On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Pat McCleave wrote:
Guys,
I have to both agree and disagree with what Chuck said about two
meter planes. I agree they are harder to see at distance but have
to disagree that they are not harder to fly well. The performance
level of most if not all 2M's is not on par with the bigger planes
and they are more difficult to fly smooth than the bigger birds.
Yeah. I gotta agree with both comments. They are a bit harder to
see and this limits the ability to see lift signals. And range is an
issue.
I've been flying open class planes most all year and last weekend
went out with only 2M planes. My Laser is well set up but I had a
difficult time getting smooth thermal turns. I made the effort to
fly it smoothly and really could tell the difference in flight
behavior, the 2M is significantly more difficult for me. That to me
is not necessarily bad. Spending time with the plane that is more
challenging to fly well should translate into flying the bigger
planes better. Perhaps not, we'll see. I will be flying my 2M a lot
more in the near future just because I like flying it.
As fate would have it, I was out flying with Les Grammer who was
tuning up his ICON. We hit a boomer thermal and both planes were
waaaay up there. My 2M was bouncing around in very buoyant air and
difficult to fly smoothly as I could not always see exactly what it
was doing while his ICON was huge by comparison and lots easier to
read. (I tried to watch him as well as my plane----when I wasn't
watching the two big hawks that were working the same lift. It was a
grand flight! :-) )
Cheers,
Bill
---
It is no bad thing to celebrate a simple life. B. Baggins
Bill Johns
Colton, WA
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe
messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email
such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
