SCAT Electronic News 29 October 2001 issue 634
- Details
- Category: Archive 2001
- Hits: 1042
SCAT Electronic News 29 October 2001 issue 634
Table of Contents
=================
carbon tubes for F1B stabs - Brooks
More ideas about the World Champs - Ackery
C G position - Simmons via Skykieng
C G position - Andresen
MaxMen 2002 - Kent
Re: canada mini - Livotto
Sierra Cup 25 Results - Simpson
The poetess Veronika - Hines
Aeronca K - Buzzard
End of October
carbon tubes for F1B stabs
==========================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
I've looked at CST and APC catalogues for hollow carbon tubes to make F1B =
stabs, and Coup wings, but the tubes seem a little heavy. Are these tubes =
being used by anyone or is there another source.
Jim Brooks
[Jim
Vivchar and Burdov both sell tubes for F1B Stabs.
Also some kite suppliers have lightweight carbon tubes]
More ideas about the World Champs
=================================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Veronika,
It was great to meet you at Lost Hills, I hope it was not too much of
an inconvenience for me to give you a ride back from down wind, while
your husband was off looking for you, (after you had successfully found
his model, and mine !).
And Veronika, it is great to for us to hear your views on the role that
ladies can play to help and support their men when they come to free
flight events.
I appreciated all the work put in by the ladies at Lost Hills, this was
an essential part to making this event a success, thank you.
But I want to make another suggestion. That ladies take the next step,
and start flying.=20
I know there already are some ladies around the world that do fly
models, but it is a very small number, and there is definitely room for
a lot more of you to join in.
Many sports find it necessary to split men and womens competition,
because of the different speed, stamina strength etc that exist between
men and women. In fact there are very few sports where men and women are
able to use their skill alone, and so are able to compete equally.
Equestrian events are one of the few I can think of, and Free Flight is
another.
There are definitely opportunities there for ladies to take up. At Lost
Hills Australia was represented by Vera Lacy (a grandmother) flying F1A,
and she gained her team place by fair competition with the men.
And there have been other ladies in the past who have flown at the World
Champs, and many others who fly in local events. So it can be done, but
the numbers are very small, women are definitely under represented in
our sport.
So come on ladies, take the next step, get yourself an aeroplane and
come along and have a go.
Join us on the flightline, model flying is a lot more fun to do than to
watch.
regards
David Ackery
New Zealand
C G position
============
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
I'm kicking this problem upstairs. I'm confused by my own seemingly
ambivilent experiences. I hope someone will step up and help resolve
this question!
Cheers, Bill Gieskieng
Hi Bill.
I am sorry I have been silent for so long but I really am very busy
on the new (full size sailplanes) book. There is another year at
least of work ahead and I shall not be able to give any serious time
to free flight matters till the middle of next year at earliest. I
have built a free flight rubber driven model since I last wrote to
you, but have not had time to fly it yet!
I have, nevertheless, bought myself some back numbers of the NFFS
yearbooks from Bob McLinden and have managed to read some of the
items. I think the publication is of very high quality and I won't
let myself get so badly out of touch again.
I remain very puzzled by the question that prompted me to raise the
matter in the first place. I won't be able to respond properly for a
long time, but I will try to set a discussion going and come back
after a few months to see where it has got to! Maybe someone will
actually be able to do some practical flight tests and accurate
measurements.
Here is my challenge.
Why do free-flight modellers persist in the belief that having the
center of gravity of their models far to the rear of the wing
aerodynamic center, improves the glide performance? I have picked up
references to this in the NFFS books and articles, but nowhere have I
seen anything at all about anyone actually testing it, demonstrating
it, or showing it to be true in any other way (such as by
computation).
What evidence is there for this belief? It is apparently a fallacy.
Until I am proved wrong, I shall go on supposing that free flighters
have been copying old and false theories, in this respect, for nearly
seventy years. The tradition goes back to about 1935 and I suspect it
is just that - a tradition, and nobody so far seems to have
questioned it. I do question it now!.
