Re: P-18 Proposal - an analysis of the rules
<<The 2 minute max simply is not going to happen,>>
You get elected to the contest board with out my noticing?
Bill C
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 6:17 AM, joshuawfinn_at_gmail.com
[Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> Gentlemen,
>
>
> Since the P-18 thing keeps being an ever present topic, I think it's time
> to address actual issues with the rule as proposed. The design of the event
> has some actual problems--major loopholes which need to at least be
> expressed for discussion regardless of whether a cross proposal fixes them.
> The 2 minute max simply is not going to happen, so these models will, as
> intended, be flown to the limits of their performance. Some of that
> performance can be limited by dealing with the loopholes allowing state of
> the art aircraft to fly this event.
>
>
> 1. Covering material: I have concerns about the ability to verify that
> "HDPE shopping material" is being used. Also, what exactly is tissue? The
> definitions need to be in line with already existing events. Would using OS
> film impact the model's performance? Sure, and probably negatively. On the
> other hand, adding in a few gadgets might make the use of lightweight
> covering a beneficial thing. How easy is it for a beginner to cut up and
> adhere a veggie bag? I know I haven't really enjoyed using the stuff the
> few times I've tried it. Mylar for outdoor modes is considerably easier.
> Anyway, not a major loophole, but issues in need of consideration.
>
>
> 2. No mention of gadgets. Are we ok with allowing torque burners? I can't
> see anything in there preventing them from being used.
>
>
> 3. Length of model--this is a beginner's event, right? What about the
> beginner who shows up with his model built faithfully to published plans
> but accidently put in too much tail boom offset? Now his stab tip is
> sticking outside the 18" limit and he's no longer legal. This one might be
> ok, but we need to be aware of the issue.
>
>
> 4. The commercially available propeller thing already features data in the
> form of P-30. Let's be realistic, I run a small business selling, among
> other things, indoor prop parts. I have no qualms introducing a cut down
> Peck 7" with one blade shaved for balancing. Before you say that's illegal,
> remember that it's a "commercially available unit", and the unmodified bit
> has already been accepted to only pertain to modifications from the state
> in which it is commercially available. I can trim it and re-pitch it to my
> heart's content, it's merely the end user who can't. Also, the rules here
> do not allow the removal of mold flashing or reaming out the hole for
> better alignment and fitting a bushing. These mods are allowed in P-30 and
> for good reason.
>
>
> 5. "hook to hook distance"? Uhm...no other event defines it this way.
> Should this not be front bearing face to rear hook distance? Otherwise the
> models won't be legal for LPP as has been so much vaunted as one of the
> virtues of the event. I guess it's handy if we want canards to be
> competitive. Let the extension shafts begin!
>
>
> 6. No materials limitations whatsoever. Rolled tubes, carbon booms,
> boron/balsa spars, etc are all fair game. Even bracing if someone thinks
> they need massive amounts of rubber. Is this within the intent of the
> event? One could make the case that models with carbon fuselages are easier
> for beginners, but they're also not eligible for LPP, which I remind us all
> has been so vaunted as one of the event's virtues. If we are going to leave
> this wide open, why are we requiring commercially available props?
>
>
> 7. Back to the prop thing: Uhm yeah, "unmodified commercially available
> unit with a maximum diameter of 5.5 inches." Gentlemen, upon passage of
> this event, should this wording be retained, J&H Aerospace will be
> releasing a special carbon/balsa molded prop with flaring spars for a low
> introductory price of $20 each. We will also produce a VP version with
> symmetrical blades for $60 each. Hey, it's within the definition of the
> rules!
>
>
> Now, if this event is going to be ratified, can we at least fix some of
> these issues? It's seriously ridiculous otherwise. I like playing with
> VP's, and I find that beginners are fascinated by them, but they have no
> place in an event with a 5.5" prop diameter, regardless of whether it's a
> "beginner's event". Even I can see the ridiculousness of a P-18 doing 6-7
> minutes.
>
>
> -jf
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Mon Jun 20 2016 - 11:57:17 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET