Re: Re: Purchased VP hubs at the West Baden Indoor WC
On 29/3/2018 6:49, leop_at_lyradev.com [Indoor_Construction] wrote:
>
> Allowing purchased vp hubs will not keep the F1D class growing.
> Nearly all of the fliers in the 2018 Indoor WC championship are
> capable of building and have built there own vp hubs. But, it is
> quite a bit easier to buy a Treger hub than to build one's own and the
> Treger hub works well out of the box.
>
> ....
> Buying a vp hub is not the same as understanding that hub well.&nb!
> sp; Also remember that no Indoor WC, at sites where vp hubs are
> necessary, has yet been won by an entrant using a purchased vp hub (no
> one buys a fixed pitch hub as used at the Slanic mine)
>
I fully agree with Leo here. Buying a VP hub is not a shortcut to F1D
success, and anyone capable of building the model can build the hub
also. I have been giving courses of building F1M models (hopefully my
students will eventually move on to F1D - some already have), and while
the models were flying and in trim almost right off the building board,
not so with the VP's. I have tried to tell them that it took me a year
or more to master my first VP, and only with the experience gained with
that I have been able to adjust my later props in a shorter time. Maybe
a bought hub would have the spring "right" readily, but short of that
you just need to take your time tweaking the prop to build the
understanding on how the VP needs to be adjusted. That insight you
cannot buy.
So, you may ask, why am I then opposing allowing bought VP hubs for F1D?
The reason is in principle. Allowing to buy the one most critical
component of the model is a "wet blanket on the face" for the BOM rule.
To me it is like saying that "you must use your seat belt while driving,
but not for trips shorter than 100 miles". Allowing built VP's is like
saying "in F1D you must build you own models, except you do not need
to". Allowing bought VP's will not make F1D any more popular (as the VP
is not that hard to build), but banning them send a message that BOM
rule stands.
>
> If we want to increase the size of F1D entrant pool in the US
> (recognizing that the F1D class in the US is often the largest class
> at many indoor contests), we need to do two things. First, we need to
> have a way for people to get started in F1D without getting frustrated
> by how hard it is to fly an early in the learn! ing and building
> process F1D. To that goal, beginners need to build a first (or second
> and third) F1D that can fly well and is sturdy enough to last.
I have said this before, and will say again: F1M is an excellent
stepping stone towards F1D. The models are large enough to fly well, and
when they use the same size of props than F1D's but at slightly higher
RPM (my models turn ~80rpm), they can even be safely flown in the same
airspace as F1D, without risking damaging the lighter ships in
collision. F1M can be built with hobbyshop balsa (good indoor balsa
makes easier to build the motor tubes, but even those can be built of
sanded-down hobbyshop stuff. For the rest of the model, hobbyshop wood
is A-ok). 1 micron film, cheaply available e.g. from Mike Woodhouse is
light enough for covering, and the models are sturdy enough to be
handled by beginners. At the same time, F1M models have limited motor
weight and utilise VP props, so they teach the beginners all the
essential features of indoor flying before the move onto F1D. I have
given several courses on building various F1M designs (first penny-plane
style novice version, then full-sized tandem models), on the latest
course we had a dozen attendants, and most of them built and trimmed
their model over a weekend. Of that dozen, three guys have since moved
over to F1D... so I think that is a good path to introduce people to F1D
flying.
-Tapio-
Received on Thu Mar 29 2018 - 06:41:00 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:49 CET