My dad still has the Daddy Rabbit hanging in the rafters in his basement. It looks a little worse for wear as it was my first patternship. It was a hand-me-down from my older (more talented) brother, and as an 8yr old, it received several beatings from me. It hasn't flown since 1984, and it's setup as a trike with retracts, so it would definately have to run a 60. I know I could get it assembled in time for Knoxville, but I don't think I could do a good job of trimming it out by then. I flew it in novice back then, so I had to leave the gear down, and we couldn't run a pipe. It last flew with an old supertigre blue head, and as I recall, it was a dog vertically (fiberglass version). I loved pre-turnaround pattern, and am looking forward to flying it again, but I'd like to perform as well as I can, but that particular daddy rabbit I don't think is my ticket....but my tipo....she's all trimmed out and waiting to go!!

Come on down to Knoxville, some of the senior flyers can lay 9's and 9 1/2's on every manuver every flight, but its not the average, you can believe me.
6's and 7's are the norm. But its all about the fun anyway. If I can average 8's 9's I'm really doing well.
Jamie

Eric

Knoxville is a great place to fly. As far as I'm concerned, there is a second inducement. There's this place called Calhoun's that claims the best ribs in the area and has a micro-brewery on the premisses. Yum, yum. If the Tipo is quiet, bring it and come on.

Steve

I sent in my membership so I'm definately in, but this year at Knoxville isn't in the cards. Probably next year. I'd love to really see it take off up here in the midwest. I know there are a lot of the "evolution class" planes still around up here. Heck when I competed in the 80s, thru the mid to late 80s almost every plane at the contests were tipos, I'm sure there's still a bunch of them around. It's funny, I was just talking to my brother tonight about SPA, he's watching this very closely too, and I know he's in the silent minority pulling for pipes and retracts. In fact he said tonight if that were allowed, they'd definately have 2 more flyers cause he'd jump in with both feet. That's the era that we grew up with, so all of our old planes are setup that way, even my dad's Cold Duck from '73 has retracts. My brother flys a Phoenix 8 with pipe and retracts every week, and he just called my dad tonight to get our other tipo so that we can both fly tipos. In fact, I bet if the pipes and retracts rule was allowed, my dad would probably jump in as well. In the mean time, I'm going to purpose build a new old patternship over the winter. I don't want to hack up one from the existing fleet, just wouldn't seem right.

I love ribs I'll say that, and I've got no problem with microbrew either, Columbus has a few as well. The Tipo isn't real quiet though, Rossi 60, currently on a pipe, but it's not obnoxious in my opinion. It's alot quieter than the guys that fly the 1/3rd scale aerobats at my field.

Got my Atlas plans in the mail yesterday, wow! that 70 inch span really looks good.
Jamie

[quote]ORIGINAL: eness76-RCU

I sent in my membership so I'm definately in, but this year at Knoxville isn't in the cards. Probably next year.

I don't know if the Tipo has a rear or side exhaust and external pipe, but if it has an external pipe, just replace it with a Performance Specialty muffler, and come anyway.

If you plan on being in Knoxville for our SPA contest, make sure what you bring will do 93db at 25 feet.

Ed

I like the idea of a speperate event for the missile class of patternshipsThey don't really mix with the original concept of SPA but that doesn't mean they should be left out. I wouldn't want to take my new Taurus/Primus and have to fly against a piped Tipo but I wouldn't mind get involved in a seperate class for these planes. They don't really fit in to any other class currently in use. I've always liked the original SPA concepts but as the organization grows it needs to stay flexible when these new ideas come along.

Rick H.

Steve I'm impressed with your idea of a sort of 'missile class' of pattern ships. I'm going to see if I can get hold of a Tiger Tail ll that's been around for many years. It might be salvadgeable with some work. It's got a piped OS .61 and Rhom's. Maybe more trouble than it's worth. Still I need to look into it to satisfy my curiousity. If we open up some classes in SPA and have a variety I think the organization might see greater growth and a positive growth at that.

