For an LPP, the difference between the old PPP film and the newer PPP film is about 100 mg for a 3.1 gram plane. And, just under 40 mg of that extra weight is in the tail. Yes, one can find other places to lose 100 mg in an LPP but I would rather put that 100 mg into making a stiffer motorstick or wing leading edge spar than into the film. Yes, 100+ mg for a 7 gram SO plane is in the noise and just reduces the ballast on a well built plane but this is not so for the heavier AMA and FAI class models like Penny Plane and F1M's. The older PPP film was also an adequate film for ministicks and F1L's, but the newer PPP film, is just too heavy. The best choice for these last two classes now is down only to the more fragile OS film (Ray Harlan's super UltraFilm and Tim G's Trulite are okay, too, but are heavier and lead to other tradeoffs in weight elsewhere in the planes).
Leo P.
Bloomington IN
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "Mark F1diddler" <f1diddler@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "spinecho" <spinecho@> wrote:
> >
> >d> the difference of 61 mg/100 sq.in. to 133 mg/100 sq.in can be a big
> > difference and can be the deciding factor in picking a different film.
>
>
> Ya, these are what, 7 gram models we're talking about? If you need to chase less than 80 mg on those, film choice maybe not the best place, at least not the only place.
>
> Oh, YYMV was supposed to be YMMV, "your miles may vary."
> MB
>
Received on Mon May 17 2010 - 11:46:16 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:46 CET