Would like to start a thread to see what flyers around the country think about "classic" or "vintage" pattern planes and flying, and how (or if?) this should be conducted in an organized fashion nation wide. The SPA and BPA have both made great efforts in this direction, and I salute the hard work and accomplishments of each. Could older, light weight, constant speed designs be covered under the same set of rules with later ballistic types? I have a personal fondness for both types, but some people have strong feelings about one vs the other.
Again, I want to emphasize that it isn't my purpose to in any way undermine the progress or efforts of the SPA or BPA - just to stimulate some discussion on rules, competition formats, etc. What do you guys think?

Don’t forget the Vintage RC Society. They have a nostalgia category for 35 year old pattern aircraft. The 35 year rule is a sliding window that changes every year.

Here's one way (that really just re-states existing groups):
engine displacement up to .45 (non-schnuerle ported) - or vintage
engine displacement up to .61 (non-schnuerle ported) - SPA
engine displacement up to .61 (anything goes) - BPA
engine displacement .62 - 1.20 This is really the other part of the BPA which I think has a design cut-off of 1996
engine displacement 1.21 and above - currently not part of the BPA, but there are a lot of designs (post 1996) that are no longer considered competitive (but probably are, at least in the lower classes) or there are pilots that would like to compete at a less rigorous level than FAI or AMA

The underlying goal seems to be to provide a competitive outlet for the older pattern designs. Every year more airplanes fall into the 'dated' category. Who knows, 20 years from now there may be a special category just for Oxai airplanes

How about anything up to before the 4 strokes were allowed/took over?

Terry in LP

I thinki it is great that SPA has done well except... I think the planes should be allowed as they were from thier era. If it had a pipe and retracts, it should be allowed.


Jeff

Since SPA doesn't allow pipes or retracts I've never really understood the 1975 cutoff. Planes in the late '70s and early '80s were getting bigger and heavier. Flying an EU1-A, a Brushfire or an XLT with a non-piped, side exhaust sixty is not an advantage over flying a smaller Curare or Dirty Birdy with the same engine. In fact, it would probably be a handicap since these later planes need the extra power of the hotter rear exhaust piped engines to fly their best. Does that make sense? I mean, if I had to use a side exhaust, non-piped sixty I probably wouldn't choose an 850 sq." design. Right? So, what practical effect does the '75 cutoff serve?

Just my own thoughts and opinion.

david

I agree 100% with everything you said, however I don't believe the planes you cite above were designed and flown before 1976, and are therefore not SPA-legal. I know the EU1-A and XLT are definitely not. You prove the arguement for a 1975 cut-off. The planes of the late 70s WERE hotter....the race for higher performance aircraft with hotter engines was definitely on by then. To answer NXTDOOR above, SPA is about "simple and inexpensive" competition with the emphasis on "simple"not high-performance. That's why STOCK engines, (whether 4-stroke or 2-stroke), and wire landing gear is the rule, even if the original designer included them. The highest level competitors always had the latest thing, (ie retracts), but they were not common in all level of competition until a little later.

The cut-off date is arbitrary, but in general, the planes designed AFTER 1975 ARE bigger, heavier, and DO REQUIRE a pipe to get the needed performance on a 60. Many of the planes designed after 1970 or so had retracts, but most still had the stock muffler.

Both the Dirty Birdy or Curare come near the end of the "legal" SPA period, and are sort of "transition planes" happy either WITH or WITHOUT the retracts and pipe.

Duane

Just an additional thought. The planes you mention were early BPA-era planes. They had to fly on rear-exhaust pipes and retracts to get that performance. The flying style is also somewhat different, hence the name BALLISTIC PATTERN, with much faster average speeds, and larger maneuver size. The SPA planes on an OS 4-stroke can approach the large maneuver size of the BPA planes, but they still fly slower, more constant speed maneuvers.

I had the unique opportunity to observe both types of planes together and back-to-back last year at the first BPA contest. It was a real mix of the old and new(er). The 4-strokes on most of the SPA planes allowed them to perform larger maneuvers along with the BPA-vintage planes, (although somewhat slower). Without the 4-stroke, maneuver size would have had to be smaller.

BPA rules are less restrictive...even allowing brand new designs to compete if they are within wingspan and engine limitations. BPA is all about performing the older style non-turnaround pattern maneuvers with high-performance planes and engines (with a pipe), retracts, and with all of the characteristic sights and sounds that go with them.