Rick H.

This will nail the coffin on me for any hope of making an event this season.
I understand the reasons for the 4-cycle at Knoxville, and their SPA growth in general, I have a surpass II in my fleet, and I've been flying 4 cycles for probably 10+ years.......in my sport planes. I grew up with 2-cycles in my patternships, I really prefer them especially in these non-draggy classic patternships. That is what the planes were designed for, they're less expensive, and to me it just rekindles a feeling from my youth, they are in their purest form, classic pattern. A good, clean, precise maneuver is a good maneuver whether it's flown at 75mph, or 105mph.

I would like to go on record as saying I fully support everything the SPA is currently doing, I've recently sent in my dues, I'm talking about it at my field, I brought it up with my AMA district VP, I'm trying to get the word out there and raise awareness any way possible.

I live in Columbus, Ohio. With the current schedule, I can realistically drive to one event, Knoxville. Let's say I put together a Thunder Panzer with a muffled .61. Small plane, 61 should have plenty of power, even on a muffler. At 13krpm, I may still not be able to make the Knoxville sound requirement. So if I want to fly my one contest a year, I have to fly something I'm not that crazy about, which kinda puts a damper on the fun factor for me, which is why we all do this after all, correct?

The SPA needs to grow to continue on. There needs to be more choices available to the modeler. If the rules were augmented to allow pipes and retracts and the like for even one class, more flyers will come out of the woodwork. More flyers means more contests. More contests means broader growth and what is now a regional sensation could then become a national sensation. We get enough flyers that we get more contests, in more locations, we get more people interested in flying all classes, including the existing classes. Suddenly the older gentlemen at my field flying tower kaoses have a whole new group of friends to fellowship with at the contest that would never be possible without more flyers. With more flyers and interest we would all have more contests closer to our home bases where we wouldn't be bound at every field by a noise requirement that prohibits us from running what makes us happy.

Many of us have families, sometimes making db regs is cost prohibitive for many in this situation, which is one reason NSRCA pattern is dying. To make .91 4-cycle power from a 2 cycle 60 you need a pipe...really to even get close, you may still not exceed the thrust of the larger prop, but it levels the playing field considerably. This does not need to be expensive though, and can be done rather easily. For example, you would way undercut the price of that .91 4-cycle with say a GMS .61 for a whopping 79dollars, add a macs header and pipe and you're making similar pulling power at literally a fraction of the cost.....probably less than half. That is huge for many of us. With regard to retracts, if you can fly, you can fly. What we had in the 80s was judging that was used to seeing wheels up and the way those planes present, which was very advantageous to those of us that had retracts. In this modern day of SPA under my ideas, we'd all be flying in front of judges that are used to seeing all the classes, but one, fly gear down all day, so the judging will not be biased against seeing wheels. If you can do the maneuvers, you can do the maneuvers, and the judging would be fair.

What the SPA is trying so dearly to preserve is pure, and should be preserved, but I think that goal can be achieved and grown exponentially with some forward thinking, and a lot of flexibility from the real decision makers. If my proposals were implemented, or at least considered I feel that a lot of fresh blood would be brought to the SPA table, but more it would help to further grow a legacy that SPA has worked very hard to establish.

What I was proposing would never result in a competition betwen a piped Tipo and a Taurus, (although that is possible now under current SPA rules in Novice class). I was proposing a class of competition, call it "Evolution class", "high performance" or whatever. These would probably start at Sportsman, and all the high-performance planes would compete only against each other--NOT the current rules legal planes. There would be separate awards etc. This would keep current SPA rules intact, and would essentially EXPAND the SPA into a new high-performance class of aircraft. This could only be done at sites where noise levels are not an acute problem, (or the db limit could be posted in the contest flyer--no exceptions).

