

[Dave_Trible]

Dave Fitzgerald was the highest placing IC. (PA .75) at 4th place.   It would be a mistake to read anything into that other than the fliers chose for personal preference and/or bought airplanes so equipped.   I don’t believe the RTF or ARF airplanes are furnished with IC.   They are equal in most every respect to compete with.   If anything (and IMHO),   the IC ships seemed to penetrate the windy conditions a little better.  The Sharks definitely have the edge in corner turning ability which demonstrated the difference in scores and placing.

Dave

[Paul Walker]

In the top 20 there were 3 IC motors.

If any of these fliers thought IC was better, you can be sure they would use them. Some just aren't convinced yet.

[Doug Moon]

I went the WCs as a spectator. It was eye opening to say the least. Matt Colan and David F were the only ICs in the top 15. Both running PA 75 on Eather pipes. The rest were electric setups. It almost feels like IC should get a point bonus as it looked much harder to use IC over electric. The setup with prop along with the correct RPM and pipe setting to get the smooth on off power you need takes alot of time to learn and apply. Then you need to do it for several different conditions all while monitoring the amount of fuel needed. Conditions this week ranged from dead calm to hard blustery winds. The electric setups seemed to have an advantage where they can change props and add or subtract RPM as needed. Time is never changed and changing rpm doesn't change the way the system runs.

Jake had to switch to a purchased Ukrainian model with an electric setup this week and it was shocking to see his improvement in just a few days. Being electric I could coach him during his flight and give him needed tips prior to each maneuver keeping him moving forward mentally as he progressed through the pattern. I swear he gained 4 years of advancement in 4 days with that thing. It is buy and fly!! 

Another thing I noted is the models are setup way differently than your traditional AMA model. For one they are all around 60oz. The electric system can apply power so quickly it can pull through the corners that can actually be flown. See the pics below of one of the Chinese competitor's plane in the pits. Note the elevator travel vs the flap travel. Also note the type of hinge. Very different.

I learned so much and now I have more questions than ever. But one thing is for sure an AMA pattern looks nothing like an FAI pattern. An FAI pattern can win AMA (we have seen this several times now) but I'm not so sure goes the other way around....

[Matt Colan]

To piggyback off of Doug…I love my 75 setup. The equipment ran well and was the most reliable I had had in Muncie, I think ever. I tried different nitro the first day of practice and stuck with 15%, even in the mornings when conditions were cool. Dave ran 20% all week. There was a lot I learned over the week that I’m currently mulling over for the next airplane. The controls being one of them. the Sharks have an insane amount of control deflection that can be dialed in, and they’re light. The next airplane I build I am thinking of a fully take apart system, Have the ability to speed up the controls a lot, and it needing to be 60oz finished. If I try out for the next world team, I would have to go to electric to be competitive. As much as I love the 75, it can’t compete with the electrics, especially after hearing what is coming down the pipeline for next generation timers (except maybe Doug’s super loud pipe  )

For now, I’ll stick with IC for the next couple years, but the time to switch is coming, as much as I don’t want it to

[Matt Neumann]

I went the WCs as a spectator. It was eye opening to say the least. Matt Colan and David F were the only ICs in the top 15. Both running PA 75 on Eather pipes. The rest were electric setups. It almost feels like IC should get a point bonus as it looked much harder to use IC over electric. The setup with prop along with the correct RPM and pipe setting to get the smooth on off power you need takes alot of time to learn and apply. Then you need to do it for several different conditions all while monitoring the amount of fuel needed. Conditions this week ranged from dead calm to hard blustery winds. The electric setups seemed to have an advantage where they can change props and add or subtract RPM as needed. Time is never changed and changing rpm doesn't change the way the system runs.

Jake had to switch to a purchased Ukrainian model with an electric setup this week and it was shocking to see his improvement in just a few days. Being electric I could coach him during his flight and give him needed tips prior to each maneuver keeping him moving forward mentally as he progressed through the pattern. I swear he gained 4 years of advancement in 4 days with that thing. It is buy and fly!! 

