Warbirds in IMAC???

[Ion01]

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	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.

Totally!! The rules also allow for larger control surfaces so you can make your control surfaces 3d size on your warbird. With a good designer and pilot i would bet one could get something like a p-51 to fly all out 3d! I never thought I would see a trainer doing that stuff but recently saw one making vertical takeoffs on a video on this site. I think a warbird flying IMAC would be awesome! I would go watch just to see it!

[50%plane]

Judge, I obviously don't fly IMAC right now, however I don't see a problem in doing this. Your post seem to have the opinion that it has to be an Extra, Cap, Giles, etc. Where's the problem in flying something that is unusual in IMAC?


50%

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 50%plane
	I'm not sure about killing the dihederal as a blanket statement. It's the dihederal that makes a Cap fly right.

7-8 degree Dihedral is a BIT much, and would make the aircraft proverse roll with rudder application (bank int the turn). this is not desirable. A fine balance must be struck depending on where the wing is located. Most low wing aerobats (like Extras and Caps) have 1 degree, basically because the top surface of he wing has 0 degrees and the wing tapers upward on the bottom side.

A similar approach would work well with a warbird.

[50%plane]

I agree. 1-2 degrees is all I would keep.

[innovator]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JeeUm
	Wow, I'm right about something? LOL. Not bad since I have'nt read that reg since about 1996

I am going to take my Zagi, do a double snap-a-dilly, into a 0 of 8, grab my trophy and go home.

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by innovator
	I am going to take my Zagi, do a double snap-a-dilly, into a 0 of 8, grab my trophy and go home.

Only in Basic. . .

[innovator]

lol

[50%plane]

lol

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by 50%plane
	Judge, I obviously don't fly IMAC right now, however I don't see a problem in doing this. Your post seem to have the opinion that it has to be an Extra, Cap, Giles, etc. Where's the problem in flying something that is unusual in IMAC? 50%

As long as the plane qualifies under the rules, there is no problem. Evidently a number of planes that could be thought of as a "warbird" do qualify. So bring them on!!

However, I think that there is still an intent to a rule and some would rather try to see how they can bend the rule to show their cleverness than simple take the rule for what it is.

In the end I do not think a warbird would do very well. Biplanes do not ,and they are well known in the IAC world. People will end up flying what makes them competitive, and after all, the WHOLE point of IMAC is the competition. So it sorts itself out.

If fun flies are your thing then there in the IMAA, warbirds welcomed and encouraged. And they HATE competition.

[notorious_benny]

I think the IMAC committee needs to tighten the wording of this rule. I dont want to see stinking Spitfires and P51's at IMAC comps!!!!

People are just getting anal retentitive about the way in which the rule is worded. Any person with some common sense can understand what types of aircraft the rule is intended to include and reject.

I believe the rule was left a little open to include silghtly odd, one design experimental aircraft that never made it into production but were clearly intended to be used primarily as a competition tool.

I am sure there are plenty of other people out there that also dont want to see warbirds invading their IMAC comps as well!!

[JeeUm]

Uggghh, this thread is like fingernails on a chalk board.

[DKnippen]

At first this thread was starting to get to me because it's so ridiculous and such a joke. Now I know the joke is on us.
I think the rules are fine the way they are, and anyone who thinks they can be compititive with a war bird in Imac has got to have a gift, or just don't respect the concept. I'm moving !
Dan

[50%plane]

	Quote: Originally Posted by notorious_benny
	I think the IMAC committee needs to tighten the wording of this rule. I dont want to see stinking Spitfires and P51's at IMAC comps!!!!

We can agree there. Spit's and 'stangs are boring. However this B26 that I'm building should do right well in any aerobatic maneuver. Does IMAC have any rules against a twin or a model with retracts?


50%

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Judge
	As long as the plane qualifies under the rules, there is no problem. Evidently a number of planes that could be thought of as a "warbird" do qualify. So bring them on!! However, I think that there is still an intent to a rule and some would rather try to see how they can bend the rule to show their cleverness than simple take the rule for what it is. In the end I do not think a warbird would do very well. Biplanes do not ,and they are well known in the IAC world. People will end up flying what makes them competitive, and after all, the WHOLE point of IMAC is the competition. So it sorts itself out. If fun flies are your thing then there in the IMAA, warbirds welcomed and encouraged. And they HATE competition.

Three things, Bill. . .

IMAC does NOT enforce it's own rules. .I remember being lambasted because I objected to "split ailerons" on an Extra. . cmon, that's an obvious infringement on the rules, but you were all for it. One side of the riles or the other, Bill. . not both. You either interpret them strictly and to the finest nuance to prevent any deviation from design (such as split ailerons, non-scale aerobalancers, and things like that). . or you interpret them loosely. . let everyone "run what ya brung" and let it all sort out in the points spread, and if someone really wants to get anal then you whip out the Mark-1 eyeball, and tell them it looks like whatever the plane is the pilot says it is.

Point 2. . NO ONE. .Especially myself, is trying to "bend the rules" as you inject, just to see how far they can be bent. The question was merely asked. . are warbirds allowed to fly in IMAC. From there we get all these emotional histrionics and petulance, and all over NOTHING. Warbirds HAVE flown in the IAC, so any arguing over the fact makes it a moot argument in the first place. Whether the plane falls within the 10% rule is the main consideration, as well as having proper control surface, wing, and tail piece locations, and falling under the 55 lbs rule with the AMA.

Point 3. . IMAC is NOT just about "Competition". . it's about FUN. .while competing. The day I am all screwed up and getting an ulcer about winning a silly contest is the day I need to quit flying RC. I get so tired of people arguing over a few points because THEY don't think the manuver was done that badly (As it did at last years SE Regionals. . almost had to handcuff a CALLER). you go up, you fly, you take your score. . have a cold drink, shoot the bull, fix the plane if it needs it. . then go fly again. THAT is IMAC. . . until you get to the Nats. . THEN it's gunfighter eyes time, and you put your game face on.

I am not going to get myself all in a wad if some guy shows up with a warbird and wants to fly IMAC with it. . He will probably get hosed. . so what??? He might also WIN. . and wouldn't that just be silly and something for all the "IMAC Purests" to hang their head about??? I think it would be very entertaining to have someone flying a warbird. . .especialy if he was kicking butt with it. And that is what this hobby, and IMAC, are about. Good Wholesome FUN.

So bring on those Warbirds. . .and good luck to them. And if I catch anyone talking BS about him. . I might just eject them from the Meet for Unsportsmanlike conduct.

Gentlemen do not talk BS about the other guy . .they fly, and smile nicely when they lose.. or win.

[notorious_benny]

Dont you have any Life?! No one cares anymore Its the people who nitpick that make the sport less enjoyable for everyone who wants to have fun.

Go and make love to your rule book!:7aa: