Jim Duda

I had just dropped out of Pylon Racing when the Spickler Quickie 500 series became popular...does anyone recall the dynamics of how that simple concept evolved into the present AMA 428 or AMA 424? Reason I ask is perhaps we can be sensitive on what we should avoid to keep the present Club 40 intent as it is without following the same path that led us to abondon Spickler's original concept.

...or is it inevitable that we are simply going to see the Club 40 Raider events evolve similarly?

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

John Godfrey Saxe's ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend,

It was six men of Indostan,
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear,
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approach'd the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," -quoth he- "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," -quoth he,-
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said- "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," -quoth he,- "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

MORAL,

So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean;
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

DHG

My Feedback: (7)

So, it's settled then ... R/C Pylon is like a snake.

luv to race

My Feedback: (1)

Speaking honestly from a neutral position....and being serious.

The evolution of "horsepower" has changed the class from back then to now. We are a far cry from a K&B .40's output. Take away all the $$'s in horsepower and the class might become the class of old. That may also level the playing field between the ARF planes and the composites..? don't know…

In that same note, everything has evolved (fuel, radios, radio gear, planes, glow igniters, starters, props.. you get the point).. The most common factor that contributes to cost and speed... is that motor.

Just my 2 cents.. which isn't worth much.

Randy Bridge

Druce

We used to call those Spickler Q500 planes "TOADS" I still got plans for them. They had a 15% wing we used K&B motors and the old )S 40 lapped piston and had a big rudder for stall turns. They did everything..

DonStegall

My Feedback: (1)

I've seen a Sky Raider Mach II hovering and doing torque rolls. And that was with a .40 and a 9x6 prop. With a .46 and a 12.25x3.75, the aerobatics are even more dramatic. Not enough elevator for harriers, but rolling circles and other moves are no problem.

The slightly smaller rudder on an LA Racer 40 makes it a little less capable of aerobatics, but both are GREAT replacements for the Spickler Quickie in this day and time. The World Models is committed to producing them as long as they are wanted.

In fact, I proposed changing the landing gear on the Sky Raider Mach II to the longer gear of the LA Racer and they decided that they did not want to do that because they don't want any confusion. They are looking at making the landing gear block stronger.

DHG

My Feedback: (7)

Randy,

I bid 3 cents! 3, going once ...

I wasn't present at the creation of Q500, but shortly after. The first thing I remember happening was that K&B, realizing they suddenly had a captive market (because the K&B .40 was the only engine allowed), released a new upgrade of their engine especially for Q500. It was a little bit faster and a lot lower quality than the original version, but if you wanted to race Q500 you needed one. They sold like hot cakes for a while.

That lasted until people got so sick of the poor quality that clubs started allowing other brands. Since those other brands had a few technical advances such as Schneurle porting that the K & B lacked, they were faster -- but most of the folks flying Q500 were ready for more speed at that point, so the door was open for speed creep.

My first humble suggestion to avoid repeating this process is to specify, by brand, an engine that was designed and marketed for general sport use -- NOT for racing. The Thunder Tiger Pro .40 fits this description.

Second, just to hedge against the possibility that Thunder Tiger might try to pull a K&B, I suggest having a second "spec" engine waiting in the wings. (The Supertigre GS40 looks good; there may be others.) Then don't hesitate to make the swap. Since these are general-purpose sport engines, no one will end up stuck with an engine they can't either use or sell.

Third -- and this applies to airframes as well as to engines -- don't jettison the "sport" features such as idle capability, light wing loading, and ground steering. These features may not be required in actual racing competition, but they are critical if you want an airplane that new pilots are willing to invest in. I think that's the secret of the success of the Sky Raiders. They're something you can use even if you decide you don't like racing, or only race once in a while.

Druce,

I remember the Toad. I don't think it was actually made by Spickler, but it looked very similar. I was a poor 19-year-old so I scratch-built a "Frog", placed 2nd in Sport Pylon, Windsor, Ont., about 1975. They made us use an air start. What a hoot! [sm=spinnyeyes.gif]

Duane Gall
RCPRO

stand-RCU

So when will you present the "Snake" for Club 40 approval?[:'(]

Ed Smith

All of the rhetoric about "slowing them down, sport engines only, keep the cost down, entry level... on and on ad nauseoum is nonsense.

