abufletcher

But then the one of the best British aircraft was with SE5a with the thin RAF airfoil, and by all accounts both it and the Camel and the Snipe for that matter had were outstanding performers. No, I think the main reason Fokker, DVIs, DrIs, DVIIs, and DVIIIs are so popular with scale modelers (beside that they are cool aircraft and besides that they are Fokkers) is that they don't require a tangle of rigging.

Rob2160

Flying for a living you fly the way others want you to fly..

Flying RC I fly the way I want to fly...

Huge difference.. LOL.

Rob2160

I understand it from your perspective, but it depends on what you enjoy this hobby for.. Personally I love flying, the faster the better.. My aircraft really don't need a throttle because I fly them at full throttle(except landing)

Flying slow becomes very boring (just my perspective and I respect everyone enjoys this hobby in different way's and there really is no right or wrong)

abufletcher

Flying slowly may LOOK boring to your clubmates, but flying really slowly takes a lot of piloting skills. Flying just above stall speed where the controls start to get "mushy" requires intense concentration. But I'll also admit that flying really fast models, e.g. models moving at 200+ miles and hour, take some very refined eye-hand coordination not to mention fast reflexes.

sensei

This is another subject but, building really light, especially on the smaller stuff will allow you to fly slower without stalling the airplane, wing loading is very important if slow flight is what you seek.

Bob

dionysusbacchus

My Feedback: (25)

Interesting conversation. Models do not fly the the full scale example, we can only hope as a scale flyer to create an illusion of the full scale aircraft. Take the F-100 as an example, it is true that you will overshoot base for landing because it takes longer to turn a swept wing plane if you are not used to it, so I guess in some ways certain aspects of the full scale come through in general ways but that is about it.

I thought these video's were fun to compare, first a video of the full scale F-100:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K7s9...k4RzqAGyCUZSPQ


Then a huge 53lb model of the F-100, the take off is hilarious: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrsB_t5iWT4

Last this is my humble 7lb 67" long version, I was flying it close to make the video more interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7LDNqivR_I

Watching the full scale video I definitely see where I can improve my scale flying technique.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Interesting topic of discussion. In addition to what has been said here already, and some others here have alluded already to what I'm about to add, it is interesting how many small scale pilots, (my term for model flyers) actually fly on the motor, and not on the wing. What do I mean by this qualification you might ask? Well it plays out like this. We have the ability in the scales that we work in, to fly machines that tend to be waaaaay over engined, so we generally always have a surplus of power available that the pilots of many (but not all) full size aircraft do not. Hence, many model pilots tend to fly by jamming the throttle forward and letting the engine rip the plane off the ground. They yank and bank at high throttle settings, or nigh unto it, and really the only time they even ever come close to using the wings to fly the plane are when they come into land....incidentally thats often why they have such a hard time with landings.
A wing flyer on the other hand really gets a better "feel" for the airframes' qualities. They use just enough power to get the plane airborne, resulting in more realistic take offs. They know the visual feel and stall speed of their machine because they have pushed that envelope and have learned the machines' feel and behavior, and they know how it acts and feels at all of these speeds. They know how to maneuver the aircraft at both slow speed and high, judging the sink rates in turns at low speed can be quite tricky, but rewarding if you try it, and there's nothing that shows me the mastery one has of his crate than watching him do low speed figure eights over the field at low altitude. This is harder by a long site than doing high speed roaring inverted passes at 100mph. I know, I've done both. So I guess what I'm saying is, if you want to fly realistically, and also really get to know all there is about how your machine handles and behaves, throttle that engine back and learn to fly on the wing. You can always fire-wall the throttle and do the 100mph inverted passes when your through!

ZZ.

PS. This kind of reminds me of an account that famous WWI pilot Ernst Udet related in one of his books about doing a post war airshow in the U.S. He was doing very slow (wing flying) aerobatics not far above the ground, slides slips and things that any pilot understands to be very hazardous, and pushing the stall envelope. After the show he overheard one of the audience who clearly didn't understand flying at all saying to a friend, "oh sure, he can do that near the ground where it's safe, but lets see him do that 1000 feet up!" lol. Clearly a lack of aerodynamic understanding!

Rob2160

Hi Bob,

That is a very impressive video!, great aircraft and incredibly talented flying..I loved the flick roll just after takeoff.. You could put a small child in that plane!.. Great stuff!

Rob2160

Unfortunately I am old enough to know all the tricks to making your nitro engine reliable in all attitudes and rev ranges..

I don't hate Nitro at all.. it was great fun.. just find Electric is more convenient and easier.. (35 years of RC flying i worked hard enough to now be lazy! ..)

Rob2160

Not being argumentative, but just wondering why anyone would want to fly around slowly just above the stall speed?

I have been flying real planse since I was 16 and instructing all types from prop piston, turbo prop, Jets and Helicopters and there is NO application in real flying to fly around just above the stall speed... (except initial flying training when demonstrating stalls) .

This thread is about scale flying, so why fly so slow because that is not "scaling" any type of real flying I am aware of..

Not being critical at all... you are 100% right that it takes skill to fly this slow.. but just curious why when its actually not how real aircraft are flown?

bogbeagle

Flying for endurance ...? Minimum power to maintain flight. That would qualify as "scale flying" ... even if rarely used in the real world.

LesUyeda

"This thread is about scale flying, so why fly so slow because that is not "scaling" any type of real flying I am aware of.. "

It is about perception. If you look at a full scale aircraft cover some amount of distance, it takes a particular amount of time, and typically our models take much less time to cover the same "apparent" distance.

