UKCAA - Models, engines and schedules

[jeff2wings]

This is the aerobatic F.A.I schedule for ’61

1.Take-off

2.Straight flight into wind (min 5secs)

3.Left turn 90' ,right turn270' i.e. procedure turn

4.Return stright flight on same path as 1.

5.Stall turn

6.Immelman turn

7.Three inside loop

8.Three inverted (outside) loops

9.Reversal (or split S)

10.Roll (to be followed by) _

11.Roll in opposite direction

12.Tail slide

13.Horizontal 8

14.Cuban 8

15.Vertical 8

16.Inverted flight

17.Inverted fig 8

18.Vertical upward roll

19.Spin (3 turns)

20.Approch

21.Landing

touch down in 20m circle = 100 bonus points

in 50m circle = 50 bonus points

pice of cake ! LOL

Maybe a (very ! ) reduced version could be used for a low-key comp at one of the 'fly-in's for thoses that would like to have a go at a schedule ??? wot do all think ??

[Martin McIntosh]

Hmm, interesting. I did not know that a rolling circle was on the agenda in those days. I can still hardly do one. The tailslide is quite difficult and I am surprised that we do not see it in today`s schedules. I think that I was fly ing single channel up to about `65 so before my time aithough I used to go and watch whenever possible. Would prefer an updated version to take propo into account as most will be using this.

[jeff2wings]

The updated 66’scheadule was as a result of most competition flyers were using propo by then ,I don’t think the ’61 schedule is any the easer through the use of modern radio !!

The rolling circle was not flown as now as a continuous rolling movement through a 360deg circle, but in 90deg segments ,that’s to say you ½ rolled inverted for the first 90 deg ,then rolled to upright for the next 90deg,then inverted ,then back to upright to complete .The tail slide was eventually dropped because it considered not to be a controlled aerobatic manoeuvre and was as much down to luck as much as skill if it went right.

[Martin McIntosh]

Hi J2W, I get your point about the tailslide, very unpredictable. The rolling circle must surely have started and finished with a 1/4 roll though.

[jeff2wings]

A picture saves alot of typing............

[Martyn K]

I could probably manage that rolling circle...

Hopefully

Martyn

[Tony Bennett]

fat chance for me to manage that.

i can just about take off and land without crashing.

[Martyn K]

I only crash at the point of impact. Before that I am a crash waiting to happen, sometimes I am lucky, other times not so lucky.

My crashes seem to get worse the harder I try to improve my flying

Martyn

[Tony Bennett]

i have that problem.

just about getting the hang of inverted circuits.

still have to wear the bycycle clips while doing it though.

[Martyn K]

Just had a chat with Steve about "qualifying" models. I noticed in another Forum post that the AcroWot is 30 years old, which actually puts it into the qualifying window.

However we need to be clear that this refers to the original kit built Acrowot design and not the foarmie and ARTF variants (which are different!) that have been released recently.

Hope that decision does not call for howls of outrage.

Best wishes

Martyn

[Andy Green]

I have to admit, i'm totally confused as to what will be allowed and whats not. I think I'm clear on the models, radio I know will be modern 2.4, but still not 100% about engines.

Andy

[Martyn K]

Hi Andy

I think we settled that any powerplant would suffice as original engines are rarer than hens teeth. However, I think that there is a (currently unwritten) spirit that the replacement powerplant should be of a similar power output/capacity to the original. This allows (moderately) larger 4strokes to be used if that is what is available. However a few eyebrows would be raised if a screaming 1.20 was used instead of the 1970's sedate Merco 61..

Martyn

[Bill Michie]

All very well Martyn, but where do you draw the line?

EG a mid-70's design could be flown with a modern .61 2-stroke (even a budget ASP is a LOT more powerful than an old crossflow-scavenged engine, let alone with a pipe). Alternatively, there are modern "90 in a 60 case" engines that will work very well, even on a standard muffler (eg ST .90/ OS .91), inexpensive to obtain & run, AND quiet............... and I don't think these should be excluded!

In reality, I believe the SPIRIT of this movement is about flying the MODELS in the company of enthusiasts, rather than limiting performance/engine size, etc!

For ex, there are a very limited number of modern ARTF/ semi kits that could be flown with modern .61/.65/.90 engines that (a) won't break the bank, and (b) won't annoy the neighbours (too much!). Yes I have a vested interest as I DO have one...............

Over to you................

