I guess we are playing a word game - To me -from years of judging pattern flying pattern-an axial roll is one which appears axial- You F15 was "axial " per some instrument evaluation. along a zero pitch line(?) The Monocoupe will roll axially (appear axial)
At least a model of it will and layout for models is what I was referring to.
As for pattern moddels All in a line setup ?
Not for me! I have way too much experience with pattern setups to do that
I designfora wee bit of stability , which makes everything look more locked in.
3D foam flip flop stuff ? another ball game -
you can get away with murder simply because the wing loading is often 2-3-4 oz per sq ft.
CAPS :I have done a bunch of em starting in 1984. are all very light and inside /outside maneuvers feel the same or so close to it , I never feel any extra correction is needed .
The one in the photo above was a fairly stock H9 33% . look at the flying angle . The model was flying at that angle My super light 27% was even more agile . It was Scratch built and weighed 13 lbs
My point is that the full scale comparisons mean zip when looking at model aerobats
the wing loading ( for example your snappy Cap) means everything BUT once you get a handle on that . the rest ofit is of little concern.
Note your little VAPOR. It does what it does due to extremely low loadings
I love that little model.
how would one inprove it using full scale practices?
I have tried a lot of different layouts looking for advantages in various layouts sizes n weights wing placement on n on.
(see attached examples)
All of the stuff shown does (did) axial rolls the pilot makes the difference in how well the roll looks but again, an on line model is not required .