About 2-stroke engines. At Cave Spring, I was one of only 3 pilots there with a 2-stroke engine. The plane DID NOT have the vertical performance of the 4S-91, BUT, it had more than enough performance, (and I'm working on new prop combos to give better vertical) to do everything that was required of it. As I said in an earlier thread-I wanted to see what my humble Taurus could really do in the hands of an expert pilot. Cass Underwood went out there having never flown ANY Taurus, and proceeded to do beautiful 4-point, 8-point, slow rolls, knife edge, and even a figure M on the first try. That was on a regular OS .61FX with muffler. I'm sure the maneuver was not as LARGE as it would have been if my 2-stroke had been piped, but that's not the point. When judging precision maneuvers, the speed or size of the maneuver is not the most important thing--it's the grace, smoothness, and perfection that matters., as has been pointed out.

While we are waiting for a possible "high performance" SPA class, why not come out anyway with a muffled .61, while working on doing the maneuvers with a little less power. I know that traditional late 80s pilots would feel most comfortable competing as they always have--using the pipes and retracts, but I would ask them to give a regular muffled 2S a chance first, as I did--experience the meet, and make your final judgement about whether you had a good time and whether it was worth it later. Challenge is the name of the game. Why can't some of the challenge be to change perfect large maneuvers, into perfect smaller and slower maneuvers? Of course it may be easier to have a missle with unlimited vertical--but that doesn't mean it can't be done. I feel that's part of the skill challenge. Next season, depending on what happens, you may have something more suited to SPA with a 4Stroke--or a piped Tipo. But that's next season, and it's a long ways off. If you feel you MUST have the piped .61 to enjoy the experience--then I guess this year it's not going to happen.

Personally, I think if you have parallel classes for current SPA birds, and the evolution birds, you'll eventually see the evolution birds make the SPA birds extinct, which is what SPA is trying to avoid. Enough flyers will be lured out of the current SPA classes when they see the Evo planes that the current SPA classes won't be viable. This is why my proposal is to only have one upper level class flying the evolution birds. As an earlier poster said, in the early-mid 70s it was usually the upper classes that had the pipes and retracts anyway.

Regarding attending Knoxville, Steve B was nice enough to suggest bringing down my tipo even though it is too new under current SPA rules. I don't have a .61FX, but several club members do where I fly. The Rossi that's in my Tipo is quite a bit stronger with regards to RPM, and even on a muffler I'm skeptical it would make the Knoxville noise regs. I don't have noise monitoring equipment, and I'm not willing to drive 6.5hrs to find out I can't fly, nor am I willing to jeopardize an established and prominent club out of selfishness. In fact, if my Irvine .53 on a Jett Engineering muffler is a fair comparison, the piped Rossi is quieter than it would be on a free flowing muffler. I do run the Rossi "quiet" pipe, which has some packing. The Rossi carb venturi is very large to turn RPMs, the catch 22 is that I've found it needs more back pressure then a straight thru pipe provides for reliable throttle transition.

Honestly, I think since they allowed 4-cycles they should have allowed .61s to be piped (obviously where noise regs alllow) as well so the playing field was more level, though still not quite.

For the record, even the piped "missles" like my tipo, although close, aren't unlimited vertically, it's about flying smoothly to maintain energy. The 11" props just don't make the static thrust the .91s do.

Times have changed regarding building techniques and radio installations, and mostly battery technology. A lot of weight can be saved now compared to the old days. My current fleet of classic birds are all fiberglass and foam. While they are light for their day, a muffled .61 isn't going to pull an 8lb 65" plane thru very graceful 3 outside loops, and there is a point where the maneuver gets so small that it looks rushed, doesn't present well, thus doesn't score well. Just ask anybody from that era that ever had a motor go lean in a contest before that maneuver. I've tried it before on my daddy rabbit, back in 84' as I mentioned in an earlier thread, it didn't pull well then, and would be a waste of my time now. As I mentioned earlier, I enjoy the fun and fellowshipping as much as the next guy, but if I'm competing, I'm no different than anybody else, I want to do my best.

