Originally Posted by shimano

Sheesh, just cant win around here

Man, I certainly didn't mean anything harsh....by all means building something is very cool no matter what. The satisfaction is well worth it I guess what I was getting at is that with modern day designs, materials and technology there are not a lot of old school plans that are up to speed so just asking for plans you may not be happy. When I decided to do my first "scratch build" I started by buying a set of older plans and was all excited....then I rolled them out and was astonished with the design compared to the ARF's that I was spoiled with from my first plane. Then I looked at the O.A. size, weight and engine requirements compared to what the ARF's were at at the time I decided to start building. Basically the 35% plans I had bought were barely larger than current 30% planes on the market at the time and weighed 3-5 lbs. more, wing area was way off, airfoils were way off, etc. etc. That's when I decided to just draw my own and see what happened (sink or swim kinda deal). Well, I'm hooked and having a ball scratch building so I say go for it

Oh, its all good man. I wasnt taking anything personal. I really thought it was funny the semantics over scratch build definition, when everyone around here builds their ARF's..

I think I will take your advice Terry, thinking more about it I know exactly what you mean. I think I will spend some time on the CAD for awhile and see what I can come up with.

Anyone know where I can find the definitions to exactly how far from scale you can go and still be considered IMAC legal?

When I decided to design and scratch build a new fuselage for some wings and stabs I already had, I wanted to do something different, but still be aerobatic for IMAC style flying. As I build it now I realize it's most likely going to be too heavy to perform all that well, but I am really enjoying the process.


In your first post you asked "What would you build if you were to do a scratch build in a 50cc or bigger design?" This is my answer. It's what I based the fuselage I'm building on, except this would be big enough for a 150 radial and has a much more complicated landing gear.

I have been following your build, and is partly what got me thinking on a new design or plan build. I really like what you have been doing!

The main thing I want out of a scratch build, is the ability to cut new parts, or build a new wing panel etc when the unfortunate happens. I enjoy building as much as flying. When I build something, I KNOW every inch of the airframe. I feel more confident, not to mention the pride.

It just seems kinda wasteful to redesign yet another Yak or Extra.. which is why the question comes up, how far from true scale can you go before its not IMAC legal.

The MXS-R is starting to become more and more on top of the list. However, I am really in love with the way the Yak flies. It be great to fly one before spending the time on CAD to plans to building.. and finding out you dont like the way it flies.

Look at the Prime Cut + 20 by Dick Sarpolis it was in M A N about a yr ago. There is a shot kit from eureka a/c co also. The plane is 88" + or - he ran a rcgf 45 on it. The plans come M A N

Originally Posted by kraft61

Look at the Prime Cut + 20 by Dick Sarpolis it was in M A N about a yr ago. There is a shot kit from eureka a/c co also. The plane is 88" + or - he ran a rcgf 45 on it. The plans come M A N

Air Flair has a kit, too.http://www.airflair.com/flaircat1.html#PC-300

Originally Posted by shimano

I think I will take your advice Terry, thinking more about it I know exactly what you mean. I think I will spend some time on the CAD for awhile and see what I can come up with.

Anyone know where I can find the definitions to exactly how far from scale you can go and still be considered IMAC legal?

10%

http://www.mini-iac.com/ go to quick links and then rules.

6. Proof of Scale: 6.1: To prove that the model resembles a particular aircraft some proof of scale is required. 6.2: Proof of scale is the responsibility of the contestant. 6.3: The general outlines of the model shall approximate the full size outlines of the subject aircraft. Exact scale is not required. The model shall be judged for likeness at a distance of approximately 10 feet. 6.4: If the contestant presents no proof of scale material with the model, and the CD can determine that the aircraft is a replica of a full-size aircraft, then the contestant will be allowed to have his/her entry considered. 6.5: Scale shall be determined by the wingspan. A change in wingspan will become a change in overall Scale. Fuselage width, height and aircraft planform or any other variations shall not exceed 10% of scale, with the exception of airfoils and size/shape of control surface within the scale outline rule. 6.6: A realistic three-dimensional human pilot and viewable instrument panel shall be appropriately installed in all Scale Aerobatic aircraft. (A one [1] percent flight score penalty will be assessed for noncompliance.)

Originally Posted by TomCrump

Air Flair has a kit, too.http://www.airflair.com/flaircat1.html#PC-300

that was his 1st one, the last one he came out with is PRIME CUT +20. very simple layout with fewer parts, quicker build.