Another thing I noted is the models are setup way differently than your traditional AMA model. For one they are all around 60oz. The electric system can apply power so quickly it can pull through the corners that can actually be flown. See the pics below of one of the Chinese competitor's plane in the pits. Note the elevator travel vs the flap travel. Also note the type of hinge. Very different.

I learned so much and now I have more questions than ever. But one thing is for sure an AMA pattern looks nothing like an FAI pattern. An FAI pattern can win AMA (we have seen this several times now) but I'm not so sure goes the other way around....

What hinges did they use?  They have to be quite free from friction.

[Matt Neumann]

To piggyback off of Doug…I love my 75 setup. The equipment ran well and was the most reliable I had had in Muncie, I think ever. I tried different nitro the first day of practice and stuck with 15%, even in the mornings when conditions were cool. Dave ran 20% all week. There was a lot I learned over the week that I’m currently mulling over for the next airplane. The controls being one of them. the Sharks have an insane amount of control deflection that can be dialed in, and they’re light. The next airplane I build I am thinking of a fully take apart system, Have the ability to speed up the controls a lot, and it needing to be 60oz finished. If I try out for the next world team, I would have to go to electric to be competitive. As much as I love the 75, it can’t compete with the electrics, especially after hearing what is coming down the pipeline for next generation timers (except maybe Doug’s super loud pipe  )

For now, I’ll stick with IC for the next couple years, but the time to switch is coming, as much as I don’t want it to

You said something about the new electric systems coming down the pipeline.  Could you elaborate?  I am just now hearing about this.

[Paul Smith]

From what I hear the majority was electric. Mainly due to the availability of fuel and noise in other countries.

Not sure on the winners. I do know Orestes is electric.

It is infinitely easier to buy an electric system than it is get a piston engine to run in a winning manner.
Otherwise, little children would not be doing so well.
Money and and plenty of practice  flying.  That's all, folks.

[Matt Neumann]

It is infinitely easier to buy an electric system than it is get a piston engine to run in a winning manner.
Otherwise, little children would not be doing so well.
Money and and plenty of practice  flying.  That's all, folks.

As a current electric flyer, electrics are not as plug and play as many people think.  There are still a lot of issues that you have to watch out for just like IC engines.  I know of several people who had issues with electrics at the NATS.  I also know of people who came to the NATS and talked with other people who had electrics and got their system to work better.  Just like IC engined folks.  So again, they are not as plug and play as many people think.

[Motorman]

Jake had to switch to a purchased Ukrainian model with an electric setup this week and it was shocking to see his improvement in just a few days.

Where does one buy one of these Ukrainian planes?

Thanks
MM

[Ken Culbertson]

What hinges did they use?  They have to be quite free from friction.

They use a pocket hinge.  They are as close to zero binding.  I am using them on my new plane.  Sparky did a video on them.

Ken

[Brett Buck]

You said something about the new electric systems coming down the pipeline.  Could you elaborate?  I am just now hearing about this.

  New Igor timer with new capabilities.

     Brett

[Paul Taylor]

  New Igor timer with new capabilities.

     Brett

Like?🤣

[Matt Neumann]

They use a pocket hinge.  They are as close to zero binding.  I am using them on my new plane.  Sparky did a video on them.

Ken

OK, where do I find the video?  I am now very curious.  Zero binding is what I have been looking for.

[Paul Taylor]

Here ya go Matt


https://www.youtube.com/live/cjKD019iOUk?feature=shared

[Paul Taylor]

They use a pocket hinge.  They are as close to zero binding.  I am using them on my new plane.  Sparky did a video on them.

Ken

Hey Ken
Nice looking job on the hinges. Your pockets look a little different than what Robert did in his video. You got any pictures on how you mounted yours?

[Paul Walker]

The winner had the new Igor timer as did myself, Tim Just, Howard Rush and Chris Cox.
It is his latest iteration with the  Drag Compensation I convinced him to add. The boost and brake are individually adjustable as is the DC. There are 3 modes the DC works in, but is sent out in just one mode that both Igor and I ended up using last year.

It is a significant improvement over his old one. Some have asked Igor if he would take his old ones back for a discount on the new ones. He just laughs!!

The new ones are close to being available. He is guessing around October.