I'm not looking to cause trouble, I'm looking to create conversation about it. I said I'm willing to do what it takes to get a plane together for next year. The point is, there are many more potential flyers that aren't that SPA is missing out on. More options for flyers means bigger contests, more events, national expansion, national exposure....it's out there, if we're all willing to talk about it.

If you look back thru all the Classic Pattern threads, I'm certainly not the first guy to bring this up, and I won't be the last. There is a market for this "evolution class" and if SPA isn't willing to bend on it, I think eventually somebody will. We've seen fun fly events start to crop up geared toward this, and I think it's just he beginning, and I think SPA has a chance to hitch up it's wagon and ride.

Living in Ohio and growing up when I did, I lived in the mecca of the classic pattern era. We had Dave Brown, Don Lowe, Mark Radcliff, Mike McConville, Tony Frakowiak (sorry Tony if I butchered that), Mike Kline, Harry Rowe, and the list goes on. We had more contests per year in our district that you could count. You know, I looked up the NSRCA schedule yesterday and we have 2 contests in this state now, and it appears one may be canceled. NC used to have a bunch, this year they had none listed. To me, this means there are a lot of competition minded individuals out there that have been chased out by rising costs, unwillingness to fly the box, etc. There is just a whole group of guys that are waiting for something like this to happen so they can get back in the game. Thanks for listening,
Eric

Oh well, you can't blame me for looking for some means to meet you this year.

You may be right about the "extinction" thing. but if there is a compromise out there somewhere
that will not result in compromising the reason SPA was created--they will find it.

It could be that we are talking about apples and oranges, and the two are just different enough that they can't be mixed well. If that's the case, there is the probability that people will just have to come to a point where they can either accept and support SPA as it now stands, or, if there is enough grass-roots support, form their own organization without trying to combine them under one umbrella. There will always be people who prefer the simpler, lower speed pattern experience, and those who love to fly the high performance birds in competition. Back when I competed in the mid-80s, when I passed out of Novice, I just wasn't comfortable with the pressures placed on Sportsman and above to compete. Although I could appreciate watching a competition of high performance birds, I always preferred, and was challenged enough by the simpler planes, and slower speeds--it's not an "age" thing--it's a personality thing. My blood pressure would go up flying the h.p. planes. Some of the reason might be I never got to be all that proficient a pilot. With the h.p. planes, there was very little room for error, (ie I lost my Dirty Birdy in an inverted pass when it got too close to the ground--you know the rest).

For me, the 4S engines are a tremendous addition to the SPA competition, and I'm glad SPA uses them. It gives me the slower, constant speed that makes a maneuver graceful and enjoyable to me, yet it increases the vertical performance enough to allow effortless larger maneuvers.

Maybe you can appreciatle what is good about each, and fly both, (if a BPA-[B for ballistic] goup is formed). Or perhaps a compromise can be reached that will satisfy everyone, and piped flying can be part of an SPA event. At least this thread can be printed out, and used as a basis for discussion of the issue in the future.

Hope to see you someday.

Remember---Don Lowe used to fly SPA planes, (and has recently), then he moved on to pipes and retracts, then on to turnaround. He can do it all, and enjoy it all.

Interesting reading. I started flying pattern in 1973 at age 15 with a Super Kaos .40 with a non-schnuerle ported OS 40. Progressed to a Kaos .40 with an OS .40FSR then a Super Kaos .60 with an OS .60FSR. The Kaos .60 had fixed gear and was all monokote - very light for the era - with the OS .60FSR it seemed like I'd never want more power.... I've flown 'current' pattern aircraft ever since. I still love the 'missiles' of the '75-'85 era (I have a Curare and an Arrow kit); even more I love the simplicity of .60 sized pattern ships. I have an MK Super VR-90 with a Hanno special with an APC 13x10 prop which can fly the current FAI sequences very nicely AND its cheap to operate and easy to transport!
As for the piped .60 versus the 4-stroke .90 issue in the SPA I think noise reduction reason is pretty logical and I'll bet there isn't any noise testing at the SPA contests. It's easy to get great performance from a 2-stroke .60/.61 without breaking the sound barrier - run more prop and a longer pipe. Keep the pitch up and you'll have loads of horizontal speed and vertical, too. I've run apc 12x10 and 11x11 on my OS .61VF with great success. Back around 1980 I had a Deception with a YS .60FR running a 10.5x7.5 zinger. LOTS of speed and LOTS of noise - I don't miss the noise!
I hope the SPA finds away to add an 'unlimited' type class with piped .60s (and retracts, too), but I think a noise restriction is an acceptable compromise. 93DBA at 25 feet is pretty easy to achieve (is that over grass or asphalt??)
Happy Flying,
Will B.