It might be (though I don't believe it) that gliding free flight
models obey some entirely different physical laws which do not apply
to any other kind of aircraft.
One of the points emerging from my own work on sailplanes is that the
center of gravity should never be aft. The best location for
performance is always about 30 to 35% of the mean wing chord. Most of
the full scale sailplanes I have been looking at for the new book,
have allowable c.g. ranges between about 22% to 40% m.a.c. Only a
very few have wider limits and 33% is about the center of the
permitted range in all cases.
The range of c.g. allowed in full sized aircraft is determined
chiefly by safety requirements - to have a c.g. too far aft causes
trouble with spin recovery, to have the c.g too far forward makes it
difficult to 'flare out' when landing. There has to be some allowance
for differing loads in the cockpit, but the best location from the
performance viewpoint is always around 33% m.a.c. Ballast is used to
ensure that no one takes off with the c.g. outside the specified
range and, preferably, in the middle of it, not near the rear limit.
The most recent serious work published on this question is, I
believe, Frank Irving's article contained in Technical Soaring for
April 2001, (available from the SSA at Hobbes, New Mexico). His
calculations indicate that even for sailplanes trimmed at high
airspeeds (100 knots) to penetrate sinking air, with their camber
flaps raised,the c.g. should not be aft of 35% m.a.c. For minimum
rates of sink (which is what free flight modellers are concerned
about), the best c.g. location comes out very close to 33%. This is
not by any means a new discovery. The figuring and practical results
in flight have been going on for more than half a century and always
come up with these answers.
So why do free flight modellers disagree? Where are their test results?
Over to you and the others. Forgive me if I don't reply for ages!
All best wishes,
Martin
---------------------------
From Martin and Jean Simons
13 Loch Street
Stepney
South Australia 5069
Re: [Fwd: C G position]
=======================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Bill,
Sorry you didn't get to the WC. You'da enjoyed the Fuzeyev Folder. It had
2 hinges/side like the Stoys' HLG and really popped out at the apex of the
climb at the WC (was less vertical at Livotto).
If I were a betting person I'd have put him and Randy in the 10min flyoff
round Sat AM. Randy put up a 9:15 (D/T) at 7AM to win Livotto by 3+min.
Not so lucky in 7min round at WC. You can read about it in future articles.
Also Joe Mekina loaded 100's of shots on NFFS site.
Anyhow to foreward CG. My mentor, Lou Tucker, 3 time Chicago rubber
champion beginning at age 17, pointed out that with the old rules it was
advantageous to run a 50% stab to take some load off the wing and to provide
good responsive stability with the high moment of inertia of the long heavy
rubber motor.
Never noted for humility, I should point out that this lesson was taken to
heart and my absolutely most successful rubber model (also 3x Chi champion
from age 17 and 1st & 2nd at last 2 Plymouth Internats) was even a bit more
extreme. It was longer, higher AR, had 50% stab and 150% CG!
This carried over into power where it was easier to control the climb with a
largish stab and rearward CG. That was with much different rules and
technology.
As a little grammar school kid half a century ago I tried a bunch of
different configurations for low ceiling HLG. Best was small, high AR stab
& more foreward CG (it got even better when rounded wingtips were cutoff
square). The Stoys', Drela, Meuser, De Shields, Buddenbohm and others have
done impressive times with a CG in the 25-30% of MAC. Many times this was
with a VIW (flapper). This seems to coincide with Mr Simons' view.
My tests with stabs showed that a high AR stab with foreward CG was
extremely stable down to 5% stab. Stab AR was 2-3X wing AR! Low AR stabs
have a lower lift slope and have to be made much larger and CG moved more
foreward to approach equal stability (if they can).
Blunt stab LE also a help (perhaps necessity) for stability. Know of
several model with pointed stab LE that would Phugoid, yet turned into
stable winners when the LE was given generous radius.
For outdoor, the big stab, rear CG config really simplifies D/T.
