I don't know if this already been answered, but why aren't retracts allowed to be used in SPA? Couldn't it at least be optional for all of us that don't have more than we can handle in problems in our lives?

As I dig deeper I'll probably be posting more questions. At least until someone tells me where to go with them...lol.

Thank you

Retracts were banded by rule when SPA was formed because they were expensive and complicated at the time(1991). The premise of SPA was to keep everything simple and cheap. No retracts. No pipes. No supercharging. Everyone ran side exhaust 61s. About 1995, 4 strokes were allowed because one of the principle clubs involved at the time got into a noise situation. Since then, 4 strokes have become dominant.

I've always maintained that anyone can be allowed to carry the weight penalty of retracts, they just can't fold them up in the air.

Then it would be bitt strange too put retracts in iff u can`t fold them up.Then it`s only when you fly at home that you use them maybe because when you want to train the program you can`t fold them up because then it fly`s different.

Or am I missing something here?

Erik

The trim may be differant. Retracts were mostly for speed.

I probably should refrain from throwing in my opinion since I haven't yet joined the SPA. But from what I read about current SPA competition it seems like most pilots are after slower speeds, higher torque and larger props for braking, hence the .91 Surpass popularity. Since the benefit of retracts - speed as Sport_Pilot said - doesn't seem to be what SPA pilots are after I wonder how many would use them if they were allowed. The other side of that coin is the philosophy thing of trying to prevent the SPA from requiring $1200 models in order to compete. But then again, a pneumatic tri-gear set can be had for only $150.

Is there at least some consideration for this rule to be changed in the future? I'd like to not have retracts on my planes that I can't use during the contest. I don't remember Blue Angel's, Curare's, Mach One's, UFO's... not having retracts when I was growing up.

Retracts are what make pattern planes really cool anyway, right? The idea of keeping it "Cheap & Simple" doesn't seem to stand up when you are allowing high torque 4 strokes that turn the bigger props anyway. If folks are out to slow them down, then just go ahead and fly all the current turn around sequences. SPA is supposed to be the "Glory Days". What top pilots were flying 4 strokes at the 75 World Champs?

I mean really, should anyone be allowed a "10" take off without a sweet looking tricycle landing gear folding up ever so slowly into the belly of an old slick pattern ship? It's like watching a 747 lift off!

Joe W.

[quote]ORIGINAL: vellum2

Retracts are what make pattern planes really cool anyway, right? The idea of keeping it "Cheap & Simple" doesn't seem to stand up when you are allowing high torque 4 strokes that turn the bigger props anyway. If folks are out to slow them down, then just go ahead and fly all the current turn around sequences. SPA is supposed to be the "Glory Days". What top pilots were flying 4 strokes at the 75 World Champs?

I mean really, should anyone be allowed a "10" take off without a sweet looking tricycle landing gear folding up ever so slowly into the belly of an old slick pattern ship? It's like watching a 747 lift off!

Joe W.

K.I.S.S.

They could make a special class where retracts and tuned pipes are allowed for the guys that want to spent a bit more and have a "real" pattern ship.But that`s allready been said a few times before here.Nothing beats the sight and sound off a pattern ship coming on the pipe and making some speed.

On the other hand you guys should be lucky there is something like the SPA. Here in the Netherlands they just moved on and almost all guys forgot these beautiful planes.
And sound has a lot to do with it here because it is so full off people here that there`s always one guy/women complaning about the noise

I think there is a simple answer... form the MAPA Organizaton, which stands for "Middle Aged Pattern Association". Make MAPAs rules revolve around what you want it to be... piped .60s with retracts. Get folks to join, hold contests and grow the interest.

That is what SPA has done. They created what they wanted and did it. Now you can too!

Here's a bit of irony. Since I'm pretty sad with a tx in my hands I can fly any plane I want in today's novice class, retracts, pipe or whatever. For those who are "handicapped" by being extraordinary pilots, well, I guess you're stuck with either 2-meter planes or the SPA legal stuff.

Lou has given you your answer!

Simple one liner too! Simply "roll your own".

I loved the retracts and hated those #*&#@!& pipes.
Yes I flew them but I hated them with a passion.

As far as the comment about take off and gear retraction ------ I only remember seeing that once as the usual was to call 'complete' on take off, ----- retract, ---- and then call the next maneuver. That way all unintentional 'bumps' were eliminated.

