Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
- Original Message - From: Lincoln Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 2:31 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two This is winning answer to my question below. It was achieved using a DuBro V tail mixer to ativate the flaperons from the towhook. Thanks to all who had a guess. Les. > Seems pretty obvious. Use towhook tension to activate the flaps. Couple > rudder and aileron mechanically from one servo, just like on my old Io. > Note that I am answering your question before you asked it! I haven't > posted this to the list. > > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 07:20:24 +1300 > > From: "Les and Gypsy Stockley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "soaring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Down here in NZ we have a 2 metre class which allows the use of two = > > servos only. > > A few years ago some guys had a serious go and created a model with = > > rudder, elevator, ailerons and flaps for launch, all with only two = > > servos. > > How you may be wondering, well I'll see if you can work it out, send in = > > your answer and I'll tell you in a week or so who gets it right. > > NO answer from NZ accepted!!! > > Les. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
Message: 5 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:54:52 -0500 From: "Richard Hallett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two Down here in NZ we have a 2 metre class which allows the use of two servos only. A few years ago some guys had a serious go and created a model with rudder, elevator, ailerons and flaps for launch, all with only two servos. How you may be wondering, well I'll see if you can work it out, send in your answer and I'll tell you in a week or so who gets it right. NO answer from NZ accepted!!! Les. My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able tosay instead of RE the "two servo class" meaning the only limitation will bethe two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance withjust two servos beyond the expected??
Re:IO and [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
What a lead-in! I recently discovered that I still have my IO and will shortly be advertising it for sale. I agree, it is better than a Sagitta 600 on keeping the landing heading and it also has a leg up on the Sagitta 600 in L/D. If anyone is interested in acquiring a RTF IO, drop me a line - Original Message - From: "Lincoln Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two > To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won > some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. > Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would > have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule > writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. > > Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t > shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? > > Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more > difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same > time as someone else who may not be experienced. > > Richard Hallett wrote: > > Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests > > > > Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we > > should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. > > > > We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in > > defining skill. > > > snip snip > > > > My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to > > say instead of RE the "two servo class" meaning the only limitation will be > > the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with > > just two servos beyond the expected?? > > > > Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a > > contest requiring a balsa based model. > > > > Rick > > > > -- > Lincoln Ross > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
- Original Message - From: "Lincoln Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia../ reduce it to two > To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won > some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. > Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would > have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule > writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. > > Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t > shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? > > Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more > difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same > time as someone else who may not be experienced. > > Richard Hallett wrote: > > Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests > > > > Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we > > should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. > > > > We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in > > defining skill. > > > snip snip > > > > My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to > > say instead of RE the "two servo class" meaning the only limitation will be > > the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with > > just two servos beyond the expected?? > > > > Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a > > contest requiring a balsa based model. > > > > Rick > > > > -- > Lincoln Ross > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
To wring higher performance, I would get another Io, only beefed up. Won some contests with this, I think it landed better than my Sagitta 600. Ailerons and rudder mechanically mixed, and spoilers. Of course would have to leave off the spoilers. I don't think the Io is what the rule writers envisioned, tho it was fun. Too bad it was so fragile. Have you tried building with a good cartridge filter mask, and with a t shirt and fancy furnace filter over a box fan? Leaving out the spoilers would certainly make the landings more difficult, but I want a suit of armor if I have to land about the same time as someone else who may not be experienced. Richard Hallett wrote: > Contests have usually in many areas ended in being landing contests > > Since everyone is flying over the same square miles I would suggest that we > should have only two servos for rudder and elevator. > > We have now increased the difficulty of the landing factor to help in > defining skill. > snip snip > > My two cents - throw out the spoilers. At that point you might be able to > say instead of RE the "two servo class" meaning the only limitation will be > the two servos. I wonder how someone would wring higher performance with > just two servos beyond the expected?? > > Personally because I hack and cough so badly with balsa I would not enter a > contest requiring a balsa based model. > > Rick > -- Lincoln Ross RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RCSE] 3 function, RES, Nostalgia....../ reduce it to two
Jack; Chuck is absolutely right on this issue. RES gliders have difficulty maintaining optimum line up during approach. Once off the perfect approach heading, correcting back to center line is extremely difficult. Consequently, loss of landing points is most likely to occur from lateral displacement. Although what you say is true about the relative size of the area for a perfect landing score, that's largely irrelevant in RES competition. Let's take a much more likely case where you're displaced two feet (24") from the center line. With the current runway landing, that's going to cost you 23 landing points. If the landing were being done to a spot on a standard 25 foot AMA tape, that same landing would only cost you 8 landing points. The bias becomes even more extreme as you're farther from the runway centerline. Assume your nose is six feet from runway centerline after landing. With a runway landing, you'll lose 71 landing points whereas the same landing on a tape only costs 24 points. IOW, landing points decrement at a three to one ratio from lateral displacement during a runway instead of a spot landing. Fred RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