While D/T mifght be more difficult, IMHO all large F1 classes would gain
time and stability with smaller, high AR blunt LE stabs, more area in single
surface wing (possibly with exposed spar on bottom) and foreward CG.
One thing that always makes me cringe is to watch a world class model stall
all the way to the ground. With composite construction it's hard to blame
warps, and if we are to believe the UIUC airfoil data, the optimum sink has
some margin to stall. With VIT, modern F1 models should at least approach
the stablity of a 60yr old Jasco Floater.
Them's my thoughts on the subject,
H
Max Men 2002
============
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger
Have you seen any dates for the above event, I need to book some holiday
to cover the event.
As yet no movement on the freeflight scene here, but no F&M outbreaks
for the last month.
Regards
Geoff
[Geoff and others
the dates for the MM are Fri 15 Feb for the Mini events , Sat and Sun 16 and 17 for the main event and Monday 18 as reserve day.]
Re: canada mini
===============
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Sorry for the delay
Thanks
Juan
F1G
==
1STEFANCHUK, S 120 120 120 120 120 180 276 1056
2GIOL, J. 120 120 120 120 120 180 220 1000
3BUKIN, A. 120 120 120 120 120 180 204 984
4COONEY, R. 120 120 120 120 120 180 202 982
5BOOTH, B. 120 120 120 120 120 180 200 980
6SCHROEDTER, G. 120 118 120 120 120 598
7MULLIGAM, M. 120 120 107 120 120 587
8NORVALL, L. 120 120 120 120 109 587
9VAN NEST, Bob. 120 120 120 90 120 570
10PRATT, J. 120 120 85 120 120 565
11EMERY, J. 120 120 84 120 120 564
12GANNON, W. 64 120 120 120 120 544
13KEPPLER, J. 120 120 120 63 120 543
14KEPPLER, T. 111 69 120 120 120 540
15BROCKS, P. 111 120 93 120 69 513
16WOOD, D. 60 120 92 120 120 512
17IORGER, T. 120 120 120 88 54 502
18GRIGGS, C. NF 120 120 120 120 480
19GANNON, L. 51 47 64 116 47 325
F1H
===
1STAMOV, V. 120 120 120 120 120 180 263 1043
2COWLEY. M. 120 120 120 120 120 180 196 976
3VAN NEST, Brian 120 120 120 120 120 180 182 962
4YABLONOVSKY, I. 120 120 120 120 120 180 181 961
5NERENG, J. 120 120 120 120 120 180 164 944
6WOLD, J. 120 120 120 120 120 48 648
7MARKOS, C. 120 120 120 120 120 0 600
8BUDDENBOHM, 117 120 120 104 120 581
9BUSNELLI, E. 120 120 120 98 120 578
10EDGE, C. 102 120 120 97 120 559
11HINES, L. 120 78 120 120 120 558
12COOPER, J. 48 120 120 120 120 528
13SMITH, N. 57 120 120 99 104 500
14ACKERY, D 120 120 120 114 NF 474
15CRISP, A. 57 120 120 53 120 470
16ZULIC, D. 120 120 120 67 NF 427
17CHAESSEBOROUGH,P. 120 120 120 47 0 407
18TRIBE, P. 120 120 0 38 94 372
19WALLACE, R. 20 11 73 69 120 293
20BRUN, P. 75 65 120 NF NF 260
F1J
===
1GUTAI, B. 120 120 120 120 120 180 510 1290
2POTI, N. 120 120 120 120 120 180 469 1249
3ROBERTS, J. 120 120 120 120 120 180 413 1193
4GUNDER, A. 120 120 120 120 120 180 389 1169
5CARROLL, E. 120 120 120 120 120 180 364 1144
6BALEY, J. 120 120 120 120 120 180 297 1077
7PARKER, F. 120 120 120 120 120 176 776
8MENANO, G. 120 120 120 120 120 133 733
9MEDINA, J. 120 120 120 120 120 0 600
10MAXIMOV, A. 120 120 120 91 120 571
11AUGUSTUS, B. 120 120 113 57 120 530
12JOHANNES, B. 114 120 120 120 NF 474
13JOHANNES, D. 0 120 110 120 NF 450
14ZITO, M. 120 120 120 NF NF 360
15LAIRD, T. NF
Sierra Cup 25 Results
=====================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
SIERRA CUP 25 RESULTS
Sacramento, California, USA
October 18-20, 2001
-------
Class F1A - 48 Flew
1. de Boer, Pieter NED 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 397
2. Schmidt, Herbert GER 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 366
3. Bachmann, Christian SUI 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 335
4. Stoev, Oleg UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 330
5. Valo, Jari FIN 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 326
6. Galor, Eyal ISR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 324
7. Stamov, Victor UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 316
8. Kosonozhkin, MikhailRUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 299
9. Zaygorodniy, Igor UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 274
10. Isayenko, Victor UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 266
