Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
November 12, 2019, 07:56:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 37   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Show us your P-30's  (Read 61665 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #150 on: July 04, 2009, 07:44:49 PM »

 Saturno V3:
 -Rubber 1/8" x 3 loops (6 strands) 9.8g lubbed, 9.5g unlubbed.
 - Wing: 760mm span, 98mm chord, high cambered airfoil (CL=0.95-1.0 during glide)
 - Elevator 350mm span, 70mm chord
 - Fuselage 750mm, CG at 60%

 I do not know how will this simulation work since the main difference of my model is the airfoil. Saturno is similar (to flow) to HB-40 except for the wing airfoil and elevator size. Saturno will go 40% higher.
Logged
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #151 on: July 04, 2009, 08:45:41 PM »

Ricardo:

The "Gizmo" prop is nothing more than a Peck which has been pitched more accurately.

Here's a few pictures of my P-30 (a Bob White design.)

Guru
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Show us your P-30's
Re: Show us your P-30's
Re: Show us your P-30's
Logged
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #152 on: July 04, 2009, 08:59:56 PM »

On reply #140, Cruz states that the altitudes are "nearly the same." Reply #144 "The SAME altitude is a fact." On #148 it is "nearly the same."Again in #148 "The Peck MAY GO HIGHER."
One has to wonder which statement is true Huh Huh

Guru
Logged
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #153 on: July 04, 2009, 11:00:30 PM »

Guru, I think I see where you want to get and I just use this forum for posting my experiences and learn something, not to argue. I will try to keep my posts on high level, technical only and I think you should do the same, at least when refering to me.

Once again, if it is not clear to some, I never measured using an altimeter the height my model will go with each prop. It is likely the last seconds of discharge on peck provides a cruise phase. It is hard to tell if a 30" model going 60m or more is a little higher now than in the previuos flight. We are talking about 9% in flight TIME, I can not provide accurate (at least not now) data if one is going 3m higher or cruising for 5s without climbing or gliding better. I believe you are thinking my model cruises low with peck as most do, and climbs as a rocket with Ikara. This is not true, I always fly on 6 strands and both will provide a fine climb ratio.
 
One possible reason for the difference is the fact of Ikara being too high pitched for my model and having a part of it stalled due to the slower flight speed. It is hard to keep guessing and see who has the best argument. My model will fly in the first hour of the day 2:15 on Ikara and 2:30 on Peck, both based on a very strong climb. Guru, how long does your model flies in this condition using Ikara or peck prop? This is important for comparasion.
Logged
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #154 on: July 04, 2009, 11:28:56 PM »

Thanks for the info on Saturno, Alex.

Duco, is there a link to a plan of your Bob White design on the web?

Are you going to provide us with your best estimates of still air times for it with Peck & IGRA props? And the height gained?

Isn't the prop in your pics a plastic Peck? What size rubber?

Anyone measured up and drawn the 2 (3 including the Gizmo) props?

Blade outline? Pitch distribution?

Gizmo certainly match the pitch on their prop but some people claim that they also increase the pitch. Anyone have evidence of this?

Lets get some useful info out of Alex's experience rather than just re-hash old prejudices.
Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
Tmat
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 68
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 2,934




Ignore
« Reply #155 on: July 05, 2009, 09:40:23 AM »

Ricardo, Duco's prop (in the pictures - lovely model by the way) appears to be an Ikara.
There is data available on pitch distribution of all 3 props mentioned in FFQ (not sure of the issue date as I lost all my issues). They have published a comprehensive P30 only compendium edition that would make a wonderful addition to any P30 flyer's library. Many, many plans and technical articles.

Alexandre, you've mentioned that your airfoil is high camber. Care to share some more details? Do you have coordinates? Or at least a drawing of the airfoil?