Who was it who did the retract sequence during the take off judging ------- Don Lowe at the Masters in Springfield OH ----about '77 give or take a couple of years. He flew one of his Phoenix 'clan' A/C and didn't bump a thing!

The reaction of the other fliers was interesting ----- everyone watching broke out in applause!

I hardly attended every contest at the Masters level back then ----- but that is the only time I ever witnessed gear retraction during the judged take off maneuver.

SPA isn't for everyone. I think that they've got it right!
Even though I like retracts (and still have two sets from 'back then').

I'm one of those folks who would hit the switch just as it caught flight - and yes it was a judged maneuver. Then again, I was still flying retracts until this past June... (and still would be if I could clear these enormous props!) Good point with creating another league altogether, but that might just lead to more splintering of the sport. I think the SPA is great and have considered dusting off some of the old birds I have hanging around. Maybe next year...

Joe W.

I agree,
I'm building new for SPA for next year but both will be four cycles and switched to TD's.

Anyone who thinks a four cycle can't stay with a piped .61 hasn't been tuning their fourcycles very well nor choosing the 'magic' prop either. Trust me, they've got it without all that infernal screaming.

I guess, while having loved my , Merco's, Tigers (I have a special reverence for Tigers), Webra's Backheads and Speeds ---- even the Dynamix, Kraft's Webra, Ross's and lastly (I hope NEVER to even see ANOTHER) a Rossi .61 on an OPS pipe.

Lots of my fellow competitors swore by their Rossi/OPS set ups. Steve Helms being one, but that set up and I did NOT have a love affair going.
As best I can remember I gave the whole thing (Rossi and OPS pipe) away just to get it out of my sight.

I have good memories of the thousands of flights put in on those two cycles but today I can make the four cycles talk to me ------- and they have a much more pleasant exhaust note.

If there is any lack of performance vs. what you younger folks refer to as ballistic pattern ---- (back then WE did not call it that) you'll have to show me as I can do loops which rocket into (almost) the stratosphere. My current ship (my own desgn CAP) will easily accelerate out of sight vertically ------ except you've got to knock that off to keep orientation.
I started Pattern in the very early sixties when a .45 was considered BIG.

But to each his own ---- it is a hobby to be enjoyed ---- and you place your own definition on that.

Every other two cycle mentioned I could get to eat from my hand ----- the Rossi simply gave me unending grief! They may be great engines ------ but for someone else please!

When I was little I used to love watching my dad raise the gear on his Compensator immediately after takeoff, it always made me smile. And that plane wouldn't have looked quite as cool to me without that shiny pipe running down the side of the fuse. Retracts and tuned pipes were what separated pattern planes from regular sport planes back in the day. Hell, until I am able to afford something better I'm still competing in AMA Intermediate with my YS .61-powered, retract-having, rocket of a pattern ship. I didn't do so hot in the last contest I went to, but considering the Friday before it started I hadn't flown ANY plane in over 7 years, I was pleased with the progress I made throughout the weekend. I guess my point is that I think retracts and pipes should be allowed... pull out an old rule book and use the same engine/plane size limitations from the 70's, extend to allow designs up to 78 or 80, and the SPA would grow by leaps and bounds. Heck, you might even be able to get people interested in pattern who are avoiding it mainly because of the cost. Not everyone has $400+ dollars to throw out on an engine just because they think it's needed to be competitive, but if they could pick up an old Bridi kit, or something similar, slap a cheap .60 with a pipe, and go flying... All said and done they could get a plane in the air competing in the SPA when they would have a hard time getting past Intermediate in today's pattern.

I feel sort of like an outsider, but I'm really enjoying reading these posts. R/C was deemed way to expensive by my dad when I was a teen in the '70s. But he did buy me a brand new Yami YZ 80, so go figure. I'm basically building what appeals to me. If it's not allowed in SPA or noncompetitive in todays style that's fine. If i decide to compete then I don't see any problem in building something suited to the rules.

Here, here! I have a Phoenix 8 and an OS Max .61 RF! Break out the Hobbypoxy 2 and let's get those wing skins on those cores! I would love to see an SPA division for piped/retract pattern planes from that era. SPA would grow, and the cost would be no more than the prices paid for most of the SPA designs, which, in my opinion, are not inexpensive. I should know, I tried to sell some of the glass fuse/foam core SPA kits a few years ago...
GPB.