Steve D?

Eddy S?

Bill

[Martyn K]

Hi Bill

You are absolutely right and there are no lines.

It's the spirit of the rules that matters. I am counting on the fact that my SC61 will comfortably fly a classic aerobat without expensive pipes etc.

As Steve pointed out, the idea is for like minded individuals to have fun..

I am desperately trying to avoid rules - just suggest guidelines.

Martyn

[FlyinBrian]

Posted by Bill Michie on 11/02/2013 12:28:26:

All very well Martyn, but where do you draw the line?

EG a mid-70's design could be flown with a modern .61 2-stroke (even a budget ASP is a LOT more powerful than an old crossflow-scavenged engine, let alone with a pipe). Alternatively, there are modern "90 in a 60 case" engines that will work very well, even on a standard muffler (eg ST .90/ OS .91), inexpensive to obtain & run, AND quiet............... and I don't think these should be excluded!

In reality, I believe the SPIRIT of this movement is about flying the MODELS in the company of enthusiasts, rather than limiting performance/engine size, etc!

For ex, there are a very limited number of modern ARTF/ semi kits that could be flown with modern .61/.65/.90 engines that (a) won't break the bank, and (b) won't annoy the neighbours (too much!). Yes I have a vested interest as I DO have one...............

Over to you................

Steve D?

Eddy S?

Bill

In the '70s I was using HP61s and OS61 FSRs in my pattern planes, some others used Webra Speed 61. All of these were pretty powerful engines, indeed I won a couple of open pylon races using A Matt Supestar with retracts powered by a piped OS61 FSR.

[terry westrop]

Hi all. This will always be a very touchy subject. Rules never suit everyone but can quickly put many off, as do schedules. My experience with 'rules' is, as some have mentioned herein, leave as flexy as sensible. Same for 'schedules'. Very Few model pilots are as capable as say, Martin McIntosh, (one of our best F3A pilots from the 70's), of learning schedules. Maybe to publish as many of the FAI F3A manoeuvres as you wish for members to view & consider. There are over 100.
Flexibility allows pilots decide how far they want to take things,in their own time.

The advantages in not adhering to any schedule of course, is that spectators get to see a variety of flying. Consequently they may be more enthusiastic to stay around & watch the next flight, (rather like Ice Skating), if indeed Classic Aeros wants this. I am assuming of course, that we would all like to present something that captures the public's imagination, just as it has ours.

If you desire judged events, fine, if that's the feeling of the many. But another option, maybe 'judge' on the overall package that any pilot presents. ie accuracy & finish of model + accuracy & style of flight. There could even be a bonus attached for use of reeds...dare I say! For this, maybe an hour or so slot in any day for pilots &/or spectators to 'vote' using several appropriate categories. Say, 6 minute flights.

Could it be suggested a guide of 10% margin for accuracy of original design to allow a shorter nose for heavier (4 stroke) motors, especially on 60's designs like Orion or Mustfire which have very short tail moments. Carrying lead in the tail is avoidable.

As for motors, that's another story. I'd love to try a Merco 61, but acquiring a good example, matching a decent quiet exhaust system & then keeping it in good form....? Once again, is this placing obstacles in the way of prospective enthusiasts? However, if some type of competition does emerge, the entrant who used a period motor in an accurately reproduced period aircraft could attract a bonus?? Rather like combining F3A, Scale & Freestyle judging. Just a few thoughts to consider. However it goes, I'm sure it'll be fine.

[Martin McIntosh]

Hi Terry and hello again. I think that you have some very good points there. Presenting a model to its best ability for the era and engine/equipment would probably be a lot better than a formal comp. Maybe we could try both depending on interest? Models are ready, when is the forst one to be? Looking forward to it.

Martin

[Bob Cotsford]

As a sports flyer I'm more interested in satisfying my clubs noise limits than replicating how it was done in the day. I also like the style and the practicality of these classic designs. To that end the Altair has an MVVS 90 with a full length quiet pipe, the Tornado an SF 61 from the 80s, again with full length quiet pipe, the Blue Angel an SF61 with short throttle pipe, and the Marabu an Enya 61 -III BB with a big SuperTigre silencer, though I'm looking at ways to bodge a throttle pipe onto that.

I'm not particularly into competition flying but I do enjoy chucking these beasts around and generally encouraging people to realise that there is an alternate to 3D or hyper-expensive F3A style models. So my take on the whole deal is to get together for a day's fun and if we promote the style of model in doing that then that's a bonus.