Tony
Logged

F1B guy...
But don't hold that against me!
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #156 on: July 05, 2009, 10:06:16 AM »

 Yes I do. The airfoil is a modified Makarov F1A airfoil:
1.000000,0.006500
0.997027,0.006857
0.992297,0.008217
0.987200,0.009678
0.981684,0.011254
0.975690,0.012960
0.969167,0.014809
0.962076,0.016811
0.954424,0.018961
0.946296,0.021233
0.938101,0.023507
0.930014,0.025732
0.921899,0.027940
0.913659,0.030153
0.905383,0.032340
0.897269,0.034446
0.889284,0.036478
0.881383,0.038450
0.873529,0.040374
0.865691,0.042257
0.857846,0.044107
0.849972,0.045928
0.842054,0.047726
0.834080,0.049503
0.826041,0.051260
0.817935,0.052999
0.809763,0.054719
0.801534,0.056418
0.793260,0.058094
0.784953,0.059744
0.776625,0.061365
0.768285,0.062955
0.759942,0.064513
0.751602,0.066037
0.743270,0.067527
0.734948,0.068981
0.726638,0.070402
0.718340,0.071787
0.710051,0.073139
0.701767,0.074457
0.693486,0.075743
0.685204,0.076997
0.676920,0.078220
0.668630,0.079413
0.660333,0.080576
0.652027,0.081709
0.643712,0.082812
0.635387,0.083887
0.627051,0.084933
0.618705,0.085950
0.610349,0.086939
0.601983,0.087899
0.593610,0.088830
0.585231,0.089733
0.576846,0.090606
0.568456,0.091451
0.560063,0.092267
0.551667,0.093053
0.543270,0.093811
0.534870,0.094539
0.526470,0.095238
0.518070,0.095907
0.509670,0.096548
0.501270,0.097159
0.492870,0.097742
0.484470,0.098294
0.476072,0.098816
0.467674,0.099307
0.459277,0.099767
0.450882,0.100194
0.442488,0.100590
0.434098,0.100952
0.425711,0.101281
0.417328,0.101575
0.408950,0.101835
0.400577,0.102060
0.392211,0.102249
0.383853,0.102400
0.375505,0.102509
0.367169,0.102575
0.358845,0.102595
0.350537,0.102567
0.342246,0.102489
0.333974,0.102359
0.325723,0.102174
0.317496,0.101932
0.309295,0.101633
0.301123,0.101273
0.292982,0.100851
0.284874,0.100366
0.276803,0.099817
0.268769,0.099202
0.260771,0.098522
0.252807,0.097774
0.244871,0.096958
0.236957,0.096071
0.229055,0.095112
0.221155,0.094077
0.213243,0.092963
0.205304,0.091765
0.197331,0.090484
0.189333,0.089123
0.181339,0.087688
0.173396,0.086191
0.165566,0.084641
0.157896,0.083032
0.150405,0.081350
0.143089,0.079582
0.135924,0.077709
0.128874,0.075718
0.121895,0.073604
0.114946,0.071366
0.107981,0.068995
0.100952,0.066482
0.093803,0.063808
0.086465,0.060951
0.078889,0.057911
0.071128,0.054742
0.063400,0.051572
0.056029,0.048559
0.049233,0.045733
0.043001,0.043022
0.037221,0.040340
0.031764,0.037599
0.026619,0.034762
0.021989,0.031932
0.018061,0.029269
0.014843,0.026859
0.012228,0.024674
0.010081,0.022640
0.008288,0.020698
0.006748,0.018839
0.005384,0.017117
0.004160,0.015578
0.003083,0.014220
0.002181,0.012991
0.001454,0.011849
0.000890,0.010766
0.000473,0.009725
0.000192,0.008716
0.000037,0.007730
0.000003,0.006757
0.000088,0.005802
0.000295,0.004896
0.000633,0.004070
0.001119,0.003357
0.001775,0.002778
0.002612,0.002322
0.003653,0.001974
0.004937,0.001721
0.006521,0.001542
0.008459,0.001380
0.010843,0.001206
0.013747,0.001050
0.016988,0.000973
0.020302,0.001026
0.023750,0.001222
0.027546,0.001570
0.032021,0.002104
0.037831,0.002905
0.045587,0.004006
0.052950,0.005061
0.060432,0.006165
0.068519,0.007422
0.075937,0.008648
0.082934,0.009853
0.089829,0.011064
0.096817,0.012290
0.104041,0.013532
0.111592,0.014776
0.119478,0.015988
0.127626,0.017155
0.135940,0.018281
0.144335,0.019375
0.152747,0.020453
0.161146,0.021536
0.169526,0.022637
0.177890,0.023759
0.186240,0.024905
0.194574,0.026076
0.202893,0.027276
0.211194,0.028501
0.219479,0.029742
0.227749,0.030988
0.236008,0.032227
0.244259,0.033450
0.252507,0.034646
0.260759,0.035805
0.269019,0.036925
0.277292,0.038009
0.285581,0.039059
0.293889,0.040076
0.302219,0.041062
0.310572,0.042019
0.318949,0.042948
0.327352,0.043851
0.335779,0.044729
0.344230,0.045583
0.352702,0.046414
0.361194,0.047223
0.369702,0.048012
0.378220,0.048781
0.386743,0.049532
0.395265,0.050265
0.403778,0.050981
0.412275,0.051680
0.420749,0.052359
0.429193,0.053013
0.437604,0.053638
0.445979,0.054229
0.454319,0.054784
0.462623,0.055298
0.470894,0.055768
0.479135,0.056191
0.487351,0.056563
0.495547,0.056882
0.503732,0.057145
0.511911,0.057350
0.520092,0.057501
0.528280,0.057598
0.536480,0.057644
0.544695,0.057639
0.552928,0.057585
0.561180,0.057484
0.569453,0.057337
0.577745,0.057145
0.586056,0.056909
0.594382,0.056632
0.602721,0.056314
0.611066,0.055958
0.619416,0.055563
0.627766,0.055131
0.636116,0.054662
0.644464,0.054158
0.652809,0.053618
0.661153,0.053043
0.669498,0.052434
0.677845,0.051792
0.686199,0.051117
0.694564,0.050408
0.702945,0.049666
0.711347,0.048892
0.719772,0.048083
0.728220,0.047242
0.736689,0.046368
0.745174,0.045462
0.753668,0.044524
0.762159,0.043558
0.770637,0.042563
0.779085,0.041544
0.787487,0.040502
0.795825,0.039440
0.804083,0.038356
0.812251,0.037250
0.820324,0.036117
0.828305,0.034955
0.836198,0.033760
0.844014,0.032528
0.851764,0.031254
0.859464,0.029933
0.867134,0.028558
0.874794,0.027121
0.882470,0.025615
0.890192,0.024027
0.897998,0.022344
0.905929,0.020559
0.914010,0.018680
0.922234,0.016727
0.930547,0.014733
0.938844,0.012745
0.946982,0.010818
0.954809,0.009006
0.962208,0.007339
0.969119,0.005820
0.975538,0.004444
0.981491,0.003198
0.987017,0.002065
0.992161,0.001033
0.996965,0.000088
1.000000,-0.000500
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Show us your P-30's
Logged
Hepcat
OOS, January 2019
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 278
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777



