Pathetic - What if........???

[Al Lewis]

Oh believe me Pat I have no doubt they are out there but I just haven't seen them up here. I'm afraid my experience with this sort of thing is limited to watching Kyle Woyshnis and Mike Carreiro grow up in the sport. I'd be the first to admit that they are not A typical but I do know that Kyle can pick up any radio and fly the wings off of any plane. I think that puts a strong case forward against the original post. There are people that practice and get good at this sport, there are people that can practice and will never get good at it, and then there are people that have a God given gift that are naturals at this sport. I don't think taking a lot of time building a kit makes you a better flier. Time better spent practicing. I also don't think that all of the mixes in the world are going to put you on the podium at a national event. I really think that saying these fabulous young folks are "pathetic" is probably a case of sour grapes. I'm terrible at this stuff but I enjoy my level of flying and love what these young guys are doing for the sport. They're our future and without a future we're certainly not going to get a lot of R&D money or capital investment spent on, what would be, a dying sport.

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Fixed Wing
	Dan, you're right. I wonder how many of today's fliers ever had to deal with 3IM issues?

Isn't that also called the third rule, or rule of threes? Where you couldn't run 3 channels equally spaced from each other at the same time? I remember that from back in the AM days...

As far as the topic at hand, I am extremely thankful for today's technologies and the advances it has brought to the hobby. Yes, today's radios are spectacular tools, but overall aerodynamic design of our aircraft has advanced over the years as well. It's like night and day, even the difference between the pattern ships of ten years ago and today's aircraft, even some of last year's aircraft might be considered outdated compared to this year.
Nowadays, a pattern plane that requires any mix at all to achieve true roll, pitch and yaw axis might be considered a flawed design.
Even with our scale aerobatic birds of yesteryear to today have changed significantly. I remember when the Cermark Sukhoi was considered a killer hot-doggin' 120 size plane, and was considered large, yet it only had 700 squares, weighed 10 pounds, and had the worst coupling I have ever experienced. By today's standards, even in the same size category, it would be a complete POS - and in retrospect, it really was/is.
I would like to think that I am pretty savvy on how to set up a plane mechanically, and I do so to the point until where only today's advanced radio programming can make a plane fly any better.
With the speed and strength of today's servos, the size of the control surfaces on today's aerobatic aircraft, and the new-found thrust-to-weigh ratios well in excess of 2:1 sometimes, it is my opinion that anyone that feels that dual rates and expo is a crutch for less talented pilots, or whatever, is simply stuck in the past or has a deathwish for their planes, or has a different idea of how a precision flight should look than I do.

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Pat Roy
	Al, Some might find it surprising, but when attending a full on 3D event the number of hard 3d flyers over 45-50 is amazing. Good ones at that. Agreed, those that have grown up with video and computer games as their primary early past times are better, but a lot of those "old" guys are pretty good. An IMAC or Pattern contest would truly separate the new from the old if mix radios were eliminated. Hard for everyone, but the older guys that did their own building had a lot of practice flying without mixes, rates, or expo. They had to tweak the plane, not the radio, requiring a lot of "feel" and understanding of the airframe and control relationships. The excess power wasn't there as well. Don't get me wrong, the new days are better than the old and I certainly don't want to go back!

I 100% agree. I can set a plane up to fly a pretty nice pattern without expo if I had to, but I am sure you would agree, too, that tha plane would only be useful for such a flight. Today, I can set up a plane to perform two different styles of flying, and quite well, with a simple flip of a switch - to me, that is downright awesome!

[Zee]

I remember back in '77-'78 Airtronics come out with radio that had switches to reverse all the chanels and expo on the elevator and ailerons. What a feeling when you able to make the neutral softer.
This was before I know of IMAC, at that time I had full scale business working on aerobatic planes and at lunch time took my RC plane out on runway and fly full scale IAC sequences. After dialing in expo on my new radio the whole sequence look different.
Zee

[Polarrod49]

I Do know one thing, my Pattern Plane the Black Magic V2 has no mixes in it what so ever. I can fly a knife edge down the runway by letting go of the right stick completly and just hold rudder and it will not push or pull. when I'm flying a straight line right side up I can go hands off. and when I fly inverted I can fly hands off. neither side will fall or climb. you pretty much have to force the plane out of the line, It just tracks so well. and this is a plane that is now considered "out of date". I do all this by messing with the wing and stab adjusters a little bit and moving the CG a little bit. and remember no MIXES too AWESOME!!

[Flyfalcons]

So I guess the answer to the original question, "What if........."?

".......They'd still smoke you at the contests."

Sound about right guys?

[swk550]

I fly both pattern and IMAC. It's best to get the mechanical trim as close as possible. All servos should be adjusted mechanically for proper differential (or as close as possible with the servo arm splines). I adjust the 100% travel for the highest rate I plan on using. Then I do a final trim with the radio electronics. On giant scale it is important to minimize sub trim in the servos and only drive the servos to 100% travel. A few of the club members had travel adjusted to 140%. In hard 3D flying, I've seen many servos lock up. Just my $0.02 worth of advice.

