Re: Double springs on a VP hub?

From: Bill Gowen <b.gowen_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:48:36 -0400

MAYBE I'm starting to see the point here.

I think that the idea is to have the second spring give a fairly quick change from a pitch that is too high to sustain level flight to a lower high pitch that will keep the model from landing. This would make it possible to do a high launch, let the model descend almost to the ground and then start from that point with the VP operating in standard fashion for the rest of the flight.

Have I got it right? I'm still not sure it would lead to additional time over cranking in a little extra high pitch on a normal single spring setup, but I'm keeping an open mind.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Tapio Linkosalo
  To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 2:13 AM
  Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Double springs on a VP hub?



  On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 RLBailey_at_care4free.net wrote:

> I use a flexible top stop (ie the second spring) as opposed to a solid
> top stop which allows a small amount of extra pitch and hence allows the
> use of more torque at launch.
>
> One doesn't want to reduce the pitch at high torque; the climb rate goes
> up!

  I do not know if this message was meant as a reply to me or to Bill.
  Anyway, you described in a more elegant way what I intended to say, use
  the second spring additional on the high end only to allow a bit higher
  initial pitch than would be possible with a fixed high pitch setscrew.

  -Tapio-


   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Tue Aug 15 2006 - 08:57:08 CEST