Ignore
« Reply #157 on: July 05, 2009, 04:52:59 PM »

Alexandre
Thank you for a lot of interesting information. I have a little more here to add to the pot. It may not suit a lot of people because it does not necessarily agree with what a lot of modellers assume; however I wonder how many of those modellers bother to test the basis of their assumptions. Actually I don't think what I have to report is proving modellers right or wrong but rather suggesting that there may be more variation in plastics propellers from batch to batch than we like to think.

I was with John O'Donnell when he was testing an Igra propeller against a Peck and the old Peck appeared to be doing better, more than could be expected from the fact that the Peck is about half a gram lighter. As I had an Igra and a Peck at home I decided to do some some checks on the blade angles of the two. The first picture below shews what I wrote on the propellers at the time: at the three quarter radius point the Igra had a blade angle of 21 degrees and the Peck a blade angle of 24 degrees. I did checks at more stations along the blade, sufficient to tell me that the blade angle distribution did not make much sense.

I think these tests must have been late 2004 because I sent the figures on the Sergio Montes. However by then Paul Rossiter had done his comprehensive article on P30 propellers for the April 2005 issue of FFQ that Tmat has already mentioned. It is interesting that Paul measured 21.5 degrees on the Igra against my 21. On the Peck he found the shaft hole was misaligned which gave differing figures for the two blades, 31 on one and 27 on the other giving 29 on each, if the shaft hole is straightened, as against my 24 degrees. You will notice that even though Paul's Peck figures are higher than mine we both agree that the Peck has a higher blade angle then the Igra which is contra to what most modellers believe.