For me, if it's a reasonable facsimile of a period design (bearing in mind that we only have photo records of some designs) and the power used isn't outrageous, then it's welcome. Lot's of models of the period were turned into kits with glass fuselage and foam wings, so I don't see any problem with these modern materials.

For those who want a competition with closely defined rules, rock on, but please allow us sports flyers along for the ride

 

Ps - I believe the first definite fixture is Sleap on May 12th which is a basic retro fly-in going on previous events.  There's also the festival of flight at Barkston - B certs only for that one. 

 

Edited By Bob Cotsford on 14/03/2013 22:27:26

[terry westrop]

Well hello Martin, been quite a while! Real pleased you are still around aeros. You are far more prepared than I, not even got my new building board sorted yet! Which models are you going for, 60's, 70's or 80's? Or one from each decade maybe..?? I'd like to be @ the first event, just to see what emerges from winter builds.

[terry westrop]

Bob's very correct about noise, it's an issue that'll never go away, especially in the UK as it becomes ever more closely populated. So I guess a Merco + period silencer would not be good. I'd prefer not to fit a tuned pipe, particularly to a 60's design, despite the fact that it would produce superior power & be quieter. Guess I'll need to investigate some current quiet silencers.

F3A has allowed me to experiment with lots of noise reducing devices over a 20 year period, so I have a few 'quiet notions'.

We were & still are all 'sports' flyers Bob. If any competitive element is introduced I don't see why it should be anything other than a very friendly gathering of enthusiasts looking to see how others present their classic aerobatic model, maybe learn from the experience.

[Martin McIntosh]

Hi all, well, I have my 1977 W/C winning exact replica Curare with a ST61XRE piped as can be found in `my photos` and elsewhere on the forum plus a YS 63 powered Dalotel from a design around 1978. Also that 2M ish Dalo in the garish CPLR colours which you pushed me into test flying at the 2000 RCM&E event Terry. After languishing in the loft for many years it was re-equipped with a YS 110 and is now my favourite model, well worn.

Regarding some of the comments on tuned pipes, they were not introduced to give more power (which was an unexpected bonus) but with a welded on additional silencer they were initially used to get inside the new noise limit of the time, which was quite stringent. Terry Cooper did most of the development of these and first used one at the 1975 W/C. According to my tacho we were doing 14,500 on OPS Risonanzas on 11x7 Rev-Up wooden props. Just a bit of history.

Regards, Martin

[terry westrop]

That Curare was a very colourful model Martin. Mini flaps were never convincing in F3A. Do you find them advantageous? & another 'oldie' rises from storage to become a favourite. Strange how things come round again.

I'd heard Terry Cooper was involved with early tuned pipes. Did he co-operate with ED pipes @ all? Think that was someone named 'Lindsey' @ ED? I believe Clive Weller may have also assisted ED with some development. All Rather vague now.

[Martin McIntosh]

The brakes are very effective indeed when landing on a short patch. I am not quick enough on the sticks to try them in a vertical dive manoeuvre but then, how many other than Prettner himself would be able to. He had an array of switches on the back of his Tx, I believe, which even in those early days of radio would `programme` it for each figure.

Pipes.

Terry only did his own research on these and was not involved with anyone other than myself. Most flyers soon cottoned on to the idea.

A while ago I bought one of your Loaded Dice, 140 size I think, models from a fellow club member, finished in primer with retracts etc. I shall probably not finish it so if anyone wishes to give it a home just give me the fifty quid I paid and it is yours. There is a slight warp in one wing panel.

Martin Mc

[terry westrop]

I'd bet there's a way of mixing those brakes with current Tx programming Martin.

The early tuned pipes were a little before my time. However, when I arrived on the F3A scene in the early 80's pipes were being used in 'optimised' form! Some packages were really howling & it was obvious it'd only be a matter of time before some method of noise control was introduced. I thought it a sensible move, but not all were as pleased! Some excellent noise surpression devices have since become the norm, including quiet pipes.

I'll keep your LD III in mind if I know of anyone who is in the market Martin. Is it 4 cycle power or 2? Retracts? Maybe put on the BMFA site, would be a brill start for novice F3A @ the price.

[Gary Vinten 1]

Hi All

Does anybody have any information on the MINI ATLAS

Any thing will be good thanks !!