[Paul Walker]

The last post got me thinking. How many combinations are there?  I laid out the variables and the range (within reason) and multiplied them out. Some variables only apply to certain others, so consideration of that was taken. I did not use the full range that Igor has available so this numbers likely too small.

The number of combinations is approximately 123 billion.  Seems like a lot!

So, when someone asks me how to set it for their model, I give them a set of "safe" numbers and instructions to how to get there. No one will ever test 123 billion.

Last year I tried to test all the end points of the DC with adjusting the "artifical" feed forward functions. 9 endpoints with 3 different "artificial" adjustments  and several different SFB values with fixed SF+ and SF- values. That took most of Spring to work out. Of course, comparing in different atmospheric conditions confounds a good subjective evaluation of each different variable.

But, some might say this is easier than an IC motor.  That is complete rubbish. We are not talking about sport flying here, where that might be the case.

But, all the work with this is worthwhile. Don't let me scare you off from trying this timer. It is the best thing out there. When Igor starts to sell them, be sure to try one.....and be sure it is connected to a Jeti Spin 66 from Igor. The Pro version will not work well with this timer.


Now, off to try some of the variables I have not used to date! 
 

[Dan McEntee]

In the top 20 there were 3 IC motors.

If any of these fliers thought IC was better, you can be sure they would use them. Some just aren't convinced yet.

    Just to play Devil's Advocate here, those three I/C entrants finished in the top 5. Two of them were only 5 points out of first place. And I would call the conditions that I saw definitely challenging for any power plant and pilot.

    When I get asked by someone what is the best power plant to fly, I ask back, which technology do you understand the best and feel most comfortable with, and can get the most benefit from? There are some out there that think electric is as easy as putting the batteries in your Stanzel Electromic toy airplane, and I am not kidding. I do not fly electric because I'm just a gear head and at my stage in life, age and general health, I'm more interested in just having fun and have had a lot of that along the way with engines and have done satisfactorily in competition as far as I am concerned. Engines are a big part of the event for me, along with the sounds and the smells. I never could make the commitment in time and money,( mostly time,) to progress to the upper most levels of competition for several reasons, so I never even got into tuned pipes, but I beat some of them along the way. I have watched the classifieds on here and the old Stuka Stunt site over the years and watched motors, batteries, speed controllers, timers and such flow like water back and forth. There never seemed to be one turn key type set up for electric that a guy could just buy and install and be done and be happy with.. The grass always seemed greener with some other component. Things always seem to be changing, just like any kind of electronics, and I think some guys get frustrated with that.  I think a lot of guys have issues tuning their set ups to what they think they need. They can't grasp the technology well enough to improve their performance. That is whether it's I/C or electric. No matter what you are running, there will be problems, and trouble shooting and solving those is part of the hobby.

  I think it's kind of a loaded question, which is better??  I think it's a matter of who makes best use of what they have to the best result possible. The New York Yankees have spent hundred of millions of dollars on the best players they can buy and still underperform. When it comes to individual talent and effort, I think of the late, great sprint car driver Jan Opperman, who had this said about him many times: " He can take his'n and beat your'n, and then take your'n and beat his'n." And I have seen that done!! In our event, it's not always the airplane or the power plant, sometimes it's the nut on the handle!!

  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Paul Walker]

    Just to play Devil's Advocate here, those three I/C entrants finished in the top 5. Two of them were only 5 points out of first place. And I would call the conditions that I saw definitely challenging for any power plant and pilot.

    When I get asked by someone what is the best power plant to fly, I ask back, which technology do you understand the best and feel most comfortable with, and can get the most benefit from? There are some out there that think electric is as easy as putting the batteries in your Stanzel Electromic toy airplane, and I am not kidding. I do not fly electric because I'm just a gear head and at my stage in life, age and general health, I'm more interested in just having fun and have had a lot of that along the way with engines and have done satisfactorily in competition as far as I am concerned. Engines are a big part of the event for me, along with the sounds and the smells. I never could make the commitment in time and money,( mostly time,) to progress to the upper most levels of competition for several reasons, so I never even got into tuned pipes, but I beat some of them along the way. I have watched the classifieds on here and the old Stuka Stunt site over the years and watched motors, batteries, speed controllers, timers and such flow like water back and forth. There never seemed to be one turn key type set up for electric that a guy could just buy and install and be done and be happy with.. The grass always seemed greener with some other component. Things always seem to be changing, just like any kind of electronics, and I think some guys get frustrated with that.  I think a lot of guys have issues tuning their set ups to what they think they need. They can't grasp the technology well enough to improve their performance. That is whether it's I/C or electric. No matter what you are running, there will be problems, and trouble shooting and solving those is part of the hobby.