KingAltair, I hope to meet you one day too. All good thoughts on your part. I honestly feel there is room for both under the SPA umbrella, and I think it would only be shot in the arm for the SPA. I guess I just really want to see this pre-turnaround stuff succeed, in a BIG way, like the old days. 15 flyers in sportsman alone meant I had a good chance of not holding up the basement! I really like what they are doing, and all the planes they are flying. Plans landed on my doorstep this afternoon, and I can't wait to see which fits my needs the best. The curare is so close in design to the tipo I've been flying for 20 years in seems like the easy pick, but once I got into the research of the designs, I ordered 6 sets of plans and will ponder a bit. Then if they do bend on the rules, I'll have planes for both classes covered. The King Altair is one awesome looking plane I'll admit, and it's proportions look right on for the use of the .91s. I think with Wing Mfg. on the cusp of releasing the phoenix 5&6 in fiberglass and foam, among other F&F patternships, the timing for the pipe and retract class in SPA couldn't be better.

ALL,

I have been following this thread with interest for some time. I'm an old pattern guy and would love to see SPA or even BPA catch on across the country. I would like to share a thought on the 4 stroke vs 2 stroke issue. In my mind there is no question that a .91 4 stroke is a clear advantage to a muffled .60, so why not allow the use of muffled .90's. OS and Magnum both have them with .60 size cases. I am assuming ( we all know what that means) that a muffled .60 and muffled .90 will produse roughly the same db reading.

Mike

I believe the traditional thinking is that a 2S .61 is roughly equivalent to a 4S .91, (based on what you always see on the side of the kit box), although for aerobatics I agree that's not the case in reality..

In addition to the obvious choice of 4S engines, (no air chambers, supercharging, or oversized carbs), for noise reduction--everybody quickly took full advantage of the "verical advantage". Don't let the "SENIOR" part of SPA fool you--guys out there love to compete, and will take every advantage within the rules to get a performance edge, including 30% heli fuel. The main difference between the old AMA patterns, and SPA is the deliberate decision to limit and specify engine type, and landing gear configuration. This creates a natural "technology leveling effect", and performance ceiling, (which I believe to be more than adequate). The emphasis is then shifted to flying skill rather than "pressing the envelope" technology-wise.

4 Strokes are pretty much entrenched in the psyche of the contestants. I had one of only three 2S at the meet I attended. There was a certain 2-Stroke comaraderie out there, and we fancied ourselves as the purists. The 2-Stroke is what I am most familiar with, and the sound is the one I associate most with the original SPA era--but as you say, vertical performance isn't competitive.

Personally I would love making muffled 90s legal to "even-up" 2S and 4S performance, but that might open up a real "can of worms" I'm afraid. If a muffled 90's performance exceeded a .91 4S, there would be the inevitable push to 4S 100s or 120s.

It sounds like a good idea, but it would alter the deliberate decision made "back when" that makes SPA so unique.

Gentlemen

DynaThrust is a muffler. Gain using them can be as much as 1500 rpm. We've had guys experiment with them on YS61s but couldn't get them to idle reliably. On a modern 61, that might be the ticket.

11x9 four blade might also be a solution. Not loud, but they sure pull on the 4s. Rs are about 10,800 on the ground on the 4s.

