Warbirds in IMAC???

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by sweetpea
	I would never say a warbird had an advantage, but if someone wants to fly IMAC but can't afford another plane do we restrict them?

This same logic would say that a guy with a pattern plane and no other plane should also be allowed to fly above Basic. I mean, gee, if that's the only plane he has how can we stop him from flying?? I'd like to run my F-150 in NASCAR, it's the only car I have. Why can't I do that??

[jack01]

I'm not 100% on the IMAC stuff since I've only done one competition, but here are the full scale rules:



91.303 Aerobatic Flight

No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight-
(a) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement
(b) Over an open air assembley of persons
(c) Within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport
(d) Within 4 nautical miles of the centerline of a Federal Airway
(e) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface, or
(f) When flight visibility is less than 3 statute miles

For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitute, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not nessecary for normal flight.




Parachute requirements are outlined in 91.307 C and D

(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds-
1. A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon or:
2. A Nose up or nose down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.

(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply to-
1. Flight tests for pilot certification; or
2. Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating when given by-
(i) A Certified Flight Instructor or
(ii) An Airline Transport Pilot instructing in accordance with 61.67 of this chapter

[Fast Fredd]

Try flying a T-6 without rudder and you'll be sorry./! Full scale or model. I have both.
BTW, I have seen several warbirds compete in IAC competition, as Matt Chapman stated earlier. A T-6, T-34, T-28, Marchaiti(sp) -- with difficulty staying in the box. Also, Stearman, Cub, Bucker, and a couple of others I don't remember off hand. Several of the latter did quite well actually.

[WRBirch]

""" or replicas of types known to be
capable of aerobatic competition within the airspace known as the
“Box.” """"

Looks to me that all you have to do is prove that a plane is capable, then get letters signed that state that someone " knows it is capable """ then it would be "Known to be capable" and you could fly it.
maybe, and, or , if, but, ect. ect. ect. maybe
Hmmmm, If you flew one in Basic and then it would be proven to be capable???????

[WRBirch]

"""or replicas of types known to be
capable of aerobatic competition within the airspace known as the
“Box.” """"
Judge,
If you flew one in basic, and receive a legitamate score, wouldn't that PROVE it was capable???? or would that have to have been a full size to prove it was capable ?????

[GremlinX]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Toro
	if you exceed these degrees than therefore you are engaged in aerobatic flight, and by FAA rule require a parachute and to be in certain airspace unless performing in an airshow. So if your going out doing loops, than you are exceeding 20 degree departure and should be wearing a parachute, and flying in certain airspace as you are engaged in aerobatic flight. Im sure Matt can define totally.... Ive forgotten some of the rules as I havent been current for a couple of years now.

I misunderstood... nevermind. I know 100% what you mean... ooooops..

[JeeUm]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Matt Chapman
	GeeUmm, You're correct! 30 degrees pitch, no parachute if solo! So, just to add fuel to the fire; If "WE" were to show up at a war bird fly-in and ask if we would be allowed to fly our Pitts, yaks, Extra or Edge....Just because it "fun" ...think anyone would let us register and fly? I THINK NOT! (unless of course it was Biff or Texx)

Wow, I'm right about something? LOL. Not bad since I have'nt read that reg since about 1996

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Fast Fredd
	Try flying a T-6 without rudder and you'll be sorry./! Full scale or model. I have both. BTW, I have seen several warbirds compete in IAC competition, as Matt Chapman stated earlier. A T-6, T-34, T-28, Marchaiti(sp) -- with difficulty staying in the box. Also, Stearman, Cub, Bucker, and a couple of others I don't remember off hand. Several of the latter did quite well actually.

Then they all qualify by the current rules. So you going to fire up the T-6 and go for it Fred??

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by WRBirch
	"""or replicas of types known to be capable of aerobatic competition within the airspace known as the “Box.” """" Judge, If you flew one in basic, and receive a legitamate score, wouldn't that PROVE it was capable???? or would that have to have been a full size to prove it was capable ?????

The rule refers to IAC competition, not IMAC. So if it has flown in an IAC contest, was designed to do so and the CD approves it, or is otherwise "known to be capable" then it qualifies.

So light 'em up boys. Let's see some of those big "ole Warbirds in IMAC. 45 pounds with a G-62 - Sa-Whee-Eat !!

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Fast Fredd
	Try flying a T-6 without rudder and you'll be sorry./! Full scale or model. I have both. BTW, I have seen several warbirds compete in IAC competition, as Matt Chapman stated earlier. A T-6, T-34, T-28, Marchaiti(sp) -- with difficulty staying in the box. Also, Stearman, Cub, Bucker, and a couple of others I don't remember off hand. Several of the latter did quite well actually.

FRED!!!!


You're ALIVE!!!!

It's Marchetti, I believe (Italian airplane company???)

good to see you pouncing around FG, Fred.

[KrisW]

Soooo. . . . . . A 25% P-47N (124" span) with a 3W 240/4 bladed prop would be legal????


KEWL!!!. . .I'll get started on it!!. . See you at the Nall.

[50%plane]

What's wrong with building a warbird as a 3D plane and then flying it as such? Change airfoils, use the 10% stretch/skew, put a 3D prop on the nose and then fly it.


50%

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 50%plane
	What's wrong with building a warbird as a 3D plane and then flying it as such? Change airfoils, use the 10% stretch/skew, put a 3D prop on the nose and then fly it. 50%

Exactly . . .kind of put the term "Warslug" to rest. don't even need to Skew the tail plane down. Just use the 10% rule and things come out fine with most radial engined warbirds. Don't forget to kill the dihedral.

[50%plane]

I'm not sure about killing the dihederal as a blanket statement. It's the dihederal that makes a Cap fly right.

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 50%plane
	What's wrong with building a warbird as a 3D plane and then flying it as such? Change airfoils, use the 10% stretch/skew, put a 3D prop on the nose and then fly it. 50%

Nothing. THe question was if it was legal for an IMAC contest.