  I think it's kind of a loaded question, which is better??  I think it's a matter of who makes best use of what they have to the best result possible. The New York Yankees have spent hundred of millions of dollars on the best players they can buy and still underperform. When it comes to individual talent and effort, I think of the late, great sprint car driver Jan Opperman, who had this said about him many times: " He can take his'n and beat your'n, and then take your'n and beat his'n." And I have seen that done!! In our event, it's not always the airplane or the power plant, sometimes it's the nut on the handle!!

  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

This was a discussion about the World Chamos, not the Nat's.
Different animal
.

[Dave_Trible]

They use a pocket hinge.  They are as close to zero binding.  I am using them on my new plane.  Sparky did a video on them.

Ken

This got a bit off topic but here is a picture of the new World Champ Shark.   What is different from yours Ken is that the hinge line is not enclosed and not sealed due to the nature of the flap rotation.   On most of these the elevators will travel to nearly 90 degrees each way-  looking like the pushrod isn’t attached.  That’s what Matt was calling ‘insane’.   The covered hinge line wouldn’t allow that sort of travel.   Obviously they aren’t deployed that far in flight but it shows the SPEED of elevator travel compared to the flaps which look to move around 45 degrees.   My reckoning is that these would be too wicked to fly if setting the CG in the range we commonly do on our airplanes here.  Frank Waddle from Germany showed me they balance right at the root airfoil high point which is more than an inch ahead of what I’m flying.  In other words pretty nose heavy to smooth it out in level flight with a powerful ‘flipper’ yonder- way yonder.

Dave

[Dave_Trible]

Marco Shark

[Dave_Trible]

You might also notice the elevator is drooped down quite a bit in-re the flaps.   Most of the Sharks are like that.  Actually the bottom side is parallel to the flaps but the top side isn’t.   

Dave

[Crist Rigotti]

Thank you Paul.

[Paul Smith]

As a current electric flyer, electrics are not as plug and play as many people think.  There are still a lot of issues that you have to watch out for just like IC engines.  I know of several people who had issues with electrics at the NATS.  I also know of people who came to the NATS and talked with other people who had electrics and got their system to work better.  Just like IC engined folks.  So again, they are not as plug and play as many people think.

Since 1958 I have bought, set up and flown countless glow engines.  Many of them did not work, some worked OK and a few actually won contests.

This March I started dabbling in electric with ZERO help and no coaching.  My first three attempts at electric CL worked well.  I won Carrier Events at the DCT spring contest, The Brodak, and The AMA Nats.    While I did not set a record, I did succeed in beating the current record-holder while flying under the conditions of the day.

If I flew electric stunt I would not win The Nats or the WC, but I would come a lot closer than a beginner with a piston engine.
PLUG AND PLAY means exactly that.  You plug in the parts and become a player.  As with everything, every player is not a champion.

I have never liked the idea of mixing gas & electric.  But they did it to one of my events and I was faced with three options:

1. Continue to get beat my motors.
2. Quit the event.
3. Go electric.

I went electric and got better scores than ever, and ever goes back to 1968. 

[Ken Culbertson]

This got a bit off topic but here is a picture of the new World Champ Shark.   What is different from yours Ken is that the hinge line is not enclosed and not sealed due to the nature of the flap rotation.   On most of these the elevators will travel to nearly 90 degrees each way-  looking like the pushrod isn’t attached.  That’s what Matt was calling ‘insane’.   The covered hinge line wouldn’t allow that sort of travel.   Obviously they aren’t deployed that far in flight but it shows the SPEED of elevator travel compared to the flaps which look to move around 45 degrees.   My reckoning is that these would be too wicked to fly if setting the CG in the range we commonly do on our airplanes here.  Frank Waddle from Germany showed me they balance right at the root airfoil high point which is more than an inch ahead of what I’m flying.  In other words pretty nose heavy to smooth it out in level flight with a powerful ‘flipper’ yonder- way yonder.