It is an ambiguity to think that racing equipment can be mandated to slow the event down. The idea is to go faster than the others. Get it?

Ed S

Ed Smith

Bob,

If all of these people were blind, then how did for example, the guy who thought he knew what rope is, actually know what rope truly is.

Ed S

Jim Duda

Ed - so your position is..."...or is it inevitable that we are simply going to see the Club 40 Raider events evolve similarly?" Correct?

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

Jim,
The dynamics of how Quickie evolved from the simple concept to today’s specialty machines is due to the never ending quest for an advantage over other competitors. The early designs were rather crude, with little understanding of drag reduction techniques which is the only way to achieve greater speed in an engine limited formula event.

Both Randy and Duane are correct that engine technology has driven the event well past the original intent. When we were racing K&B 40’s, Randy might have reached kindergarten. Even then, the event was mired with engine problems, since K&B made many performance parts that the average modeler was unaware of. All it took was a call to Bobby Tom, and they were shipped out. There were also some very creative cheaters that developed technologies to take advantage of unaware contest directors.

As the K&B became a mild sport engine with the newer PDP and Schneurle porting, racers no longer wanted to have to buy what was becoming a crappy sport engine. This had two effects, both unintended. The first was the engine of the month club, where after each contest people felt forced to buy what ever was the fastest engine the previous contest. It also allowed a terrific amount of cheating with engine modification, since there was usually no second engine to compare to. With a typical winner having glow plugs looking like they come out of a Formula One engine (and also only good for one flight), quickie was not much fun with stock engines. That’s when I switched to Formula One and dropped quickie altogether.

The Nelson Quickie engine was a breath of fresh air. Most of the cheaters dropped out of quickie, since they were not able to have the advantage they were used to. They would mumble something about the expense of the Nelson, but since most of them had half a dozen Rossi’s in a modified state, it just said they were unwilling to compete on a level playing field.

Randy is correct that with the high powered models, aerodynamics and model refinements became more important. So people caught on, and now you have the maximum span, high wing placement, internal tail controls, fuselage design to avoid flow separation at the wing junction, and on occasion proper wing tip design. It makes them fast, but a ***** to build.

Ed,
We may have the only racing or speed event that hasn’t taken steps to slow them down or control costs. NASCAR, NHRA, and F1A does for auto racing. Closer to our sport, control line speed does it by fuel limits and line size to increase the drag. We can easily do the same. That is where the discussion should focus.

Jim,
I would not worry about club 40 doing the same. It may evolve due to changes in airframe or engine availability but remain based on the same concept of a simple airframe and tight constraints on the engine and prop.

DHG

My Feedback: (7)

Ed,

Yes, that's the idea ... to go faster than others within the bracket that's defined by the hardware. The game is a mix of skill and equipment.

If it were really true that hardware limitations are useless, then why should the F3D pilots limit themselves to a .40? Why should a Quickie 500 have 500 square inches of wing? Why shouldn't Indy cars be allowed to run in Nascar? Why wouldn't we all just do speed runs instead of going to the trouble of starting the engines, taking off, flying 10 laps without cutting, and getting ready for the next heat? I must respectfully disagree with your premise.

Duane

Ed Smith

Duane,

I knew that! Why do you think I posted what I did? This thread was getting boring.

Ed S

Jim Duda

Bob/Duane - Thanks for the excellent summation of the "history" of Spickler Q500 era planes/engines compared to where the event stands today. Now I know "The rest of the Story"...

daven

My Feedback: (1)

Jim,

As long as the ARFS you are using, and the Engine you are using doesn't change, you should be in pretty good shape. Since you mandate stock equipment, you limit a good deal of what people would like to change to make them go faster.