I have rechecked my figures today using the same set up as before, shewn in the next picture. The figures have not changed on my propellers since I last tested them.

John
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Show us your P-30's
Re: Show us your P-30's
Logged

John Barker UK - Will be missed by all that knew him.
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #158 on: July 05, 2009, 06:04:32 PM »

Hepcat, is the grey prop a Peck? I thought both were the same diameter.

May I trouble someone to send me a copy of the FFQ article or at least the page with the pitch and chord distributions of the 3 props?

I think I'm far enough N in Cooktown for the crocs to protect me against a punitive expedition from the Tasmanian FF mafia Grin
Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #159 on: July 05, 2009, 06:57:35 PM »

I will try to keep my posts on high level, technical only and I think you should do the same, at least when refering to me.
My model will fly in the first hour of the day 2:15 on Ikara and 2:30 on Peck, both based on a very strong climb. Guru, how long does your model flies in this condition using Ikara or peck prop? This is important for comparasion.

Mr Cruz: If you wish to keep this discussion on a "technical" level, you must explain the differences in altitude gained by your model using YOUR OBSERVATIONS only. From a strictly technical standpoint, there are some variations in your observations from one post to the next.

In answer to the time flown by my model in the first, second, third or fourth hour I present this "technical" observation... My P-30 continues to climb at a steep angle for over one minute, it then proceeds to glide until the D/T deploys at 2:10 at which time it descends to the ground. The time of the descent varies with the altitude gained in step #1. In all cases, the time aloft is sufficient to allow a flight time in excess of two minutes.

I have no observations on how the model might perform with a Peck propellor. I prefer the Ikara because its is drilled on center and has equal pitch distibution in both blades.

Guru
Logged
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #160 on: July 05, 2009, 07:39:17 PM »

My P-30 continues to climb at a steep angle for over one minute, it then proceeds to glide until the D/T deploys at 2:10 at which time it descends to the ground. The time of the descent varies with the altitude gained in step #1. In all cases, the time aloft is sufficient to allow a flight time in excess of two minutes.
I have no observations on how the model might perform with a Peck propellor. I prefer the Ikara because its is drilled on center and has equal pitch distribution in both blades.

Thanks for this Duco. We can now put your remarks in the proper context.

Would you care to make a technical estimate of the still air time?

To investigate this further, could you oblige us with a plan or even a dimensioned 3D of your model?

What size motor do you use?
Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
Hepcat
OOS, January 2019
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 278
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777



Ignore
« Reply #161 on: July 05, 2009, 07:57:32 PM »

Ricardo
The camera never lies - but it does some masterly obfuscation by violent perspective when in Macro mode!

Yes, the grey propeller is the Peck and they are both 9.4" in diameter. It may, or may not, help to convince you but here is the first photograph I took and rejected because of reflected light. This time the Large Peck propeller is nearest to the camera. Smiley

John
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Show us your P-30's
Logged

John Barker UK - Will be missed by all that knew him.
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #162 on: July 06, 2009, 12:02:51 AM »

Guru, I would be nice if you could fly the model in still air, first hour of the day. It would be also nice if could use a peck prop to see what happens. As I understood you flly on 4 strands, and have not measured the time the model flies nor changed the prop to see the result. So, there are no evidences to affirm Peck prop is inferior.
Logged
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #163 on: July 06, 2009, 04:07:51 AM »

Cruz:

I am not in the least interested to "See what happens" by changing propellors on a fully trimmed model. I prefer to stay with a model that has proven to be fully reliable from one contest to the next.

As a matter of interest, I built a P-30 model designed by Fred Pearce, the rubber testing guru, several years ago. It had a thinned Benedict airfoil, turbulators, and in many respects was a scaled down Wakefield. Originally flown with a Peck prop, it was "hit or miss" on achieving a two minute max. After changing to the Czech prop, it became a consistent performer.

Sadly, it was lost a thermal after the pop up stab D/T'd... the reason I now utilize a D/T system that detaches the wing.

Guru
Logged
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #164 on: July 06, 2009, 06:34:53 AM »

As I understood you fly on 4 strands ...