Dave

Before I put the enclosure strips on the flaps and elevator would drop to 60 degrees with the 1/32" recess gap in the1/4" Recess.  I get 45 with the enclosures.  If you look at some of the pictures of the Chinese team you will see similar "at rest" insane movement.  It is obvious that their style is quite different from ours.  If corners were the only thing judged in AMA, our planes can be made to turn just as tight as a Shark.  I would love to see a high-speed camera slow motion of a Shark in the 4th corner of the hourglass to see if they are using all of that elevator.  It is hard to judge even if you are flying the plane.  I am convinced that as more of us convert to active timers you are going to see a tightening of the pattern in both corners and elevations naturally.  You can't fly 15' corners on a pattern flown to a strict 45 degrees and have a decent square 8, it just looks funny.  Tighter corners give you longer flats.  I am not advocating any changes in AMA.  Let that evolve naturally, it will.

Ken

[Dave_Trible]

You might also consider Orestes has shown to be pretty successful with the Shark in Nats winning for the last number of years.   We can only wonder how different it might be if he were flying something more 'domestic'.

Dave

[EricV]

You might also consider Orestes has shown to be pretty successful with the Shark in Nats winning for the last number of years.   We can only wonder how different it might be if he were flying something more 'domestic'.

Dave

Yes, Orestes is an amazing talent and quite the artist too! It was quite a feat how he perfectly mimicked the paint job of several of the other ready-made, painted out of the mold ARF Sharks at Muncie this year. Quite the talent indeed! Yes, I too wonder how well he would do with something more "homey".
EricV

[Les McDonald]

By far the most interesting IC engine I saw at this contest was Lauri Malilas homemade unit. He gave me quite an extensive tour of his efforts and after watching one of his flights I was impressed by its performance. Rob Metkemyer did the crankcase and Lauri did all the rest. High tech indeed. A variety of drop in cylinders with various porting choices. A curved piston baffle and a Dykes ring. Everything perfectly machined with long lasting materials. The crank pin and journal are even coated with black diamond. I believe it is a .77 and but was puzzled by the large, very traditional wood prop. Lauri is a total asset to the event.

[Doug Moon]

>>>Snip<<<<
But, some might say this is easier than an IC motor.  That is complete rubbish. We are not talking about sport flying here, where that might be the case.
>>>Snip<<<

I don't think easier it the right word. As with anything at the top level it takes tons of testing and work.  That is never been in question. 123B is basically infinite!! Sounds like a perfect storm for a retired guy with his own circle... 

While not easier it seems to be a more consistent program and testing should be more linear, I would think. At least it appears that way. I'm late to the party for sure but I will be dipping the toe in these waters soon....

[Doug Moon]

By far the most interesting IC engine I saw at this contest was Lauri Malilas homemade unit. He gave me quite an extensive tour of his efforts and after watching one of his flights I was impressed by its performance. Rob Metkemyer did the crankcase and Lauri did all the rest. High tech indeed. A variety of drop in cylinders with various porting choices. A curved piston baffle and a Dykes ring. Everything perfectly machined with long lasting materials. The crank pin and journal are even coated with black diamond. I believe it is a .77 and but was puzzled by the large, very traditional wood prop. Lauri is a total asset to the event.

You are very correct sir! This guy and his wife both work for some of the best watch makers out there. The craftsmanship was most excellent. Venturi on the back plate with remote needle. Venturi changes are a simple set screw remove and slide in a new one in about 10 seconds. Very cool stuff indeed. His run was very very nice and symmetrical.

[Matt Neumann]

The winner had the new Igor timer as did myself, Tim Just, Howard Rush and Chris Cox.
It is his latest iteration with the  Drag Compensation I convinced him to add. The boost and brake are individually adjustable as is the DC. There are 3 modes the DC works in, but is sent out in just one mode that both Igor and I ended up using last year.

