AmericanSpectre505

I agree,..with Dave, Don, Brett and Jon,.........

Now saying that, I think #15 and #16 are miss placed in the sequence,..IMOP? No big deal,...but seems odd?


Bill Holsten

DaveL322

I did some rough math.....(maybe very rough)...and it seems consistent with my observations from flying the P-11. A check of my math would be appreciated.

Assuming 60 mph flight speed (quite slow), the vertical component of the Figure M is not a problem at 150m or 175m - assuming the 3 of 4 point rolls are crisp (1/2 second) with short pauses (1/2 second), and short straight lines before and after (1/2 second).

Assume the 1/2 loop 1/2 roll integrated in the center is HALF the diameter of a 1 roll loop completed at 150 meters, and the entry and exit radii of the Figure M match the center radius. The Figure M will be a minimum of 725 feet wide (221 meters), 1/2 of which needs to be upwind of center.

Add a brief straight line (1 second, again, at 60 mph) - 88 feet (27 meters).

Using similar radii for the 1/2 Reverse Cuban 8, I'm calculating -
- 89 feet (27 meters) for the width of the 1/8 loop entry
- 277 feet (84 meters) for the width of the 5/8 loop
- 155 feet width for the 45 upline (at 60 mph) with quick 1/4 rolls and brief pauses between the points, before and after the 1/4 rolls.

So.....upwind of center, the needed width is -
362.5 feet (110 meters) for Figure M
88 feet (27 meters) for straight line between maneuvers
521 feet (159 meters) for 1/2 Reverse Cuban 8

The total box width at 150 meters is 1704 feet (520 meters), so 260 meters are available for the upwind portion of the Figure M and 1/2 Reverse Cuban 8 combination which (by my math) requires a minimum of 971.5 feet (296 meters) total width. Move the combination out to 175 meters, and now 303 meters box width are available - so the combination will just barely fit at 175 meters. And keep in mind this is flying the center loop of Figure M at a rather rushed pace, and the flight speed of 60 mph is quite slow (especially at 175 meters) and the height of the 1/2 Reverse Cuban 8 will be less than 1/2 the height of the 60 degree vertical limit (assuming base height of of 100 feet - 30 meters). Clearly not the presentation consistent with the guidance given in 5B.2 and 5B.4 of the F3A judging guidance.

And yes, the stall turns can be flown in either direction <G>, but the minor change in maneuver width is of no consequence when looking at the overall width needed for the Figure M and 1/2 Reverse Cuban 8.

Regards,

Dave

AmericanSpectre505

Yeah,..It's a large one to do for sure,.......I flew it saturaday,..for anyway,..LOL. My base line was a bit higher than usual after flying it several times, leaving some additional room for the 1/2 roll. The #2 end box was rushed for sure and I found myself flying a much slower flight not to get behind the plane,...it's interestingly fun! It's not bad,...but the Fig-M can really get things out of wack early on for sure. The logic in the numbers look good Dave. I will be at the Farm Club contest, so maybe Don and I can fly it together,..I will have my VF3 EP flying before then.


Best Regards,

Bill Holsten

Advantage Hobby Fliton Field Rep/Custom Airframes Of America/Dragon Fire Customs/Duralite/Guardian America.

Jeff Boyd 2

It's not a LOT larger than the current Split 'S' Combo (Double Immelman) in P-09 . . It's actually a little shorter in overall length (depending on how big you make the entry and exit radii) The added radii before and after the verticals adds to the effective total length at the bottom of the box, so it does make it tight, but it's OK in reality.

Fly in close, and you will be in real real trouble that's for sure.

Cheers, JB

DaveL322

The Double I could be easily wider than the the Figure M - and which is flown larger matters little compared to the exit point of each - the Figure M exits much further upwind - and that is the problem.

Regards,

Dave

JAS

My Feedback: (2)

P-11 makes a 'good' Unknown as it 'flows' like some of the unknowns that we've made up in the past. Overall... well mom always said "If you've got n.........................." so [sm=47_47.gif]

jonlowe

My Feedback: (12)

OMG, Jason's gone PC!

AmericanSpectre505

What I was getting at was the "M" to do it correctly and present better,..IMOP it needs to be flow wider for the half roll at the bottom. In judging the masters "M" at local contests it looks more like a scientists test tube or a test tube (visual) off centered,...very long verticles and a really short radius on the bottom. In some cases, but not all cases for sure. I fly a bit larger than most with YS power,...so it's a bit tight starting off with the "M" to the 1/2 reverse,..just me as I push the box. I think with the EP I could manage it much better,....we shall see!

But I can see the points brought up,.....I flew it many different ways into a 12 mph cross wind on saturday afternoon and it can be quite challenging. And #15 and #16 can get you if your not paying attention to your exit altitudes,..well not you guys anyway,..LOL!


