Warbirds in IMAC???

[KrisW]

Just out of curiosity . . .Are there ANY Warbirds (P-51, P-40, Bearcat, etc etc etc) that would be considered legal for IMAC competition? After all, they ARE aerobatic aircraft. . competed in the toughest aerobatics competition in the world (combat) and fit the description of having a single engine, and do Aerobatic demonstrations all the time at Airshows.

Any opinions???

[Mudsurfer1234]

isn't one of the rules that it must be a replica of a full scale aircraft competing in the IAC?

if not, i might try some sportsman with my 1/5 scale mustang

[KrisW]

I believe the rule states that it must be a scale representation of an aircraft that either competed in Aerobatic competition at one time (such as a Stearman or Pitts) or was designed to do so (such as Laudenslagers "shark" which never flew). this would qualify the Bearcat, since the Blue Angels originally flew Bearcats after WW2. today, lots of warbirds do demonstration aerobatics, and even the Gee Bee shows off it's capabilities in the aerobatic arena.

Where is the line drawn between planes designed specifically for IAC style competition, and aircraft that can fly aerobatics, whether they actively compete in IAC meets at this time?

[dmichael]

The full scale plane must be capable of flying the aerobatic manuevers within the space of the box. This would almost certainly eliminate any warbird.

Dave

[MetHerInBaghdad]

You know what I like about this conversation?
A great chance to learn more about the rules. That never hurts anyone does it?
Good questions, good answers... keep them coming.

[Toro]

aerobatics is very broad description.... FAA defines aerobatic as pitch and roll maneuvers not to exceed certain degrees, I believe +/-20 for pitch, and 60 for bank.... With that description, I could fly a Cessna 152 aerobat in IMAC. I think DMICHAEL is right on this one, One caviat though, you can fly "ANY" aeroplane in basic... Who was the guy that one the basic class in a contest with a EF extra 300 electric in the wind ?

Warbird in IMAC would be the right tool for the wrong job in this case I believe.

[xtra330]

why? leave warbirds for the fly ins and scale meets....

[DKnippen]

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	Just out of curiosity . . .Are there ANY Warbirds (P-51, P-40, Bearcat, etc etc etc) that would be considered legal for IMAC competition? After all, they ARE aerobatic aircraft. . competed in the toughest aerobatics competition in the world (combat) and fit the description of having a single engine, and do Aerobatic demonstrations all the time at Airshows. Any opinions???

Kris,
We all know war bird flying and IMAC are a different breeds .War birds more or less I feel are limited to Immelmans, Barrel rolls, split S. rolls and turns.Warbirds were not designed for IAC or Scale Aerobatic flying even thought they have somewhat aerobatic capabilities .
They weren't designed for Imac which wasn't even heard of then. Two totally different types of flying. But personally I would like too see it. especially in Unlimited. LOL ...I really think the Imac planes would have done exceptionally in the war if mounted with guns. No Bombs ....too heavy!
Dan

[airborneSGT]

Hey there was the guy who flew his B-52 inverted. I saw the actual plane on my way back home from the Army. If you went out of your way I am sure it would be possible to do some type of warbird to fly IMAC. The term warbird itself is really a broad term also.

[sweetpea]

	Quote: Originally Posted by airborneSGT
	Hey there was the guy who flew his B-52 inverted. I saw the actual plane on my way back home from the Army. If you went out of your way I am sure it would be possible to do some type of warbird to fly IMAC. The term warbird itself is really a broad term also.

Don't think that was a full scale B-52. They can't roll inverted, the wings would snap off and it would have to be so high up because of the loss of altitude that you'd never see it. Now a KC-135 did a roll when they first built it.

As for the IMAC......the rules state......any plane that could compete in an IAC contest. There is no reason that someone couldn't enter with a warbird plane......would they win? Probably not.

Regardless any plane is welcome in Basic, so bring it!

[Judge]

How about we just look at the actual rule?

3.1. The events accommodate aerobatic monoplanes and biplanes
which are replicas of types known to have competed in International
Aerobatic Club (IAC) competition, or replicas of types known to be
capable of aerobatic competition within the airspace known as the
“Box.”

3.2. All classes except Basic require that the pilot must meet the
requirements defined in Rule 3.1. The Basic Class is open to all competitors
with a monoplane or biplane aircraft. There is no minimum
size requirement for any class. Contest Directors may make an exception
for a model of a full-scale aircraft that was built for IAC competition,
but has not yet competed. Proof of the latter is the responsibility
of the contestant.

The killer is being capable of aerobatics inside the airspace known as the "Box". Few, if any, warbirds meet that criteria. The box is actually very small, and I am not aware of any warbird that has demonstrated the ability to fulfill this requirement.

Notice that it does NOT imply that the plane "could" compete in IAC. It says "known to be capable of". HUGE difference there. As a CD I would not allow a warbird in any class above Basic.

Bill Malvey
Chairman - IMAC Rules and Standards Committee

[MetHerInBaghdad]

Once again... the more you know.

[Toro]

Gotta LOVE the Malvey factor.... That guy has forgotten more than I know !! One smart duck

How YA doin Bill ?

[KrisW]

Ya know. . I BET a Stearman, Fokker DRVII, A6M Zero, or any of the other slower and highly maneuverable fighters from pre-1945 could fly sequenes inside the box, though they might not score very well. Laudenslagers "Shark" never even flew, yet I'm told it is IMAC Legal because it was "designed to fly aerobatics" (or so the quote goes) they say the P-26 could literally turn around in it's own length (It's about the size of a Yak) Not EVERY warbird is a slug like an AT-6, with many WW2 era plane capable of 8-10 g's.

The current plethora of models that are supposed to look like their full scale counterparts, in reality, are hardly recognizable in many cases. But, I bet no one, including Bill M, whips out a tape measure and set of 3-views at Meets to ensure they are legal ( I can name a few that are very borderline and probably IMAC non-legal, that fly competition every weekend). So who is to say a 120" P-47 would not be THE next "ultra IMAC" plane. . the way the Yak is supposed to be at the moment?

If you can't prove it could not fly inside the IAC box (because no representative models are flying any more) how you gonna know? Personally, I'd give the pilot the "benefit of the doubt", the way I do with a lot of questionable IMAC planes, then chuckle and watch the fun.

[notorious_benny]

Aircraft known to have competed in IAC competition or capable of competition is what the rule says.

Go for your life with your warbird mate. Even an old Zlin will poop over it.
The point is fullsize warbirds were never designed with the power/weight for COMPETITION aerobatics.

I would love to see how many seconds of vertical a stearman will give you.

The rule is pretty easy to follow, if the type has never been used in competitive aerobatics there is probably a bloody good reason why.........

Why do you always insist in flogging dead horses....................