just tape it fast......you wont need it......

Yep. So here's your assignment. Do a slow, large loop - say 100 ft diameter - over the runway in a cross-wind situation of at least 10 mph. Simple maneuver.

See how you do without rudder. Then see how long it takes you to get a good one staying in the center-line of the runway for the whole entry, loop and exit.

Next assignment is landing down the center-line of the runway in a cross wind ("crabbing"). When done well this is the most beautiful of landings.

Both of these take rudder finesse. Done properly it's just a smooth path that would leave a non-pilot wondering why the old timers are saying "nice job" among themselves.

Wow! I really have opened up a can of worms havent I.

What I've taken from this is firstly:- Rudder is an important part of flying.
Secondly:- You dont nesisarily need it, but if it wasnt there you couldnt do alot of the manouvers and MAY not be able to keep "straight line" control in some conditions.
And lastly:- Everybody has different opinions on what makes somebody a good pilot!!!

Thank you all for your insights. I already started experimenting with the rudder last night. IT WAS HARD! Suprising how much that one extra control confuses things! Im sure it will improve with time though.



On the next plane front I heard a couple mentioned. Anyone else want to throw their opinion into the mix?


Thanks again,
Adam_Fozz

LOL, Adam , this is how it goes alot here on RCU . Want to open a big can of worms, ask which is better 2 stroke or 4 stroke ,and look out lol .
I have been around this plane some. http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...ProdID=EFL2250. A freind of mine has one and it does a great job aerobatics and handles the wind very well . Heres a video I made of it . http://www.rcuvideos.com/video/Dan-and-Ultrastick. He does havce a big motor on it ,pulls pretty good, I think.

Four strokes are better than two strokes.

LOL!

First of all...

Two strokes has a much better...

jeez Don't get me started!!!

Do you have ANY idea what you are talking about?!!!

Insanemoondoggie thanks for the advice re 2/4 strokes...Keep quiet there starting again!!!

Anyway, nice video. Looking at the other ones that people have recomended I think I may need to explain what im looking for a bit more. I think that people seem to be recomending 3D planes (correct me if im wrong). If my understanding correct these 3D planes will basically hover. To me they always look like they are flying in galeforce wind and I really dont fancy that. Im looking for something that acts like a real plane. By acrobatic I means something like a single seater stunt plane (like the redbull planes you see in real life). You know, will do fast rolls one after the other etc.

I also like the look of stunt biplanes. How are they to fly?

Thanks again
Adam_Fozz

The T-28 is a pretty aerobatic plane in its own right. I reccomeded the Tyhpoon because it will do fast rolls and any other aerobatics as well as hover, and it has a lot of components in common with the T-28. But it is very light and it sounds like you also want something a little faster. I think you also said you wanted to stay with sometihing electric, so you might look at this plane or something similar.

http://www.hobbyzone.com/rc_planes_e...i_pulse_xt.htm

The Red Bull planes pretty much are 3D planes. There are videos of Red Bull planes taking off right into a hover. The beautiful thing is that you don't need to hover the plane if you don't want to. I fly mostly precision, but I also have a nice Yak that I like to fly. I try to hover it once in a while just because I want to be able to do everything, but mostly I fly precision/IMAC with it. You can get a 3D plane and not turn the rates up so high, and fly aerobatics with it.

Check out (search) IMAC flying - that is flying precision aerobatics with scale airplanes. Such planes are: Extra, Edge, Yak, Sukhoi, Katana, Giles...the list goes on, though I believe the Extra, Edge, and Yak are up there for the best flying characteristics. If you want a little scale aerobatic plane, Great Planes has a new little Extra out that is electric powered. I've heard many great things about this airplane:
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXVVG4&P=ML
You are at least into a low wing sport plane so I don't think this would be too much plane for you to handle...

If you don't care about the scale part of the airplane, you can check out pattern flying - precision aerobatics with machines crafted specifically for precision. They look funny at first, but when you start to understand the engineering behind them and feel how one flies, it's very very easy to get hooked

To nicely tie this back to the original question, rudder is a HUGE part of flying these types of planes. If you end up getting into aerobatics, the rudder is constantly used for corrections during the maneuvers, and is a major part of many of the maneuvers themselves (snaps rolls for example are actually not supposed to be initiated with ailerons. Elevator is used to stall the plane, rudder to initiate roll). A basic roll is another example - it really is more than just banging the ailerons. Elevator and rudder are both used all throughout a roll to keep the plane from losing altitude. A properly executed roll is truly a thing of beauty[sm=shades_smile.gif]

Here is a pic of my 'dream' pattern plane:

great topic
Here is somthing to try. With a trainer try doing axial rolls without rudder. Then try it with rudder. A Sig LT 40 can do precise axial rolls with the right amount of rudder. Try it for fun!

another training technique is to fly a trainer on a buddy box and set the trim for level straight flight at a specific throttle setting. Land and disconect the ailerons, tape em if you want, and fly it rudder elevator only. My instructor did this to me to get me used to the rudder. A conventional trainer will fly just fine this way[8D]

Well, there are all sorts of things one can use the rudder for.
besides steering and ground handling, you can do knife edges, four point and eight point rolls, a knife edge loop. harriers or hovering need to use some rudder to help keep the plane upright too.
with a plane that had dihedral in the wings, you can turn the plane using rudder, very handy if the aileron servo quits working for some reason.
With a plane without dihedral the rudder pivots or turns the plane sideways, useful for some manuevers to make the plane look better and in knife edges, helps keep the plane level.
On some planes like float planes for example, or a plane with huge landing gear fairings, you need to include a little rudder to get the plane to turn or bank, other wise you have trouble controlling the plane.
When you get into aerobatics you will quickly find using the rudder on the aerobatic maneuvers sure makes them work better and look better.