Best Regards,

Bill H.

Jeff Boyd 2

How high are the verticals ? . . as high as you are supposed to fly them for geometry, symmetry and consistency with the rest of your flight, I would expect !

There's only ONE way to fly it if you want a good score

Cheers, JB

Jeff Boyd 2

Oh, I think I see what you are meaning

. . and it also means that the figure 'M' will be as wide as you care to make the radii of the entry, the 1/2 loop and the exit . . plain and simple. Radii TOO big, and you will be squeezed to fit in the rolling elements . . never mind anything else.

Cheers, JB

AmericanSpectre505

Yep,..

jim woodward

I flew P-11 last week for the first time. The M should be flown to the best way you can score it (size wise), then make a size sacrifice on the 1/2 reverse cuban to follow. I used a quicker than usual roll rate the 1/2 reverse cuban 8, 2 of 4, to keep it in the box. Overall, P11 is going to be a nice sequence I think.
Thanks,
Jim

AmericanSpectre505

Its' alot of fun for sure,...I like the "F-11" program more,.... The 2-1/4 opposite spin is driving me nuts! It feels un-natural to hold in elevator while reversing the spin, but I am also working on my plane set up,... fine tuning things.




Best Regards,

Bill Holsten

Advantage Hobby Fliton Field Rep/Custom Airframes Of America/Dragon Fire Customs/Duralite/Guardian America.

burtona

My Feedback: (50)

bump to top. I wanted to find this thread again easily.

I predict lots of zeros on the M and the reversed spins in the next two years! And not just my scores!

AmericanSpectre505

What,....Huh,..........don't understand?




Bill Holsten

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

Bill,

btt - Bump to Top

Basically post something just saying btt to move it to the top of the forum,

Arch

AmericanSpectre505

Ahhhhh,..understand now,...couldn't figure that one out,...LOL



Bill H.

AnttiAM

Can the figure M be flown "reversed", i.e. you fly past center an then make the first vertical (on the right side of the box, if started from left-to-right) then back across the center to the left side vertical and then again across the center for the cuban? This would leave more room for the cuban which could be flown in normal size.

It´s against the pictorial aresti diagram but is is againt the rules? The written manouver description would allow this. ...?

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

No, you can not do this. Maneuver must be flown in direction of flight.

Arch

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

....but aresti diagrams can be dangerous. Often. one diagram cannot show every possible permutation of the maneuvers. The written description needs to be very clear about the options available in every maneuver.

Jeff Boyd 2

Ummmm ? . . have you got an example of a "different permutation" ?

Cheers, JB

Jeff Boyd 2

Hi Jim . .

In reality, the Figure 'M' and the Half Reverse Cuban fit in fine with some practice. The "part loops" (radii) of the 'M' can not be too big (baring in mind that the radius on entry and exit must be the same as the half loop). The Half Reverse Cuban should be flown proportional in size with other similar manouevres (e.g. Cuban 8) . . Rule 5B.2. and 5B.4. of the FAI Sporting Code for F3A Aerobatics explains this . .

I have flown this a few times now, and it can be flown proportionally, gracefully and with correct use of the box . . more difficult in wind . . The 'M' can get blown around quite a bit. Just "grease up" your wind correction skills

Cheers, JB

grotto2

My Feedback: (2)

Sure. Suppose you have a maneuver containing two snaps, and the description doesn't specify whether they are negative or positive, or whether you should do one of each. If an aresti pattern shows it done a particular way, does it require that you do it exactly as the aresti shows and throw out all other options implied by the written description? They're not going to show a cluttered diagram with inside-inside, inside-outside, outside-inside, and outside-outside snaps.

Oh, BTW these are general comments and not specifically about the 'M'. I apologize if I'm hijacking the thread.

-Ron

Jeff Boyd 2

Hi Ron . .

Now someone PLEASE correct me if I am wrong . . but the way I understand it is the Arresti diagram gives you the technically correct way to fly a manouevre, and the "description" gives a general description of that manouevre in notation form.

e.g. In a particular IMAC schedule, there is a "description" saying "1 1/2 spin followed by a half roll" . . the Arresti diagram CLEARLY shows the spin to be POSITIVE, and the half roll to be in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION to the spin. Fly this as per the description, BUT any way you like other than how the Arresti shows it . . and you will score a ZERO.

Cheers, JB

Jeff Boyd 2

Ron . . the Snap symbol on the Arresti diagram shows whether the Snap is positive OR negative . . if there are two consecutively, and it shows these symbols opposite to each other . . it means the snaps are to be in opposite.

I have never flown "Unknowns" in F3A competition (we only fly "knowns" here in Australia currently), however I fly "Unknowns" in IMAC at every competition. We are ONLY given an Arresti diagram . . NEVER a "description".

Cheers, JB