Steve

[bodywerks]

I know 140-150% has caused problems, but I go as high as 130%ATV and have never had issues...

[Wayne]

Steve,

Your going to get more out of your servo (resolution wise) to strart with 140% and mechanically adjust linkages to give you desired throw.
You can do that starting with 100% atv but your not getting everything out of the servo that you can.

If you've seen guys blow up servos using 140% its their geometry and mechanical advantage thats doing it. Not the 140% atv.

[Blog+1]

Whew - got you guys all steamed up. Some super replies and input.
One response I was kinda hoping for, was, with a well trimmed Imac plane, using a straight 6/7/8ch, on a scale 1-10, what % score do you think top fliers can achieve?
And Ryan - be nice...

[Mike Hester]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JohnVH
	People still build? why would you want to do that with all the beautiful Arfs out there? My time is worth too much to spend it glueing my fingers together. haha

ok....NOT picking at you but this quote is priceless, and one that's used a lot nowadays. Being one of the massochistic builders left in the world today, I'll explain.

First, there is not one single thing wrong with this point of view. if you'd rather not build and would much rather just buy it, well the world is definitely your oyster! A few years back I would have said "ARFs are crap". Well, some still are, but some are VERY nice indeed. You have plenty to choose from, pretty much anything you want, it's there.

But why build? Simple: we call it "modeling". Sort of like those plastic warbirds most of us built when we were little kids? Except now, they are way cool and they fly. I enjoy building. I used to just build kits, but then I tried my hand at scratch building...and was so pleased with the result, I ended up designing my own planes. I thought I was the only one left in the world, ESPECIALLY in pattern.

BOY was I ever wrong. I was sort of talked into making the planes I was doing available for others if they wanted them. I figured maybe 10 people at most, all overt he world, would still want to build a wood pattern plane. What followed was nothing short of spectacular, and in truth, something I wasn't really ready for. I made the kit of the Black Magic V2 available at the beginning of 2006. By the Nats that year, I had sold 50 or so. After going to the Nationals and winning the Concourse de Elegance, and doing very well with it in the advanced class (I got second to Brett Wickizer, that kid is phenominal!), I had over 100 orders before August. That plane sold about 200 copies.

The next year I introduced everything I had ever learned into the latest version, the Black Magic VF3. KaBOOM!!!!!!! If I ever had any doubts whether or not there were still builders/modelers in the world, they are erased. Well, except for the left coast....that area is still ARF central pretty much...

We just get as much pleasure out of building a plane as we do flying it. We're not better, we're just different. it takes a certain type of person to enjoy building. but then it also takes a different type of person to fly pattern in the first place!

What I strive for is to get a plane as close to zero neutral as possible before ever touching a mix. Usually a plane can get well below 5%. The VF3 when properly trimmed takes about 1.5% up elevator to left rudder, and that's it...no differential, no roll coupling, nothing. but what people don't see is how much work went into getting the design to that point. Everything affects everything else. if you make one change, you have to change everything or else it's a compromise. I hate compromises....

Most modern pattern planes have achieved this level of perfection. Pattern design moves fast. What was cutting edge last year is last year's plane. There's always a way to make it better, and we are constantly adjusting to the new schedules. For instance, by 2010 your plane had BETTER snap clean and do integrated rolling manuevers well...because F-11 has 9 snaps, and the opening manuever in P-11 is a figure M with an intergated half roll-half loop across the bottom center. That manuever alone will be quite a challenge for older designs, especially ones not really set up or trimmed well. This is making desingers go for broke right now.....and thankfully most of us have a good head start!

As for the original topic of this thread? Most of the "good" pilots I know don't use much expo (if any) and don't rely too heavily on mixes. if you have the skill and a good plane, you don't really need much of either one. But some does help, without a doubt. I'd like to see the guy that can fly smooth with no rudder expo on a VF3....these things will KE loop with about 1" of rudder deflection LOL

And I would imagine Chip's Passport is the same or better in that respect. you will probably see most of the cutting edge planes take on this general overall airplane shape, because it works and works WELL.

But would I go back to a straight Kraft 5 channel radio? Not on your life. I like my radio and I like having options. Even if I don't actually use but maybe 5% of it's capabilities, it's more in the way the plane "feels". if it's easy to maintain a nice graceful radius in any conditions, without a jerky response, if it feels SMOOTH, then that's where the newer radios shine. I really like the feel of the gimbals on my 12z, and I am looking forward to see how they feel on the new JR 12x one day as well. That has been my only real complaint with JR....the gimbals don't feel smooth to me.

Ok enough rambling.....LOL

-Mike

[alec taylor]

the best thing about the old days is not being able to remember them... alex