I certainly don't want to see a splintered pattern group, that's not my intention. Was thinking more of an "open" class. Retracts, slightly older (younger) designs (nothing "modern" like, maybe 3 more years) and older (younger) motors. Make a db limit (if not already one) so to keep the screamers at bay. I know I have more research to do before I even compete, but the Trouble Maker and Miss Norway will both have retracts, even if we can't use them. Not sure how many more a class like this might bring in, but there are 3 of us here that are ready to join in the fun.

Regarding Aerobatics - we have an AMA Pattern SIG, a Scale Aerobatics SIG, and a Senior Pattern SIG. We also have FAI. There are many factions, which are basically distinct and separate from each other. Can they be or should they be united? Is it easier to try to unite them or create another division with another flavor for 70-80s pattern planes? I don't know.

I do know that the real question is this.... "should we create a class and see if folks will come, or do we try the idea by flying some 'demo' competitions to see if there are enough participants to support it". I favor the latter. If you feel there is enough support for a Piped .60, retract class, develop a contest schedule and see if folks participate.

The way things happen is that someone has to make them happen. I don't think you can ask a special interest group to expand their special interest to include yours. You have to do it for yourself and the others who feel the same way you do.

I fall into the same category as Raineday. I am building what I like and not necessarily for competition. May compete in SPA, may not, just enjoying how the older planes fly now.

I believe this has been tried at a few contests. Steve Byrum could confirm that, if he would jump in here. IIRC, there was lots of noise made about pipes and retracts being a big sticking point for a lot of people. So one of the CD's made a special "hot rod" class for the later planes. Only a handful of people signed up for the class. So, when all was said and done, nothing happened due to lack of participation. This happens all the time, lots of people talk about it and then when the time comes to do it, only a small percentage actually show. I'm not slagging anyone, it's just the nature of people and group events like this. But it sure is tough to get something off the ground because of it.

As for the noise issue, there is no way to make a screaming piped 60 quiet. It is not possible to turn an 11" prop at 15k+ rpm without making a LOT of noise. This is part of why pattern went to big props and lower rpm as the noise limit came down. Simple physics says it can't be done.


Mark

I'm totally confused why pipes and retracts are almost always grouped together in any discussion. One is in no way dependent on the other.

There is a very clear reason - understandable by all - why pipes are an issue: noise.

Retracts don't make noise and today you can buy a Tower .61 (very happy with an APC 11x10 or 12x8) and the new Robart 520 series tri-gear, spring-down, pneumatic retracts (I have them in my UFO and they are nice quality, all metal units, see my build thread for pictures) for $224.98. Or the same engine and a two-gear, main set for $209.98 if you want a tail dragger setup. An OS .91 Surpass is $249.99. (these are Tower prices) So, it's not really about keeping it affordable anymore. That's exactly what I did. I bought the Tower .61 and the 520 tri-gear set. When Spring Airs are on sale you can go that way for about $25 more. That's right at the same cost of the Surpass.

I'm just saying, the two issues should be discussed seperately. Clumping pipes together with retracts in the same discussion doesn't make sense to me.

Fair enough. I was only commenting on what has gone before, but you are correct that they are (or can be) separate issues that can be dealt with independently. I think the reason they are linked is that the screaming fast planes all used retracts as well. But all the retract equipped planes are not necessarily running piped engines. Ones like the Dirty Birdy, UFO, Kwik-Fly, etc.


Mark

I don't think so. It is what the members want it to be as they vote for the rules. If you don't like them then join and propose a differant set, or start you own ballistic pattern club.

Think about this. For those who started pattern from the begining, then the "glory days" were when the USA team would always win. That is before retracts and tuned pipes. So for them a real pattern airplane does not have retracts and pipes.

Mark, I wasn't really pointing at you with my comments, so I hope I didn't sound argumentative. I do see the relationship between the two since they were typically used together to achieve a common goal. I guess I was mainly stressing that retracts don't make a plane louder and they don't make a plane more expensive. They can make a plane more complicated and high-maintenance, however. But, if an individual pilot doesn't mind the pre-flight testing and tinkering, then why should that matter to others?