93 db at 25 feet is the IMAC standard and not hard to meet.

I hope you are referring to the ULTRATHRUST muffler sold by Performance Specialties---'cuz I just ordered one for my O.S. FX.61. The guy over there said you need to use a longer chambered muffler than the one normally made for a .61 if you are going to swing a larger prop than maybe a 12X6---or it won't "needle". That may be the cause of the idle problems you mentioned. I have thus far had best results with a 13X6 APC prop--let's see what this will do for $70---it's only money --right??

BTW-Guy says "...you use it--it's yours...". I'll let you all know.

It was a beautiful weekend for flying up here. Had the tipos out both days. I don't feel so bad going back to work tomorrow after getting a full weekend fix.

No doubt the Tipo is a pretty, nicely proportioned plane, though I never have owned or flown one. I wonder if one, (ie Tipo), could be converted to a 4S, or at least a 2S with performance muffler? No--No--don't go "ballistic" on me----I wasn't talking about THOSE Tipos, (marriage made in heaven etc etc)--just thinking in general terms.

I DO HAVE a Super Curare with a .61 O.S. FX that is my current "back-up" plane to the Taurus in Novice. It flies nicely, though I'm sure not as fast as you'd like or expect--but enough for my purposes. I mostly want vertical--not so much interested in speed.

Just re-read eness76-RCU's comments earlier about wing loading, and sluggish performance of the Curare and Tipo during slow flight. Like I said, I haven't been around Tipos much, and at least to me, the picture made the wings look like they had more area than they must have, (and the airfoil must be thinner as well).

Jamie--If you're out there-----you were flying a Dirty Birdy at Cave Spring-correct? If so, did it have a 4S, and how did it fly on one. The Dirty Birdy was originally designed with a 2S in mind, (probably with tuned pipe also). It's a fast plane, even without a pipe. I remember I had to make long approaches, and keep the speed up.

Not me!!, the only thing going ballistic is the tipo!! I'm sure one could be converted to 4-cycle. They're fiberglass, so if you were starting from an old kit you'd probably have to mount the firewall a little aft of indicated. It would be very similiar to the SPA guys flying the curare. They use the same wing cores I do know that. The tipo is a modified Curare basically. Dick Hanson made a few changes here and there. Our Tipos have the old style strip ailerons, so at slower speed the roll become really mushy, but I'm sure a set of barndoors more like the modern pattern planes would solve that. The airfoil is fairly thin, but the design overall is very clean. I've been practicing SPA Expert with it for a few weeks, and the plane absolutely screams on the downlines....top hat, etc. We have a phoenix 8 as well, and it is much slower on the downlines than these. Overall though, at slower speeds, these do feel heavy in the air. I'm guessing since the Curares are wood fuses, you could lighten them up more than these and start to swing the wingloading in a more favorable direction for slower flight. It's not that I'm a speed junky, heck look at my avatar, that UCD certainly is no screamer, especially with a 15x4. My point with these planes and the pipes is that in era they were designed, pattern was flown a little hotter than earlier...or later for that matter. It's all fun, that's all that counts! I'm sure a muffler would work, just less power.

Guys

I'm covering the first of the lightened wood Curares now. We'll see what kind of difference the weight makes. I do know that at 8 lbs, the one I'm flying is an absolute rock in the wind. It just stays where I put it (whether it's right or not, unfortunately).

The bigger prop on the 4s helps the downlines a lot.

The firewall needs to go back a little over an inch to mount a 4s in a fiberglass fuse. The engine will fit nicely mounted inverted. A remote glow driver helps a bunch if you're doing tricycle gear.

To build wood fuses, I've had to widen the firewall and the two formers. When using 1/4" sides, I had to widen 1/2". By using 1/8" sides, I saved a quarter. If I hung the engine on sideways, it would fit the original width, but would leave a huge lump hanging off the side. I like the looks of the inverted mount for the 4s.