Ryguy

My Feedback: (1)

Makes me wonder why my ANimal flew like crap.

pmackenzie

Mine was built only slightly different from stock. There is a build thread over on rcgroups with pictures.
The main differences:
-the addition of underwing X-struts like the newer shockflyers. Only 3.8 grams for a huge stiffness increase.
Devin's F3A models used fishing line bracing instead of the struts but the goal is the same- make it stiff and light.
- I did not use the supplied wire and snake pushrods, instead I just used carbon rod.
- The landing gear, which I only added for the contest, is also YAK style. Easy to add, removable and very tough. Only added about 6 or 7 grams.
- Kept it light. Used POR for most of the construction. 2204/54, 2S or 3S 480 packs, CC10, Berg 4 and 3 x HS50 servos. Just under 6.5 ounces with 3S and the LG
(latest one is 147 grams empty, 184 with 3S. The one in the video is 5 grams heavier but was flown by me on only 2S. Matteo flew on 3S. Outdoors or in a bigger room I would have used 3S)

I have flown the Superstar, Yak, Knuffel and the Animal, and the Animal is better than all of them at nearly everything.
The Knuffel has a slight edge in gusty conditions and flys a bit more pattern shiplike. I also used X struts and LE and TE spars on it.

Built stock, without the struts, I would imagine that the Animal would be nowhere near as nice a plane.
The ones at ETOC were re-enforced with dental floss. The stated reason was to increase drag, but stiffness would have been improved as well.
IMO they should add the X struts to the kit.

Pat MacKenzie

Devin McGrath

I think I will order one next week and see what I can change on it I really liked the roll rate on yours. do you have you had any other problems except for it flexing?

pmackenzie

Flying over grass all summer the aileron counterbalances proved to be a bit fragile, but indoors at the Hobby Show they just flexed when I let them touch the ground during botched rolling circles and knife edge.
In any case they can be reinforced with a couple of strips of carbon.
Cut the counterbalance free as shown below. Do it before hinging the ailerons, not afterwards as shown .
One strip of 0.5mm x 3mm carbon goes along the joint and extend towards the angled cut at the front, and the other is attached to the back bridging the joint. They form a "T".
This is one spot where I used 5 minute epoxy instead of POR.

The wide nose takes a bit of a beating just because it is so big and it usually hits the ground first. Easily repaired most of the time.

Unlike the shock fliers there is no tape along the edges. I did not think this would work, but it seems to be fine.

The full length triangle Depron fuse stiffeners add a lot of strength to the whole fuselage.
To improve the joint and save weight on glue cut the edges to a 45 by laying a straight edge along each side and using a sharp xacto knife held on an angle.
The plans show a funny two ruler method for cutting the bevels on the control surfaces, but one ruler and the knife on an angle works fine for me.

All of the servos can be almost completely hidden inside the stiffeners, and you can put all of the servo wires and the rcvr out of sight by putting in a small hatch, hinged and held shut with a bit of Blenderm.

Building the frame takes a bit less time than a shocky, but it is a bit tricky. If you are going to use POR, do the fuselage assembly "dry" first with no glue to figure out how it all fits.
Then put on the glue but only wait a couple of minutes for it to get tacky. That way you can still reposition things, but it will grab when pressed together.

I left off the balsa bits from the kit that were provided to stiffen the elevator and nose. They don't seem to be necessary.

I did put the carbon stiffener in the elevator.
That was something I did on all but my first Superstar to reduce tail flex. I have not decided which spot is better, on the elevator or the stab.

Check out the rcgroups build thread. There are more pictures over there, and some input from Scott Foster as well.
Hope that helps.
Pat MacKenzie

Wiggle-Sticks

Pat, can you give us a link to the thread you are referring to?

David

pmackenzie

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=379327
Pat MacKenzie

Xavier Mouraux

Congratulations to Devin, Ivan, Matteo and Pat. It was a lot of fun to meet the other pilots and very impressive to see the two young guys fly. The video doesn't give them justice. It was even better than that. It was most impressive to see Matteo take a airplane he never flew before taking off for the final. In the end, the better prepared pilot won and that's what it's all about.
I know I wasn't prepared enough. I flew a new plane (shockflyer Yak) that I was not used to and I should have stay with the one I flew many times (shockflyer F3A). I didn't flew with the music until late Saturday night and I was way too careful to avoid crashing. I was surprised how well I placed in the semi but that was more because the other pilots all had trouble with the wall, ceiling or floor :-) They all fixed it for the final and I went downhill... I had a special trick for the final but I had not tried it before and I missed it.
It was fun anyway and very different from flying pattern. I'll do it again.

Xavier

rickhannah

My Feedback: (19)

Watching these videos brings up an interesting question......what should be the minimum dimensions of an acceptable indoor flying site for sanctioned indoor aerobatic events?

An NBA and official NCAA (college) court is 94 ft long and 50 ft wide.
A High School court is 84 ft long and 50 ft wide.
A Junior High court is 74 ft long and 42 ft wide.

Would we fly an event with the sidelines and endlines being out of bounds, with a mandatory deduction?

Nice flying guys, excellent job dealing with the low ceilings and the posts !

pmackenzie

The advertised size of this space was 135' x 70' with 15' ceilings. Some space was lost along one edge due to the pits, judges etc.
There were also the two columns to deal with. The 135' x 70' sounds about right, but the 15' sounds generous.

The videos make it look smaller than it actually is. On my computer at least they are shrunk a bit side to side.

It would have been nice to have had more room, but this was part of the Hobby Show and this is the largest space available.
Ted Curl, the organizer of the show, provided the space and the prizes. There was open flying for 3 full days.
Locally we get 2-3 hours once a month in gym.
I am not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

I hope there is another shootout next year. It is the only indoor contest in the area.

Pat MacKenzie

Devin McGrath

It was allot of fun to fly there even though it was a little small and had some obstacles. Unfortunately I was only there for Saturday afternoon and Sunday. After getting used to the pillars and the space it was not to bad just to fly but when trying to do a competition circuit it was quite a challenge... Even if you where slightly off in what ever it was you were trying to do it put you in a bad position really quick. As far as a minimum area to fly it is important to judge the necessary size by how many people you want to be flying at once. For more than one or two people at a time this area was to small.... The other thing that is important is a good tall ceiling you feel more comfortable flying in a place with taller ceilings and it gives more room and makes it so you can have more people flying at once.