I see the rules allow you to recover the planes? I gaurantee there are those out there that can cover much better than the Chinease. If I were interested in that class, I would completely recover the plane (tight), and elimate horizontal (against the air flow) seams. Before I re-covered it, I would remove as much excess wood from the wing/frame that I felt I could get away with safely. I would reinforce the firewall and the nose of the plane back to the rear of the wing to help with power transfer. I would use high quality (digital) standard sized servos, small receiver, and tiny battery to limit excess weight. I would only carry enough fuel in the tank to make the 10 laps. I would wax the plane prior to every race, and clean all excess goo off the plane between heats.

Are Bladder tanks allowed? If so, I would DEFINATELY use one. I wouldn't have the antenna floating in the breeze. The engine would be broken in properly, I would probably buy 3-4 motors and find out which one was the best, and use it. etc.. Test 20 different APC props of varying sizes and find out which ones performed best in the air (not some often meaningless RPM number). Have a friend with Radar catch, top speed after a straight, and your speed after a hard turn. I like to average the two speeds to compare different props. You may have great straight speeds, but drop 30 mph after a strong turn.

Same ideas as whats in my speed secrets columns. Start from the front of the plane and elimanate all excess drag and weight as you go back to the tail.

I haven't read the rules, so I don't know if what I recomended is even legal. But if I did fly this, I would read those rules 20 times, and find ways (within the rules) to go faster.

Jim Duda

Dang it, Big Dave! Jason and I wish you would have relocated to Austin/San Antonio instead of Wisconsin...you would definitely be in our Club 40 mix - with a RED BULLSEYE taped to your Green Raider (wink)!

I think the Texas Club 40 rules stay "Standard Servos". Bladder tanks ARE allowed. Otherwise, I think everything you stated is legal.

daven

My Feedback: (1)

Does it say Standard Servos, or does it say "Standard Sized" Servos.

I glanced at the rules on the RCPRO site, and I thought it said Size, not specifying analog.

Jim,

Its far too hot down there for me. We came close to cracking 60 degrees today, and I had to turn the A/C on in the car. Also, from what I've seen, you guys are having a ball keeping things loose (intent on fun) with the rules. My competitive spirit wouldn't allow that HOWEVER, I do strongly support this type of racing, although its probably not for me.

I hope all of you become rabid 422 pilots!

DHG

My Feedback: (7)

"The Devil was represented by his volunteer advocate, Mr. Ed Smith, who immediately livened up the proceedings with several outrageous statements and juicy sound-bites timed for the local 6:00 o'clock news."

DonStegall

My Feedback: (1)

Dave,

The RCPRO Club 40 Rules are guidelines.

The planes are to be assembled per the instructions. Airframe modifications are limited to repairs and reinforcement.

Any kind of standard size servo can be used. The benefit of coreless servos in a Club 40 plane would not really give any advantage. The slower they respond the easier they are to fly. I forgot to add expo on ailerons to one and it was too responsive.

I just put Futaba 3151 digitals in the yellow Raider because a digital flight pack is only $30 more than a standard pack. They are digital but not coreless.

Of al of the Club 40 planes I have put together with a wide range of radio gear, the most popular plane is a Sky Raider Mach II with Futaba S148 servos. I don't think it has anything to do with the servos though. Quite honestly I think it is because that plane has a $50 Tiger Shark .40 with a Tower Hobbies muffler and it is louder than the other planes.

Some of the Club 40 racers in Texas, Florida, and other places are already trying 424. One day they may be your competition.

Ken Erickson

Don, you let the cat out of the bag! Yes guys, someday, some of these guys will be your competition.

To that end, we in South-Central Texas are dedicated to protect and defend the "sport" aspect of Club 40. With an LA .40, these planes have been radar gunned at 65 mph, average of both directions. The TT Pro equipped planes were gunned at 95 mph average. If someone wants to race faster, there supposedly is a class, using ther TT Pro, that averages somewhere between 115 and 130mph.

Sure, I have heard that a guy like me coluld not compete with a Preditor II and a TT Pro. But, what if 5 guys like me showed up at a sport 424 race? Could we have fun? Could only one of us be low point man for the day? Would we feel great, if one of us was only sixth lowest?

