delateurj

Hi everyone,

Below is the line up for the 2015 race season so be sure get your orders in to Santa so you are ready for the racing season.

Not quite finalized as some clubs are still considering dates and there may still be another date added, but wanted to get out what we had.

We will have 5 (perhaps 6) events again this year in the Triangle Series. If we go to 6, we'll allow everyone to drop one set of scores for the year championship

In the Triangle Series we will be running the EF-1, T-34 and .46 Warbird classes unchanged from last year.

We are dropping the Unlimited class this year.

Davis will be holding two 3 pole events again this year and there will be 422, 426 and EF1 at both Davis events and we will continue to have 3 pole on the second day of the events at Oakdale.

So for those of you who want to do three pole in the area, there will now be 4 events for EF1 and 4 events for 426 within a couple of hours of the bay area. I'll pull together some sort of prize for the best cumulative score across those 4 events in each class so we can recognize the yearly champions in three pole just like we do in two pole.

A belated thank you to Kelly A. Collin for his article in the Tomcats newsletter on two pole EF-1 racing.

Triangle Series Dates Are:

March 28th Fresno EF-1, T-34, .46 Warbird. 2 pole

May 30th Oakdale EF-1, T-34, .46 Warbird 2 pole (Exact weekend date is tentative, club still finalizing date)
May 31st Oakdale EF-1, 424, 426 3 pole

Jul 25th Salinas EF-1, T-34, .46 Warbird 2 pole (Exact weekend date is tentative, club still finalizing date)

Aug 22nd Modesto EF-1, T-34, .46 Warbird 2 pole (Exact date is tentative, club still finalizing date)
Aug 23rd Modesto EF-1, 424, 426

Oct 3 Morgan Hill EF-1, T-34, .46 Warbird 2 pole

Davis Race Dates Are:

Apr 25-26 Davis/Woodland EF-1, 426, 422 3 pole

Sep 12-13 Davis/Woodland EF-1, 426, 422 3 pole

Its been less than 2 months since our 2014 finale and I am already itching for the next race.

I've attached the current number list. I freed up some numbers if the flyer has not participated in last few years.

Regards,
Joe


P.S.: Here are some other race dates that may be of interest:

Redding Warbird Race: June 27,28.

So. Cal. 3 pole racing:

Mar 21-22 Whittier 424, 426, 422

Apr 11-12 Basin G Finch Memorial

May 16-17 Whittier Q-40

Jun 6-7 Basin EF-1, 424, 426, 422

Oct 24-25 Whittier 424, 426, 422

Sacramento will be running their series again but have not announced dates yet.

I believe Vacaville Flyers still do a T-34 race first Sunday of the month.

Jimmy Skids

My Feedback: (2)

All,
The SAM event planning meeting will be held next week. We will try and post dates for 2015 when confirmed.
Thank you,
Jim

T34RACING

My Feedback: (1)

HI Y'all,

Looks like a lot of racing for 2015. I might just have to find some planes to come play.

-Kevin

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

Joe can I run a sport jett 46 engine?

delateurj

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for asking. Rules disallow Jett "You cannot use a Nelson, MB,Profi, Flora, Jett or and specific Q-500/QM-40 engines. You may use any performance pipes
supplied by Nelson, MB Profi, Jett, Flora or any other performance-enhancing supplier. Engines
may be modified and do not need to be stock. "

Full rules are here

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

Thanks joe just checking. This would be a sport jett engine which is the same power s the rossi. I am thinking of making a plane to race the 46 Warbird. can you give me a link to some pictures of these planes. I remember seeing a lot planes there that are way way stand off scale. i dont want to bring a scale plane lose lol.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Jeff, I think your small Tsunami with a corrected wing area and fixed gear would be a winner. Anything that runs 1:45 to 1:50 at SAMs would be highly competitive.

delateurj

Hi Jeff,

Even sport Jett not allowed. As far as planes we haven't been too tight on scale outline. Planes that have raced are:
T-34 with a couple of bays chopped off or stock, John Lockwood did a custom T-34 he basically shrunk all dimension of WM to match min. of rules
Phoenix Models Strega
Shawn's Macchi and very simliar is Babe's Macchi
I think the Jewel brothers have been running some smaller arf spitfire either a Kyosho or something similar
There was a P-39 and that was the first plane where there was some rumblings from competitors because it was fast, very stand way off scale and didn't even have trike gear. But it died this season so took care of that.
The PT-26 kit by Wing Maker (no longer in production) was run and very competitive in past with Kevin Norred at sticks. Here is link: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=741765
I have a Wings Mfg. Short Kit of mustang that I think would be competitive, especially if wing redone, and if you are interested let me know as odds of me getting to it are low. Here is link to one that sold on e-bay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/P-51-Short-K...p2047675.l2557
Certainly anything acceptable at SAMs would be acceptable in Triangle series as far as subject and fidelity to scale.
Its a fun class for those who like to custom build and/or wrench on sport engines. Engines are the Rossi's and Tower Hobbies heavily modified. I think a pretty stock OS .46 AX, crank up the nitro and put a nelson or jett sport pipe is a good combination.

