quote:

I knew this day was coming, but I was hoping it would be a little longer.

We need to keep it fun, but we may need to put a tighter set of rules together to control technology creep. Since I have been in contact with a large number of the groups and people that are flying Club 40, I will take on the task of identifying areas that may need regulation. And my end result will be presented as a Request For Comments (RFC). I will start the process by listing some of the issues that I know about. And I will pose some questions.

To streamline the text, a few terms will be abbreviated:

SRM2 - Sky Raider Mach II
LR40 - LA Racer 40

The engine compartment sides (cheeks?) of the SRM2 are an area begging for enhancement and controversy. They vibrate, and they sometimes flutter at speed. Plus they can break if banged significantly. Some groups allow a piece of wood or other material to join them. At least one person has added doublers to them. I don’t think either method is a speed enhancement. In fact, both could slow the plane down. But techniques could be used to reduce any speed penalty and therefore could enhance the performance. I think it is important to not allow rounding the edges significantly. Removing the cheeks could possibly be a speed improvement. I think that they must be in place at the start of a race. Reattaching them during an event will probably not hold up to flight conditions. I think a pre-event inspection may be required.

The landing gear block assembly has broken out of some planes. Repairing the damage will most likely not result in exactly the same configuration, especially if the original parts are lost or are too broken to reuse. One repair I saw shifted the gear forward a quarter to half inch. The SRM2 and LR40 use struts with the same mounting configuration and are interchangeable. The landing gear on the SRM2 is shorter than the LR40 gear. I personally have used a LR40 gear on a SRM2 because it gives more ground clearance. Another person has used a landing gear made from flat aluminum stock. I doubt if he used the stock wheels because he used Dubro American size axles. Lost wheels will most likely be something other than stock wheels. We will probably need to specify a minimum diameter and width if substitute wheels are allowed.

ARF tanks are often not available at the local hobby shop. People tend to replace ARF tanks, especially with use and development of leaks, with off the shelf tanks. And there is the issue of bladder tanks. Some would argue that bladder tanks improve performance, and unless homemade, they add significantly to the cost of the aircraft.

The spinner used could affect performance. Some will prefer to use a smaller spinner or prop nut. Some will want to use a larger spinner. I personally have replaced some spinners with aluminum spinners.

SRM2 and LR40 wings are interchangeable. The dual aileron servos on a LR40 wing are exposed and may have more drag. Using a SRM2 wing on a LR40 could provide an advantage. An LR40 wing on a SRM2 would probably provide no advantage. A local guy busted his SRM2 wing and I had a LR40 wing with one little dent. Is it ok for him to use a LR40 wing on a SRM2?

Sealing the gaps of control surfaces, or using gap/hinge seal tape is another issue.

Does the amount of dihedral in the wing need to be checked?

At least one local guy trimmed the bottom of his rudder so he could get more elevator throw. This modification was for better aerobatic capability, but could it have a benefit in a race? The only thing it seems to do is allow better snaps.

I replace the control horns with Dubro horns and I use Great Planes nylon clevises on 2-56 pushrods. I also push out the wing mounting blind nuts and replace the wing bolts with 1/4-20 nylon bolts. Is hardware substitution an issue?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ed Smith

...

This is exactly how we ended up with $1000,00 Quicky airplanes and $1500.00 Q40 airplanes

Ed S