It is a significant improvement over his old one. Some have asked Igor if he would take his old ones back for a discount on the new ones. He just laughs!!

The new ones are close to being available. He is guessing around October.

Paul, can you elaborate on Drag Compensation?  Thanks.

[Ken Culbertson]

Paul, can you elaborate on Drag Compensation?  Thanks.

Is that in any way comparable to how the Fiorotti compensates for the change in wind direction in level flight through the G-Force setting?

Ken

[Matt Colan]

By far the most interesting IC engine I saw at this contest was Lauri Malilas homemade unit. He gave me quite an extensive tour of his efforts and after watching one of his flights I was impressed by its performance. Rob Metkemyer did the crankcase and Lauri did all the rest. High tech indeed. A variety of drop in cylinders with various porting choices. A curved piston baffle and a Dykes ring. Everything perfectly machined with long lasting materials. The crank pin and journal are even coated with black diamond. I believe it is a .77 and but was puzzled by the large, very traditional wood prop. Lauri is a total asset to the event.

I couldn't agree more!! It was by far the coolest item at the Worlds! the machining was incredible! Lauri's engine only burns about 3.72oz of fuel per flight...I was using 3-4ml less than 8oz per flight on my thirsty PA 75

[Dan McEntee]

This was a discussion about the World Chamos, not the Nat's.
Different animal
.

  Well, you mentioned Top 20, so that is what I thought you were referring to. The WC used a top 15 format.  I know they are flown or judged differently, but what goes on with the power plant on the nose shouldn't be too different. Given what the scores were for the AMA Final 5, and comparing to where David and Orestes finished in the FAI event, I don't think it's an overwhelming difference. Who knows where Todd and Derek would have finished in the FAI event??

  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Matt Neumann]

I couldn't agree more!! It was by far the coolest item at the Worlds! the machining was incredible! Lauri's engine only burns about 3.72oz of fuel per flight...I was using 3-4ml less than 8oz per flight on my thirsty PA 75

Funny thing is when I flew the PA 75 I only used a little over 6 oz.  I got 20 flights per gallon.  I think there is 128 oz per gallon so easy enough to do the math.  I had a lot different set up however.

[Dan McEntee]

I couldn't agree more!! It was by far the coolest item at the Worlds! the machining was incredible! Lauri's engine only burns about 3.72oz of fuel per flight...I was using 3-4ml less than 8oz per flight on my thirsty PA 75

   If you go search the engine section, Lauri has many good threads on what he builds and his practices. Lots of great photos and descriptions. It's mind boggling and I wish I could have seen an example up close and in person.

   Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee

[Paul Walker]

  Well, you mentioned Top 20, so that is what I thought you were referring to. The WC used a top 15 format.  I know they are flown or judged differently, but what goes on with the power plant on the nose shouldn't be too different. Given what the scores were for the AMA Final 5, and comparing to where David and Orestes finished in the FAI event, I don't think it's an overwhelming difference. Who knows where Todd and Derek would have finished in the FAI event??

  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

I used top 20 to get one more I C listed.

[Paul Walker]

Paul, can you elaborate on Drag Compensation?  Thanks.

Matt,

DC counters the effect of increased drag in corners. It measures the pitching rate and adds thrust as necessary. There are numerous adjustments to this function from adding thrust in every corner to only bottom corners, the amount of thrust added and the length of the throttle increase.

David F was at my place earlier this year and I gave him a ride on the P-47 and showed him a little SF+ and -, then increased those and he was impressed. Then the DC was added and he was impressed with the performance. He left saying that he just HAD to finish his electric fuselage!

By the way, the boost and brake, which Igor calls SF+ and SF-, are far superior to his old system. They are individually adjustable as well.

If you have more questions on this, please ask.

[Dave_Trible]

Funny thing is when I flew the PA 75 I only used a little over 6 oz.  I got 20 flights per gallon.  I think there is 128 oz per gallon so easy enough to do the math.  I had a lot different set up however.