Les

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

ive been flying since 1940 and have seen many scale planes and i can not see that there is a real scale flying plane by any pilot unless you have some way to check your speed to be like the real plane

sensei

We took radar gun speed readings on my 55% Extra 260 with a 164" span one day at the field, with the airplane level and at full throttle, it was hitting 118 mph. The truth is it really did not look all that fast. The same day we took readings on some .40 sized airplanes that were running around 120 mph and lay looked like they were hauling the freight in comparison, so size does matter on how we see things. Here is a short video of that airplane, see if you think it is moving that fast.

http://youtu.be/H_dGA7VZe6g

Bob

ZoomZoom-RCU

Not being argumentative, but just wondering why anyone would want to fly around slowly just above the stall speed?

That's not really the only thing thats being recommended, allthough you will learn from it. Actually what's being recommended is to fly slower (in all ranges of power) than just full or practically full bore and for various reasons. A more scale appearance is one benefit, and learning to handle the plane on the wing and not just the motor is another, and there is a wide range where one can do this, not just barely above the stall.

ZZ.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

ONE VERY VERY GOOD FLYER BUT DID NOT LOOK THAT FAST

otrcman

Ahhh, in the last day this thread has begun to take a direction that I hoped for at the start. If I may take quotes from some recent threads and put them in a different order, perhaps it will make even more sense:


"This thread is about scale flying, so why fly so slow because that is not "scaling" any type of real flying I am aware of..
Not being critical at all... you are 100% right that it takes skill to fly this slow.. but just curious why when its actually not how real aircraft are flown?" Rob 2160

" A more scale appearance is one benefit," ZoomZoom-RCU

"It is about perception. If you look at a full scale aircraft cover some amount of distance, it takes a particular amount of time, and typically our models take much less time to cover the same "apparent" distance." LesUyeda

"there is NO application in real flying to fly around just above the stall speed." Rob2160

"This is another subject but, building really light, especially on the smaller stuff will allow you to fly slower without stalling the airplane, wing loading is very important if slow flight is what you seek." sensei


Now my turn: Sensei, you're not on another subject at all. You are right on the mark. We need to make our models travel slowly in order to appear more realistic (Zoom & Les). Unfortunately, flying a heavy model slowly brings it very near to a stall (Rob). But if we build our models lighter, they can be slow without being close to a stall (sensei).


Dick

Jaybird

I recently flew a full scale Stearman in Florida (Fantasy of Flight) where the take-off, climb, cruise, stall and landing speeds are all within a 10-20 knot range (if I remember correctly), so, flying near the stall speed or just above is a part of regular flying. One of the exercises we did included cruising around in "slow flight" and observing the covering on the wings vibrating indicating the separation of airflow at around 65 knots. We then sped up to 85 knots and continued on with the flight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eq8rFSJ_OCQ

I believe a Cub or Jenny probably flies in a simialr speed range, in other words not much! It may not be intentionally flying near stall speed but if the overall speed range isn't much then you will be near stall whether you want to be or not.

I've seen very few 1/5 or 1/6 scale Stearmans fly anywhere near what "appears" to be a scale speed. I think they are probably too heavy to fly much slower safely. I've seen video of larger scale (1/4 or 1/3) fly in a more realistic way, but they still spent most of the time screaming along at full throttle with large radial engines. Watch John Mohr if you want to see a stock Stearman put through it's paces....very slowly!

Also flew a Blanik glider in Florida last month. We cruised along at 45-50 knots chasing thermals. Slow flight for sure.

Jaybird

sensei

When I am building my own design or a kit I go to a great deal of work to get my stuff just as light as possible, both flying videos I posted of my airplanes in this discussion have wing loadings of around 26 ozs. that make them very friendly to fly at even a crawl.

Bob

abufletcher

Isn't a light weight a sort of double-edged sword? If it's light you can fly it slower. But if it's light it bounces around more.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Very good points sensei, Jaybird and otrcman. And, when you make your planes lighter, you will need less power to fly them, and hence, be closer to approaching a better representation of full scale flight at lower power settings.

ZZ.

PS. Abu, me like your EIII avatar. niiice. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that they are referring to the fact that many builders build too heavy, so in general, lightening the machine is still not going to make it a floaty feather. Then again, a Sopwith PUP IS kinda a floaty feather, so it depends on the plane.

abufletcher

Also bear in mind that scale flying should involve climbing and descending with the throttle.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Absolutment!!

abufletcher

I mentioned this earlier but you won't read a single account of WWI action which doesn't mention diving. But you almost never see RC fliers put their model in regular dive...and I admit that when I do it it feels seriously wrong to be pushing forward on the stick. Still, it's something that I try to practice. I'll climb a bit and then put the model into a 45 degree dive and work of keeping it diving straight and straight ahead, then pull up again. A rolling dive when I "peel off" 90 degrees and dive is also something I should start practicing.

We also don't see enough of big, ol' barrel rolls.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYDx3IGAp-s[/youtube]

Jaybird

I love the scenes in the "Fly Boys" movie where one plane catches up to another one, matches speed while they have a converstation, and then one speeds off like two cars at a stop light....makes me crazy! Some rotary engines did have crude "throttles" which were selectable spark plug grounding, but most of the time they flew full throttle in cruise and "blipped" the cylinder cut-off for landing (poor expalnation, sorry). But they did NOT have an "idle" as we are used to or a throttle lever and therefore adjustment from low to full. The later in-line and V-8 engines had a conventional throttle, but not the rotary's. You had to dive to speed up or climp to slow down.

So, flying at full throttle all the time may infact be a scale representation...but our models have a much higher power to weight ratio which requires us to use throttle management.

Jaybird