11. McKeever, Mike USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 261
12. Lihtamo, Matti FIN 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 250
13. Romi, Avi ISR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 219
14. Limor, Shachar ISR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 215
15. Antonucci, Rene AGR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 194
16. Barron, Andrew USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 224
17. Van Nest, Brian USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180
18. Cowley, Martyn USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 171
19. Aberlenc, Frederic FRA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 44
20. Mitchell, Phil AUS 180 178 180 180 180 180 180
21. Gregorie, Martin GBR 167 180 180 180 180 180 180
22. Kulmakko, Kimmo FIN 180 162 180 180 180 180 180
23. Nyhegn,Henning DEN 180 180 180 180 160 180 180
24. Bovari, Diego ARG 180 180 152 180 180 180 180
25. Donchenko, Yuriy UKR 180 180 148 180 180 180 180
-------
Class F1B - 44 Flew
1. Kolic, Ivan YUG 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 518
2. Andriukov, Alex USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 455
3. Fitch, Jerry USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 391
4. Khrebdstov,Andre RUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 381
5. Seifert, Michael GER 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 378
6. Batiuk, George USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 374
7. Burdov, Andrey RUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 371
8. Ribchenkov, AnatolyUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 368
9. Blazhevych, Yuriy UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 356
10. Isotalo,Juhani FIN 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 345
11. Jensen, Blake USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 330
12. Tedeschi, Serge FRA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 420 325
13. Shelepov, AlexsandrRUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 399
14. Waltonen, Yrjo FIN 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 394
15. Blackam, Richard AUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 379
16. Barberis, Didier FRA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 302
17. Bond, Terry AUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 302 275
18. Khuziev, Radik RUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 258
19. Malkin, John NZL 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 291
20. Kulakovskiy, Oleg UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 289
21. Stefanchuk, StepanUKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 280
22. Davis, Michael USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 258
23. Bukin, Oleksiy UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 214
24. Zilberg, Igor GER 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 198
25. Gorban, Evheni UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 182
26. Ruyter, Pim NED 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 162
27. Gostojic,Svetozar YUG 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 4
-------
Class F1C - 24 Flew
1. Watson, Peter GBR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 376
2. Gutai, Bob USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 350
3. Babenko, Artem UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 349
4. Johannes, Bob USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 300 348
5. Truppe, Reinhard AUT 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 267
6. Archer, Randy USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 242
7. Tregubenko, Vladimir UKR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 237
8. Oliver, Ken USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 234
9. Joyce, Doug USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 226
10. Poti, Norm USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 220
11. Johannes, David USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 186
12. Screen, Stafford GBR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 175
