In a message dated 3/20/2007 6:43:03 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
f1diddler_at_yahoo.com writes:
> We should have a postal event of theories against common practice,>>
Not a bad idea, Fred! <g> I will be glad to enter postal times on
behalf on the side that uses only common practice as developed by 60
years of record setters and contest winners. But would the "thinner
rubber" adherent be allowed to try thicker rubber after model landed
with 30% turns left?
I like Fred's idea, too. But what is the point of a postal contest if the
times of only one "side" are going to be posted?
My airplane takes off with 98% turns and lands with 5% turns. It neglects
6.60% of the available energy at takeoff and 1.17% on landing, a total of
7.78% unused, so it uses 92.22% of the available energy from the rubber. With a
more precise torque curve, representing flight test practice, more careful
measurement of cruise torque and more consistent winding to highest torques, I
can do better. Maybe 7.77% better, if I push my rubber hard, one flight each
motor. I am getting 1:38 with a 9.7 gram Dandiflyer with 1.7 grams of rubber
under a 24 foot ceiling.
Gary Hinze
************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
Find out more about what's free from AOL at
http://www.aol.com.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Wed Mar 21 2007 - 04:09:19 CET