Duco, is this true? For both your Bob White and Fred Pearce models?
Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #165 on: July 06, 2009, 08:31:12 AM »

Ricardo:

For my Bob White model, I use 3 loops of 1/8" Tan Super Sport. On my Pearce model, I used 3 loops of 1/8" Tan II.

Attachment with White version is "O-Ring." With Pearce, a miniature Crockett Hook. No blast tube with White, blast tube with Pearce. D/T with White is button timer/mousetrap w/ wing detach. On Pearce it was a fuse w/stab pop-up.

Covering on White is light Poly-Span, on Pearce, Esaki tissue. White weighs 41 grams. Pearce had to be ballasted to make minimum weight.

Guru
Logged
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #166 on: July 06, 2009, 08:45:39 AM »

So we conclude, concerning your question: “So you think the Peck propeller is better than Ikara?”
 
My model, Saturno V3, using 6 strands:
•   Model climbs to an unknown altitude, which looks nearly the same to both props. Will measure when the altimeter is delivered.
•   Power time using Ikara is 38s, power time with Peck is 52s.
•   Total flight in still air is 135s with Ikara and 150s with Peck.

Guru’s Twin Fin, using 6 strands:
•   Model climbs to an unknown altitude, using Ikara. Peck was never flown.
•   Power time using Ikara is unknown (more than 60s). Power time with Peck has never being measured.
•   Total flight in still air is unknown (maybe more than 130s but not measured).

I feel more comfortable flying with Peck prop in my model….but I am curious now to discover why it happens.

Guru, there must be something wrong, how can Ikara discharge time be more than 60s on 6 strands? Most models will discharge this motor in less than 35s.
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 97
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #167 on: July 06, 2009, 11:41:40 AM »

Ok, let's hold the debate and think a second. The Peck prop has a fairly low P/D, don't remember the dimensions, but I think slightly lower than the Ikara. Thus it will give a shorter motor run, and should deliver a much higher climb rate (straight up on 6 strands, in my experience). I've no experience with the Ikara, but that's not the issue here. Now the lower P/D of the Peck will reduce glider peformance. Now with a Gizmo-modified Peck, I get a ~50 sec motor run on 6 strands, and unexceptional altitude. Now let's switch to 4 strands...I get a 95-100 sec motor run on the Gizmo with that setup, and the glide is very good, largely I think due to the high prop pitch.

Now here's the bottom line: Guru is claiming that the higher climb has the advantage. I disagree very strongly. If you're good at picking air, that's fine. I for one am not. A slow, long climb will cover a multitude of mistakes, including launching into heavy sink, because the model's climb will often outlast the sinkhole. Now if y'all want to continue this, I suggest that someone who has an Ikara, stock Peck, and Gizmo, take them all out in early morning conditions and test them out. Now there's more to it than that: try optimizing the motor to the prop: Each one of those will be best with a particular model. I would also purport to you on the currect motor setup, a clean P-30 will be optimal for the same prop, period. I understand the thought that each airplane will have a particular prop it likes, but that would probably not be the case here because we're looking at very clean airframes. After you're done with that test, see what they do when launched into bad air. I know from experience what happens with the Gizmo, and that's why I'm still using it.

My prediction is that the Gizmo will come out on top because its high pitch will allow the longest practical motor run. To get the same run with an Ikara will require a loop of 3/16 to sufficiently slow the prop, and that motor may well present some problems in the skinny fuselage of the average P-30. All of these props will cause glide inefficiency, so it's best to keep the model under power as long as possible.

Now, does anyone know how Deloach gets 2+ minute motor runs on his Polecat?
Logged
Alexandre Cruz
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #168 on: July 06, 2009, 12:47:02 PM »

Peck props do have a low P/D but a large amount of area so they do not discharge quickly. Of course Gizmo has the same area and more pitch so discharge is slower, as is thrust.
I have flown with 4 strands a few times (peck only) but I did not liked it. In a strong sink my model would touch the ground before the motor quits. In neutral conditions it would fly almost 2min, but could come short of the max.
I agree with Guru that a strong climb is better; the ground boundary layer is not too low if your model climbs very few meters. Thermal activity is much better from 20m or so above the ground and there. At least is much more fun to see a model very high than flying as indoors.
Motor setup is something I have to try harder. Maybe 10 1/16” strands is a good choice, since 4 1/8” did not worked that well.
I did not understand what you mean by clean airframe, does airfoil counts? In my opinion F1A and F1C are very clean airframes but do not fly the same due to their airfoils. Airfoil must count and gives a spectrum of possibilities of motor and propeller choices mainly due to flight speed.
Yes…we need to do that test in the early morning and use an altimeter if possible.