Sounds like stepping stones to me: 65, 95, 125.

Two catches: 1. The amount of space needed to race Quickie: 2. The need for a constant supply of new blood.

Club 40 won't last without a constant supply of new blood, but as of now, that does not seem to be a problem.

Club 40 is just plain FUN! Some are competitive, some aren't. One of our non-competitive guys has a new Predator and a TT Pro. I suspect he will go to a 424 race and have fun being non-competitive.

Let's promote racing!!!

Ken Erickson
San Antonio, TX

Ken Erickson

dwbebens

Daven;

I've read your "Speed Secrets" article many times myself. I agree with your ideas for optimizing everything WITHIN THE RULES for some new class like Club 40. A number of us here in Florida are already doing just exactly what you suggested. We do NOT alter the airframe by removing ANY material though. We DO stay strictly within the rules. If we are in doubt, we just don't do it! You can see the results in the air during a race. The optimized planes are noticeably faster and turn faster. But, they aren't that much faster than one that isn't fully optimized. They seem to reach a performance "wall". You get to the point where "you can't get blood out of a stone" so to speak. AS LONG AS YOU DON'T ALLOW ANY BASIC CHANGES IN AIRFRAME OR ENGINE, the inherent performance of the planes will eventually settle out near this optimized condition.

Probably at least half of the planes at a typical North Central Florida Club 40 race could be flown to a win by a competent pilot. It really does come down to piloting, and lack of mistakes in order to have success at one of these races. Now there do seem to be some people that won't ask how we're going faster. Or maybe they think they already know how to go fast. The end result is that these people stay slower than they could be.

I've actually done a number of experiments concerning identically set up and optimized Skyraider Mk II's with different pilot and plane combinations. At our local field, a number of us practice on a two-pole course set up exactly as for a race. At first, my friends would complain that their planes were slower, and that's why I was pulling them. We then traded planes. I still pulled them! Their planes flew exactly like mine. They would then say something like, "it must not be the plane then". I've seen this over and over again in our group and at the races. I would then proceed to tell them how I fly the course. They are now able to keep up!!! - - oh oh, what have I done?

As to engines: I'm on my original engine. I broke it in properly, don't run it lean, keep it clean, prop it right, and it's running as good or better than it did in my first Club 40 race early last fall. Most of the engines seem to run about the same as mine. The few poor running engines I've seen have obviously been run lean a lot (dark brown burned-on oil stains over the head, cylinder, and muffler; i.e. they've been ruined) and/or are propped wrong.

Anyway, those are my experiences with this kind of racing.

Doug Bebensee

daven

My Feedback: (1)

This optimizing could very well turn off the new guys. Tearing off, and re coting planes is really a pain, I hope that doesn't turn out to be necessary to be competitive. If someone thinks they have to do that, it could very well be enough to not get them involved.

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

One click on the needle seems to have more effect.

DonStegall

My Feedback: (1)

The only reason to tear the covering off is if you don't like the colors. The ToughLon covering job is better than most people could ever do.

Based on feedback from Club 40 racers we were able to get AirBorne Models to do a production run in solid white and solid yellow with CA hinges so that recovering would be easier if they didn't want a white or yellow base. As of Monday all of the yellow had already left the building. As of today, they may have one white left.

They are going to produce them in white, yellow, red, and orange. So there will be little reason to strip them. But if someone really wants UltraCote on one, it is fairly easy to strip them and recover them now that the solid colors are not pre-hinged.

Supply is being addressed. They have plenty of stock colors on hand except for one color of tail. And another boat load will be in shortly.

Dave, you need to get some racing started in your new area. Club 40 could be the ticket. For less than $150 for an airframe and engine, plus radio, you can get some first hand experience, and you can start letting people fly your "entry level racer". Call AirBorne tomorrow at 925-371-0922 and see if they have a white one you can get. They even have ToughLon in several shades of green as well as green and white checks. If you want to go really cheap, stick one of your OS .46 engines on it and call it a Club 40 "Outlaw". But get a Thunder Tiger Pro 40 and set a good example.