Ok, be gentle with your responses, but what is the difference between aerobatics and 3D flying?

Mike

Don't have all of the technical stuff with the big words on it in front of me. Aerobatics such as pattern and IMAC fly a set of standard maneuvers such as loops, rolls, spins etc. Most are done at a moderate speed to keep the maneuver crisp and clean. 3D on the other hand is almost the opposite in that the plane is nearly always on the brink of a stall while doing most of the 3D flying. It's been called high alpha flying. It takes rather large flying surfaces and relies on prop blast over those surfaces to keep the mass of the airplane in the air. Hovering, elevator and harrier maneuvers rely on huge deflections and as much air as possible to execute properly. Most any size model can fly aerobatics, but in my opinion, the 30% and larger planes by far excel in the 3D arena. The profiles aren't bad, but until you've had your hands on the sticks of a giant scale, you haven't lived I'll leave the rest up to you guys...

Thanks, that's kinda what I thought. Thanks for the input.

I thought that most 3D manuveurs are flown the the plane in stall...

I guess this is the grey area between stall and stay in the air. A high alpha knife edge for instance can be real close, but I'm not sure it's stalled. Let's hear if from some of the other veterans...

I think that we may both be right. I believe the correct definition for stall is that there isn't enough air moving over the wings to provide lift. Any sort of prop hanging manuveur could definitely be interpreted as the plane in stall (since you're using the thrust of the prop to keep the plane airborne). But there are 3D manuveurs that require speed.

Hi Folks.
Your both right. When an aircraft stalls, the wings have exceeded their maximum angle of attack for the power available and quit flying/providing lift. The aircraft then stalls/decends.

In 3D flight, the wings have far exceeded their usual agle of attack, but high horsepower/RPM settings have provided enough air movement to drag the aircraft through the air on brute strength alone. The enlarged flying surfaces and huge control throws permit the deflection of this air blast and direct the aircraft accordingly. Beware, in some stalled/3D attitudes, the given control input can sometimes give the opposite effect from the one desired.

This is all part of the area known in aviation as the "back side of the power curve".
Silversurfer

Just remember guys, stalls can occur at any airspeed and any attitude it's all a factor of wing loading and AOA . You can stall just as easy at 100 mph as you can at 20. 3D utilizes max contol throws beyond the normal limits in a stalled or somewhat part stalled condition. It's real easy to get into tail stalls running a 3D setup. Just my 2 cents worth. Enjoy

Craig

There is a common misconception that a stalled wing stops generating lift. This is not so and was touched on by silver.

A stall point is typically assumed to be reached when the air flow detaches from the wing. There is an angle of attack (AOA) for a given wing at a given speed where the wings lift lessens. The air flow over the wing detaches past this AOA. This greatly increases drag, but the wing still generates lift. Please note that speed is not the only part of the equiation for stalls. IMAC_Buff is very right in that you can have a high speed stalls.

It is this high drag/low lift (stalled) area of flight that is used in many (not all) 3D manouvers, such as an elevator and harrier. In short, stalled planes can stay in the air.

I would consider 3D a type, or subset, of aerobatics, but I think Bob_NJ pretty much hit the key of 3D. Low speed thrust vectored and high alpfa manouvers. Alpha by the way is just the letter symbol used to denote AOA... hence high alpha = high angle of attack. Not all 3D is 100% thrust vectored and the lift generated by the wing is important. Yes, the wing may be stalled, but it is still producing lift.

Monkey Boy that is