Different models, modellers, motors, props and strategies all aiming for a max no matter the weather....that what free flight is all about!
Logged
Hepcat
OOS, January 2019
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 278
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777



Ignore
« Reply #169 on: July 06, 2009, 01:31:28 PM »

In reply #157 I reported measuring the blade angle (at three quarter radius) of an Igra propeller as 21 degrees and of a Peck propeller as 24 degrees. I also quoted the Free Flight Quarterly article by Paul Rossiter where he measured the Igra as 21.5 degrees and the Peck as 29 degrees. So in both of these very carefully taken measurements the PECK HAS A LARGER P/D RATIO THAN THE IGRA.

Will the modellers who keep saying that the Peck has a lower pitch than the Igra please supply some measurements to substantiate the claim.

John
Logged

John Barker UK - Will be missed by all that knew him.
danberry
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 952



Ignore
« Reply #170 on: July 06, 2009, 03:06:58 PM »

A couple of notes.
You cannot measure one Peck prop and get any useful data. Measure about 40 and average the results. That's why Olm is selling Gizmo-Geezer props, They ain't made very accurately.

DeLoach uses a 6 strand 3/32" motor. He might put 2400 turns into it. It runs close to 2 minutes.
His plane is optimized for that motor setup. He starts flying early, before any noticable lift. He can often get 4 flights in before most guys even think about flying. He's looking for lift when going for 3 minutes.
In sink or bad turbulence the Polecat has the same problems as any other plane.
He recently asked me what my plane would do in dead air. My reply--- I've no idea, i don't fly it in dead air.
Logged
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #171 on: July 06, 2009, 05:21:08 PM »

Now here's the bottom line: Guru is claiming that the higher climb has the advantage. I disagree very strongly. If you're good at picking air, that's fine. I for one am not.

That says it all! I am in full agreement with Danberry, I choose not to fly in dead air or sink... if I wanted to piddle around with very long motor runs, I would compete with indoor models. They are not on MY list of interesting modeling subjects.

Guru
Logged
danberry
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 952



Ignore
« Reply #172 on: July 06, 2009, 05:39:57 PM »

Hey now.
Don's system works. I just watched him knock out 6 maxes. The first 2 before 8;45 AM and it was raining. My plane doesn't work with the long motor run. He is at minimum weight and plastic covered.
I have also seen days when he didn't make 4 or even 3.Sometimes the system doesn't work.
I fly backwards so nothing my plane does can be compared to youse guys.

If somebody is going to get serious about comparing the 3 props you need to get serious about finding an indoor site and spending several days at it. A couple of sorta early one and done flights won't level a lot of variables.

Its P30. If you can't put it into lift and keep it there, welllll, you're not gonna win a lot of events.
Logged
Duco Guru
Guest

« Reply #173 on: July 06, 2009, 06:08:28 PM »

P-30 is supposed to be an "entry level" simple class for SIMPLE MODELS!! I have one that meets the rules and makes it's max when I do my job.

Sorry to say, I have never been (or want to be ) an experimenter with airfoils or propellor designs. I try to use "what works" and when I find the magic bullet that hits the bullseye with any given model, I am done.

My satisfaction in modeling comes from helping the less experienced and competing against the top competitors in local and national events.

My hat is off to the experimenters and the level of success they have brought to the freeflight community; there is still much to be learned.

Guru
Logged
danberry
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 952



Ignore
« Reply #174 on: July 06, 2009, 06:13:26 PM »

Duco, you've gotta be VERY careful when calling P30 an entry level event; a fast bard might take offense.
P30 is, though, a perfect event. It can only be harmed by any rule-tinkering.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 37   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!