Even with a good VP it's hard to use the turns. You're still working with
less turns and a lower cruise torque when comparing to something like 5/99.
You may see more area under the torque curve for SS, but it's really hard
to use energy at the very top end. I wouldn't feel comfortable hooking up
a motor with .65 in/oz of torque. Even if the motor stick could handle it,
other parts of the model probably wouldn't.
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Akihiro Danjo
<adanjo-373_at_mx1.ttcn.ne.jp>wrote:
>
>
> Hi Tapio san,
> These lines are impressions of the same weight/length rubber.
>
> >Do you think that the slope of the cruise phase is the same for Tan II
> and SS?
> If it is not, but SS drops faster initially, but then approaches similar
> torque towards the end (that is: has a flatter torque curve), then that
> might be of benefit in flying low ceilings in classes with unlimited
> rubber: you would need slightly heavier motor and do more backoff, but
> would get flatter flight profile?
>
> TanSS has less cruise TQ, so begin descending earlier and faster than
> Tan2.
> To compensate for this, yes, you will need to use thicker rubber. But
> thicker rubber has less turns and need more back-off turns, so less flight
> time. And, longer and thicker rubber is heavy.
> The superiority of TanSS is the burst phase, very high max TQ. We,
> Indoor modelers, cannot use the advantage with fixed pitch props. I, am not
> good at VP props, cannot use the advantage even with VP props.
>
> Aki
>
>
>
Received on Mon Jan 20 2014 - 08:55:14 CET