But one can fly a plane without a rudder, lots of modellers do already. When I fly small two channel 1/2a planes, you only had two channels for control, no throttle, only aileron and elevator or rudder and elevator. I have flown some larger planes two channel as well. Same thing.
Many of the flying wings have no rudder too.

All biplanes are a hoot to fly. Stunt biplanes especially so. You have much more drag, but also, depending on model, more lift and a shorter moment arm for roll (narrower relative wingspan = faster rolls) and most are pretty short coupled for tight loops, also. Bipes do things differently. Not better or worse - just different. I can't speak for the little foam oddities they fly indoors with drag panels and reversable props. I'm talking the ones that react like aircraft.

A scale Pitts Special can be a handful when taxiing or taking off. An Ultimate is one of the best stunt airplanes . . . ever (but that's a biased opinion). With enough engine it will do the 3-D stuff, but with a reasonable engine it stunts marvelously yet is easy to fly when slowed down and on low rates or exponential throws . And for just lazy Sunday aerobatics one of the 1930's styles can be great fun. Doing loops at a walking speed and graceful stall turns and such. If you want to get into IMAC style maneuvers (like planes with human pilots do) a biplane with upper and lower ailerons would be recommended. And here's where that rudder training is needed. Ground handling a narrow carriage bipe takes a lot of rudder and elevator to keep from ground looping or nosing over. Until you get that tail flying they can be alarming. Again, put enough engine up front and you can get away with slam and bang take-offs. But eventually that technique will bite you.

Biplanes take appreciably longer to set up at the field because of the struts and cabanes. Figure five to 15 minutes additional unless you go hog wild and build a WWI biplane with flying and landing wires. They also have an extra wing you have to transport. My 27% Ultimate and flight box absolutely fills my Jetta Sport Wagon. I have to deflect the rudder to close the rear hatch and the spinner and prop is beside my seat.

Bipes are also a bit harder to see in the air. Depending on the model, the extra wing can really play games with you and what you think you're seeing. Someone on here had a great example where they took some image files of a monoplane and a bipe turning, then turned them into black silhouettes. With the bipe, it can be really hard telling what is going on if you aren't paying attention.

Still, have a soft spot for them. I don't care much for the looks of the Ultimate myself, but the Model 12 and some of the Waco and other golden age bipes are a lot of fun.

Thanks for more great advise. Im going to sit on this and practice my rudder control before making my decision. Whether I go for stunt or biplane I will let you know and keep you updated with my flights.

If anyone has got further ideas about good aerobatic or biplanes please feel free to post further.

Thank you
Adam_Fozz

Great Planes Escapade ARF. Electric option is included in the instructions.

David, thats a bad idea... real bad. How can you make proper heading corrections while on final to land.

It's not cheating, you're cheating yourself from properly learning/flying.

Well, the answer would be to have the mix feature assigned to a switch so it could be turned off.

Problem with mixes is that they are crutches.

Problem with switches is that you sometimes hit the wrong one. I dorked my Hot Stik last weekend when I wanted to switch to low rates for landing and, at 20 feet, I hit the low rate AND air-brake switch next to it with my fingertip. Problem was I had been toying with my air-brake feature at home and had a ton of down elevator mixed in. The Hot Stik is about 30% control surface on the wing and 75% control surface on the h.stab. It did a 90ΒΊ nose dive instantly. I recovered at an altitude less than the landing gear was tall and tore it out of the bottom of the plane; pancaking in and shearing the motor mount arms off the bases. Amazingly the prop was OK . . . though I broke teeth out of three of the four aileron servos.

Three night repair, three replacement servos and I count myself as darned lucky it wasn't 2" closer to the ground.

Adam , the GreatPlanes Super Skybolt in my honest opinion ,is one of the nicest flying Bipes around and I,m sure it can be converted to EP .Just don,t under power it .
A guy at our feild has a Sig 4 Star 40 , converted to EP and it flies very nice . Out of all my planes , I would have to say ,my 4 Star was the one that taught me the things I needed to learn to move on to the more aerobatic planes.
One mistake I made when I taught myself to fly RC ,was not flying a plane to it,s full flight abilities Found myself going back to the 4 Star to gain the knowlege of certain manuvers I had bypass in my hurry to fly the really cool planes. If you truly master your Second plane ,your high dollar areobatic planes will last longer...