Flying wing P-30

[Hepcat]

In reply #21 Glidermaster said:”if Hepcat designed a 9.5 inch propeller ... would that make P30 more interesting”.

It probably would for a while, John, but three things quickly come to mind: first, I would want to modify it after a very short time, two, I don’t like freewheeling props they are so unrealistic (full size aircraft never use them although there have been plenty of folders and featherers!) and three, imagine the embarrassment of being regularly beaten by people using standard plastics rubbish.

To be serious for a moment it might be interesting to design a P30 propeller, carve it from balsa, and see if performance could be improved.

John

[Pit]

If Hepcat designs a nice balsa P-30 prop, and the powers-that-be can be persuaded to drop the "plastic" in the propellor rule, and Allen (or Superior) "produces" the prop...?

[danberry]

The thread has wandered....
The beauty of P30 is the limitations imposed by the bad props.
To compare, look at a Coupe. Same rubber,twice the weight and 250% better performance. The difference? The prop.

[dosco]

The thread has wandered....
The beauty of P30 is the limitations imposed by the bad props.
To compare, look at a Coupe. Same rubber,twice the weight and 250% better performance. The difference? The prop.

Based on this, wouldn't it stand to reason with a "good" prop a P-30 would go OOS on the motor run alone?

[Zeiss Ikon]

The thread has wandered....
The beauty of P30 is the limitations imposed by the bad props.
To compare, look at a Coupe. Same rubber,twice the weight and 250% better performance. The difference? The prop.

Based on this, wouldn't it stand to reason with a "good" prop a P-30 would go OOS on the motor run alone?

Well, the other difference is no 30" limit on Coupe -- you can build to 40", or even 50" span if that's what gives you the performance you need (and 70 grams of airframe can be pretty big).  However, I'd bet a P-30 would perform better with Coupe style propulsion (carved, folding, with tension stop to prevent rubber shifting) than a Coupe would with a P-30 style propeller (even in a larger size to absorb the torque of a short, thick Coupe loading).

Originally, the plastic propeller and dimension limits were intended to level the playing field and give beginners a class that wasn't too intimidating -- perhaps the rules need to be revised to eliminate moving surfaces and gear drives, to keep it more that way.  The best fliers will still win most of the time -- but a beginner with a good eye and hand and some good mentoring will have a chance on any given flying day, if a One Night 28 isn't completely outclassed on technology.

[danberry]

The geared stuff isn't likely to overtake the event. Neither will voodoo,errr, auto-surfaces.
The event still needs a plane that will climb into and stay in a thermal.
The props keep anyone from blowing away a OneNight 28. You cannot load a Coupe motor onto the plastic prop. The blades will deflect and lose performance, assuming that it doesn't just shed a blade.
P30 will be killed by a good $85 cf prop with an effective freewheeler.

[Tmat]

Dan's right. The prop is the reason that the event works. It's supposed to level the field and make all the planes fly more or less the same. It's not a weakness of the event, it's a strength. Allow folders or carved props and P-30 is gone very quickly imo.
Gears add no real performance benefits just complexity (fun to play with though). Auto-surfaces make the planes easier to trim, but add very little value. A simple model can always win. That's the appeal of the event. If you want an event with folders with good props fly coupe. If you want lot's of rubber fly unlimited.

Tony

[waltbald]

I'm surprised since Barnaby Wainfan's name came up right off the bat that no one has mentioned his Facetmobile design. If you're looking for doubletakes, a P-30 Facetmobile would be just the thing.