mad web tv scientist
Posts: 451
Joined: 6/30/2006 From: Salem ,
OR, USA Status: offline
|
AstroDad, interesting type of flying. I think you are safe up to 600-700 feet. My one meter plus wing span PF planes that can just barely be seen at that altitude perform quite well. The Cub was so high today I really couldn't tell what it was doing except getting smaller and smaller. I flew a lot of dead stick maneuvers while bringing her back to a more visable altitude. Found ranges on the web for popular PFs to be from 1300 - 2500 feet. Talent, great to see you back! Your unique enthusiasm and pure joy of modeling has been missed. You have more than made up for your absence with your post. Glad things are working out so well for you. You live very close to some family members my wife and I plan to visit in the fall. Do you think it might be possible for us to get together for some flying and/or some visiting? Hemi, it's good to see you still having fun. derek, I understand your work situation having been in a similar condition myself, so don't let us stress you out about our airplane stuff. Looking forward to learning about some of your new adventures. I hope we can get some former posting flyers back and posting about their current activities. Today's flying schedule was to have been low key, starting with a couple of long relaxing Accipiter Badius flights and then ending with three shorter flights flying the Cub. For some strange reason the motor on the AB would not run. Very strange because it performed perfectly last time out. It was very turbulent and windy on the smaller site I chose to fly on today, but I was determined to run down all five (5) batteries that I had peak charged. I allowed adequate cool down time between flights so as not to cook the motor though it seemed to never get hot, possibly compliments of the extra cooling my modifications may have made possible. I wasn't in the mood to experiment with props, etc. but it was interesting to notice the performance difference between the 2 ounce batteries and the 3.5 ounce ones. The first flight with a "heavy" battery demonstrated very noticeably slow Cub climbing performance below about 300 feet. Evidently the good thermals at higher altitude were what created a false sense of security as the big battery seemed to be adequate at altitude. The really noticeable problem was how quickly the plane dropped out of the sky when the battery gave up compared to the lighter batteries. Stalling behavior was checked and seemed to be nicely normal. I wasn't in the mood to try any nice recognizable "Chandelles." Instead, there was the "comfort zone maneuvers" of loops, aileron rolls, rudder rolls, inside and outside barrel rolls, and a spin. A stall turn would also be a nice maneuver to perfect. I never remember to think to try it. One maneuver that needs to be tried someday is to start with a power dive, pull straight up and aileron roll, then at the exact point where the plane stops going up, quickly reverse the ailerons, and if it can be done correctly it should continue rolling a time or two while dropping tail first before it tries to fall out of the sky. My Spitfire should be able to do it if my Cub can't. HAPPY FLYING ALL! madwebtvscientist ____________________________________________ Modeling Promoting Blog: http://www.rcuniverse.com/community/profile.cfm?section=blog&memid=266748 Modeling's rendezvous with destiny will surely be unstoppable when something greater than the narcissistic pleasure of an esoteric chosen few is adopted in modeling.
< Message edited by mad web tv scientist -- 6/27/2008 7:33:18 AM >
|