Regards,
Joe.

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

Hello Joe the engine is now big deal as I get them to make great power some as strong as a or more than the Jett 56LX. I just looking for suitable planes.

Thanks shawn I have looked at that plane also. I really like your airfoil.

I am thinking of running a TA-152.

delateurj

Cool idea and from a quick look at three views seems like it has a higher aspect ratio than many warbirds which would be good if my eye is not fooling me.

- Joe.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Jeff, if you need a set of cores just let me know. With the loss of Unlimited in the Triangle series I am contemplating going back to 46 mod as well. I'm thinking of my glass fuse, super light layup and appropriate size wings and tail. Not talking about engines quite yet.

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

yes shawn I already thought of you for a set of wings. I will call you this week sometime or you call me and we can discuss. I can work an engine for you also to make more power.

tdstaf

My Feedback: (11)

I'm kind of at a loss with the rules. 475 sq in 50 in wing. It's kind of limiting the type of plane you can fly. I can come up with a bunch that meet the the 475 squares but span is short and if you make it 50 in the wing area would be something like 530 Sq in. On the other hand if you do the Ta 152 like Jeff is contemplating, at 475 the span will be 60 in. Any explanation on this would be helpful.


Tim

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

Tim i know there is a fudge factor on these planes. I bet you can be 25% off from scale and still race.

delateurj

Hi Tim,

Thanks for asking. I inherited the rules and never really questioned or had others question but get what your asking. Crazy busy at work so it may be awhile before I have a chance to really look at this and check with some who know the history, but I will. My blink thought is that we are trying to keep the planes from being too small hence the minimum sq area and if you add the need to be near scale outline it drives planes like TA 152 which is higher aspect ratio you have a longer wing than minimum which is legal and probably faster than shorter stubby wing with same area, at least in the turns. But that is a quick thought. One way to help with thinking on this is any suggested change you would make that meet the objectives of not too small to control speed and scale outline. But either way I'll give this some thought and research.

Regards,
Joe.

tdstaf

My Feedback: (11)

Thanks Joe

It just seamed that they contradicted each other. Most as myself push the rules a bit, I just see it as wing area is wing area regardless of span.

delateurj

Thanks Tim. So its having both a min. wingspan (you are clear its a minimum and not maximum wingspan) and having a min. wing area that feels overly constricting?

tdstaf

My Feedback: (11)

I guess my real question is. How many guys run with the wing area at 475? Most of the planes that I have looked at that are warbirds with a wingspan of 50 inches or more are around 520 inches or more. Wouldn't that be less competitive than against the ones with 475?

delateurj

Got it. I'll consider and look into. Thanks.

- Joe.

T34RACING

My Feedback: (1)

To reply to the wing area / wingspan minimums


The rules for the .46 warbird class were designed in beginning to allow the aircraft at the time racing into the class. Most of the Wing Mfg kits and Arfs on the market fell into the 475 square inch and 50" minimum. When the class first started, we had a little world models j-3 cub that we were having fun with and dominating the 50" warbird class at the time. When the .46 warbird class evolved, we didn't want it to turn into a J-3 cub race, so we put the minimum 50" wingspan and 475 squares. Even though that killed my airplanes, it was about the class and future. This attracted a lot of other kits and arfs and never really changed.

I have seen a lot of planes come and go and I raced the World Models PT-26 520sq for a long time with a O.S. stock 46 w/ jett pipe. You had to fly it hard and smooth to win. But with all the custom planes coming out, it would be hard to place anymore I would think. The only good thing was ...it flew on rails.

I did build a TA152 for the class, but it didn't meet the wing percentages that are required. It was either to fat of a wing or would not meet the desired size. The wing on a short fuse also was a challenge because take off was exciting and balance was hard. All engine and tiny airplane. It flew horrible.

T34RACING

My Feedback: (1)

Oh Joe,

That P-39 that you are referring to was actually a EL Banita....it was a tail dragger version of the P-39. That is why it looked funny.

MFLOOD3800

My Feedback: (51)

Wish I lived closer. You all have a superman schedule going on up there.