13. Halliday, David USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 150
14. Simpson, Roger USA 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 80
15. Aleksandrov, Viacheslav UKR 180 180 165 180 180 180 180
16. Verbitsky, Evgeni UKR 180 180 180 180 156 180 180
17. Carroll, Ed USA 180 153 180 180 180 180 180
18. Summersby, Roy AUS 180 180 180 152 180 180 180
19. Gewain, Matt USA 180 160 180 180 180 169 180
20. Staebler, Rold GER 180 129 180 180 180 180 180
21. Babenskas, Danas LIT 180 180 154 180 180 180 164
22. Thomas, David AUS 180 180 180 180 180 180 109
23. Menanno, Guy USA 180 180 180 148 180 180 131
24. Happersett, Ken USA 180 0 89 180 180 0 0
-------
Class F1G - 12 Flew
1. Gorban, Evheni UKR 120 120 120 120 120 240
2. Stefanchuk, Stepan UKR 120 120 120 120 120 165
3. Bukin, Oleksiy UKR 120 120 120 120 120 149
4. Brocks, Peter USA 120 120 120 120 120 146
5. Davis, Bill USA 120 120 120 120 120 134
6. Wood, Richard USA 120 120 120 120 120 125
7. (Jr.) Scheiman, Phillip USA 120 120 120 120 120 112
8. Flynn, Edna GBR 120 120 120 109 120
9. Burdov, Andrey RUS 120 53 120 120 120
10. Vanderbeek, Bill USA 67 61 105 120 120
-------
Class F1H - 20 Flew
1. Zink, Don USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 234
2. Brun, Pierre USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 138
3. McKeever, Mike USA 120 120 120 120 120 234
4. Van Nest, Brian USA 120 120 120 120 120 193
5. Kosonozhkin, Mikhail RUS 120 120 120 120 120 186
6. Bechasny, Vsily UKR 120 120 120 120 120 152
7. Busnelli, Ernesto USA 120 120 120 120 120 126
8. Williams, John GBR 120 120 120 120 120 78
9. Smith, Norm USA 120 104 120 120 120
10. Chaussebourg, Pierre FRA 120 120 120 120 99
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Class F1J - 17 Flew
1. Poti, Norm USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 540
2. Gutai, Bob USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 524
3. Carroll, Ed USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 484
4. Medina, Juan ARG 120 120 120 120 120 240 411
5. Watson, Peter GBR 120 120 120 120 120 240 384
6. Johannes, Bob USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 367
7. Haught, Jim USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 328
8. Archer, Randy USA 120 120 120 120 120 240 273
9. Menanno, Guy USA 120 120 120 120 120 112
10. Bailey, John GBR 120 120 120 120 90
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Roger Simpson
Sierra Cup 25 Organizer
Sacramento, California, USA
October 25, 2001
The poetess Veronika
====================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
I am in awe of the beauty that Veronika Salzer
wrote, sent to SEN & I had the extreme pleasure to have just read.
How wonderful & true are her words & sentiments.
I imagine being surrounded by the wonder of Austria contributes to her =
poetic virtues.
I have been composing a note of appreciation
to all those who made the 2001 WC such a smooth
success; now I find Fr. Salzer says it all, & so
eloquently that I can only defer to her poetic supremacy.
Yes, sport IS sport, & I applaud you all, & her
for adding so much to the occasion with her words and presence.
George B; Veronica's poem/note deserves to be
placed in yours and the rest of the good folks
who helped make the 2001 FFWC the grand event
it was and will be remember for.
I am prouder and happier than ever to be a SCAT member.
Thank you all, and also you, Fr Veronica Salzer,
for being.
Lee Hines
Aeronca K
=========
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Hi Roger,
I'm looking for plans for the Aeronca K that I can scale up or down
for 1/2A Texaco scale event. (sorry)
Any help will be much appreciated,
Buzzard
End of October
==============
Last weekend's Las Vegas FAI was a fitting end to the endless October -
again great weather, great prickly pear jelly and great flying. Winners were
Vasily Beschany in F1A, Bob Tymchek in F1B and Roy Summersby in F1C. This is
first time Doug Joyce had competition in F1C .. and it came from OZ and
Lithuania ! never from the US! - Results will follow in due course. Tymchek
wants to move the team finals to El Dorado Dry lake as this is his second
[or more ?] win !
....................
Roger Morrell