When calibrating my fuel load to prepare to fly warm up flights at the Worlds I got the RO Jett .76 down to just over 5 ounces for a 6 1/2 minute run.

Dave

[Ken Culbertson]

OK, where do I find the video?  I am now very curious.  Zero binding is what I have been looking for.

Found it:



Ken

[Brett Buck]

Matt,

DC counters the effect of increased drag in corners. It measures the pitching rate and adds thrust as necessary. There are numerous adjustments to this function from adding thrust in every corner to only bottom corners, the amount of thrust added and the length of the throttle increase.

David F was at my place earlier this year and I gave him a ride on the P-47 and showed him a little SF+ and -, then increased those and he was impressed. Then the DC was added and he was impressed with the performance. He left saying that he just HAD to finish his electric fuselage!

By the way, the boost and brake, which Igor calls SF+ and SF-, are far superior to his old system. They are individually adjustable as well.

If you have more questions on this, please ask.

  BTW, presumably, SF = scale factor = gain, how much it responds for a given input /

     Brett

[Matt Neumann]

When calibrating my fuel load to prepare to fly warm up flights at the Worlds I got the RO Jett .76 down to just over 5 ounces for a 6 1/2 minute run.

Dave

Show off.     What nitro do you use?

[Matt Neumann]

Matt,

DC counters the effect of increased drag in corners. It measures the pitching rate and adds thrust as necessary. There are numerous adjustments to this function from adding thrust in every corner to only bottom corners, the amount of thrust added and the length of the throttle increase.

David F was at my place earlier this year and I gave him a ride on the P-47 and showed him a little SF+ and -, then increased those and he was impressed. Then the DC was added and he was impressed with the performance. He left saying that he just HAD to finish his electric fuselage!

By the way, the boost and brake, which Igor calls SF+ and SF-, are far superior to his old system. They are individually adjustable as well.

If you have more questions on this, please ask.

That explains what I saw on top five day with yours and Orestes set up.  I noticed that and was wondering how to get the extra boost and such.  I also noticed it seemed like you plane got up to speed much quicker when released.  Again this explains what I saw. 

Yes, I will have to get in line to get one once they are available.

[Dave_Trible]

Show off.     What nitro do you use?

Matt I was using 10%.   During Nats practice I was tempted to go to 12-15 but tank problems made it all pointless.  Opened the tank when I got home and found a solder ball partially blocking the pick up.  Pulled the tank from my back ship and got a good run again for the Worlds warm up.

Dave

[Doug Moon]

When calibrating my fuel load to prepare to fly warm up flights at the Worlds I got the RO Jett .76 down to just over 5 ounces for a 6 1/2 minute run.

Dave

With the noisy pipe I got PA65 down to about 6.75-7oz for the flight. It might be a little less I had to pull alot to make sure I was under time. In AMA I run a little longer so I dont get beeps in the clover.

[Paul Walker]

  BTW, presumably, SF = scale factor = gain, how much it responds for a given input /

     Brett

Igor calls SF...Standard Function

[Howard Rush]

By far the most interesting IC engine I saw at this contest was Lauri Malilas homemade unit. He gave me quite an extensive tour of his efforts and after watching one of his flights I was impressed by its performance. Rob Metkemyer did the crankcase and Lauri did all the rest. High tech indeed. A variety of drop in cylinders with various porting choices. A curved piston baffle and a Dykes ring. Everything perfectly machined with long lasting materials. The crank pin and journal are even coated with black diamond. I believe it is a .77 and but was puzzled by the large, very traditional wood prop. Lauri is a total asset to the event.

I told Lauri his engine looks like a Tee Dee .65.  He said, “Yes, Cox only made a few of them.”

[Paul Walker]

That explains what I saw on top five day with yours and Orestes set up.  I noticed that and was wondering how to get the extra boost and such.  I also noticed it seemed like you plane got up to speed much quicker when released.  Again this explains what I saw. 

Yes, I will have to get in line to get one once they are available.

Matt,
Well, not really. At takeoff the DC is not activated as well as either SF function. What you are seeing is the prop I use. It is the Igor underchambered 12" 3 blade. That along with the 3520 gets it up to speed quickly.