RADIO CONTROL AEROBATICS
Ron Van Putte
111 Sleepy Oaks Road, Ft. Walton Beach, FL 32548
Boy, do I ever get a lot of mileage out of that servo tester! Hardly a day goes by that the mailman doesn't have at least one SASE with a request for a copy of the article and schematic. I really enjoy receiving the requests because I consider them to be positive feedback on this column. So don't apologize for sending the requests, and please don't send money to cover printing costs. Printing costs are minimal and well worth the good feeling I get when sending out something that somebody else can use. In addition, I get a kick out of some of the notes that accompany the requests. Keep those SASEs coming!
Frank Elliott of Santa Fe, New Mexico sent a letter about the suggestion I made in my August '94 column about softening epoxy resin that had hardened in the bottle:
"I had also run into the 'too-thick-epoxy' problem. My local hobby store advised a similar solution to the microwaving, but there is one trick which I think might be less messy, maybe less risky. Use the old cooking trick of the 'double boiler.' Put the epoxy bottle in a small pan of water on the kitchen stove. It takes longer, but you can't get it hotter than 212°F. (For those of us here in Santa Fe, it's more like 200°F.)"
Frank's epoxy-softening idea works. I tried it before using the microwave oven. It may be a bit safer for someone who is tempted to use the microwave longer than I recommended, but I don't believe that it's messy to use the microwave. I stir the epoxy with a piece of 7/32 music wire and wipe the wire on a rag when the epoxy is thin enough. No mess.
And yes, I do know about flying at high altitudes. I'm also familiar with how it feels to run and play tennis at a high altitude: you can't breathe, and the balls bounce much higher. It's strange when the ball bounces six inches higher than you expect, and you miss it completely.
By the time you read this, it will be too late to submit rule-change proposals for 1996–1997. I have seen the results of the National Society of Radio Controlled Aerobatics (NSRCA) rule-change survey; there are a few survey-question results that the NSRCA committee needs to review before rule-change proposals are submitted.
However, I expect that there will be some potentially significant rule changes proposed by the NSRCA that will make it through the AMA's RC Aerobatics Contest Board.
Foremost on the list will be the unlimited-displacement rule, which will probably be passed hand-in-hand with a two-meter-by-two-meter wingspan/length rule. I have seen Ron Chidgey's latest Typhoon, which was built within the new FAI rules (these won't be in effect until 1996). The Typhoon doesn't really look that big relative to current models. Maybe the size increase won't be a big factor. There is a big effect that can be expected, though.
Can you imagine the performance of a 10.5-pound model with a 1.2 two-stroke engine up front? This rule would inevitably shift the performance advantage from four-strokes back to two-strokes. I'm looking forward to listening to the current four-stroke users explaining why the unlimited engine-displacement rule shouldn't pass.
After I finished reading a letter from Grant Peters of California, Missouri, I turned to my wife and said: "Here's one of the best letters about the column's subject I have ever received!" It addresses an outsider's feeling about RC Precision Aerobatics.
In regard to the excerpts from the letter you received from Dave von Linsowe [August 1994 column, RVP], I've got some opinions about Pattern that I would like to share.
I consider myself young in RC. I've been flying for about seven or eight years. The third plane I built was a Sig King Kobra — not a true Pattern model, but it flew very well.
The worst thing about Pattern that I've come across is information — information about anything. It's like if you want to fly Pattern, you have to belong to a secret club to find out anything.
I don't consider myself a Pattern flier, but I do love to fly the planes. They fly better than any plane in the sky, and the only people who disagree haven't flown a real Pattern model.
I've been to the Nats four times and have gotten some information, but very little. Not that the people were unfriendly, but at the Nats I know everyone is very busy.
The clubs I've belonged to had no Pattern fliers. It was either too expensive, no fun, or too hard. So I had no luck there. I get some information from magazines, but not the kind of information a beginner needs. The best information I got came from Dave Patrick: practice, practice, practice.
Personally, I don't think a name change is going to do it. More, more, more information is needed. From the first time I heard "K-Factor" to the time I finally found out what it was is unbelievable. I think a flood of information could help the sport, from the beginner all the way to expert. You always hear what's going on in the big guys' area but never what's going on to help the little guys get started. I don't think I'll ever be a contender for the world champs, but I love to fly and compete. I just don't know how to get started and started in the right direction.
I don't think Pattern fliers have a bad name; it's just that they seem like the elite, untouchable. I think if you bring them down to earth a little (I don't think decreasing the size of the box will help this) so the common guy will feel a little more comfortable, it will help the sport enormously.
Maybe the AMA could put out a brochure "Getting Started in Pattern," or "Your Guide to Pattern Success," or maybe some guidelines to help us understand the rules and how maneuvers should be done.
I don't think there is one simple solution to the problem. I would just like to know more about the sport.
I know the AMA puts out a rule book with a lot of little print that is kind of hard to understand. I know that if I was really interested I guess I should study all that small print, but sometimes it gets a little difficult. After all, it is supposed to be fun, isn't it?
Name changes? Personally "Novice," "Sportsman," and "Pattern" don't bother me. People who have problems with names generally have an ego problem also.
I think Grant's dilemma is shared by many people; I'd just never heard anyone put it together the way he did. He suggested the AMA could put out a brochure about Pattern flying. I suppose AMA could, but I believe the NSRCA could do a better job of it. After all, the NSRCA is the special-interest group for RC Precision Aerobatics. What do you think?
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
