Hi,
If your model is stiff enough in the right places,
it will be consistant whether it is a flapper design
or non-flapper design. A big factor in improving sink
rate is to reduce weight. If light enough a
non-flapper design model can compete with a flapper.
I have seen some very nice flying cat 1 gliders that
are non-flappers. But to get a non-flapper design
light, it typically will become weak and you basically
have the same problem of inconsistant times.
For Cat 1 gliders I still think flappers have an
advantage and I recommend you build a few more to get
the feel of the stiffness required.
By the way I have some Time Machines that are very
consistant, as consistant as any non-flapper model.
Flapper models are harder to trim out because you have
another variable, flaps to deal with. But if you build
enough of them and spend time learning to trim them
they can become very consistant performers.
Kurt
--- barrysholder <barry_at_signandart.com> wrote:
> After after a great day of flying, I have had some
> thoughts that come
> up about my glider experience. I had a" Time
> machine "that I flew, did
> well but was very touchy on the launch ,I suppose
> due to the light
> structure. It finally hit the dust. Time machine was
> around 3g. That's
> as good as I could get. I had other gliders of the
> non-flapper style
> that were heavier and consistant time ofter time,but
> not competetive
> comparitively. My question is this is there a
> way/design that can be
> competetive with the time machines glide w/o the
> flapper, that can
> still be consistant time after time?
>
>
Kurt Krempetz
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
Received on Sun Dec 03 2006 - 08:20:16 CET