I think "Vintage" or "Classic" pattern is divided into these two distinct eras, (Antique SPA 1962-1966, General SPA 1966 or so until 1-1-76, and BPA from the early 70s until 1996), and although there is some overlap, the January 1976 cutoff date seems about right as the division between the two.

Duane

Hi Duane, please reread my post. My point is that the non-legal, post '76 designs that I cited could, in fact, be at a disadvantage to early '70s designs when using the same side exhaust, non-piped sixties. The three planes I listed are all after the SPA cutoff, are larger and were designed around more powerful piped RE sixties.

To put it another way... suppose the SPA cutoff was 1980. But, you were still limited to using a side exhaust, non-piped sixty. I'll bet most pilots would still choose to build the smaller, lighter designs of the early '70s. So, having the '75 cutoff doesn't really "level" the field that much, does it? Image trying to compete with a contemporary 2M design using an older 120 4-stroke. You just don't see people doing that. Why? Because the latest pattern models have been designed to fly with the power of 140's and 170's.

Thanks,
David

Please don't get me wrong I love what the SPA has done and is doing now. Without them I strongly believe that Classic Pattern would pretty much be dead today, and I would most likely not be active R/C right now. However, I really don't think that the money spent on these (SPA and BPA) is a factor with the average modelers by todays standards. Just look at how much money is invested in ONLY electronic entertainment equipment in the average house hold for a child under the age of 10. I think most would be surprized.
If a modeler is starting in competetion, they would be flying in the novice class, where flying skills would attribute more than the landing gear or the exhaust used in the plane.

Personally I would like to see the day the SPA and BPA merge into one group. To me it just makes sense from a contest stand point to be able to have more contestants to spark interest with the public. I completely understand why some members would resist this to preserve the style and models to that era. But competitivly speaking, the radios would have the most impact. Not the engines. Have you guys looked into the features of a 14MZ? It's insane.

My primary concern is preserving Classic Pattern as a whole. I'm 40 and it seems that I am in the younger crowd here. That is not too good for the future of these planes. My primary concern is preserving Classic Pattern as a whole. The only way to do that is to get younger people involved in these designs. After all it IS about the planes. The addition of retracts or efficient scavaging exhaust is related to the plane a lot less than the servos, batteries or the transmitter in the pilots hands.


DM

A couple things to respond to points made by Dave and DM.

Actually it's NOT PRIMARILY about the planes.........it's about BASIC, SIMPLE COMPETITION with vintage planes. SPA values BASIC above everything else, (I agree the expense is not the primary arguement it might have been in the late 70s through 90s when you had to have a high performance plane to be competitive). Still pipes and retracts for the purpose of increasing performance is NOT BASIC...or as basic and inexpensive as it could be. As an aside... use of the 4-stroke was because of noise limitations, not to increase perormance, (however it had that side-effect).

We have chosen to stick to a certain era before pipes and retracts became popular among all competitors at all levels above Novice. The cut-off date for that period is 1-1-76. As was pointed out, planes that came in the late 70s had to have the added equipment to perform well. The playing field is level because we purposely limited 1)engine size, 2)landing gear type to simple wire, and 3)performance enhancing equipment. The cost is as low as any other plane at the Sunday field. There will be no change in the SPA cut-off date, as there was recently in VR/CS bacause we already have a wide variety of legal planes we need to have the competition style we want.

Competition is NOT age-related.....it is common to ALL AGES. You can have a heck of a lot of fun, and get your blood pumping while standing in front of the judges and running through the pattern with simple SPA-legal planes. Once folks of ANY age come out and try it, they like it and keep coming back. We have many people in their 20s, and 30s, (and some teens) getting involved because they love it....the competition. The fact that the plane design was before their time doesn't matter. To them it's a new design...but it's about the basic competition. The name "Senior" in Senior pattern might be a bit misleading. Maybe it should be "Vintage Pattern Association". There are a lot of older guys who actually flew the early planes in competiton, but SPA is not dependant on them...it's dependant on new people coming out and trying out the concept of precision aerobatics in a contest setting. That's why I wrote my two articles for Model Aviation.

As I said above, SPA and BPA planes DO fly differently. Ballistic is ballistic. So although the different era planes CAN fly back to back, we feel most comfortable with equal performance planes competing together.

Maybe someday SPA and BPA will somehow merge. If so, the SPA rules, (and the basic concept it was founded on) will need to be rewritten to reflect flying a certain type of pattern instead of "...simple and basic...". I don't expect the cut-off date to change in the foreseeable future, nor do I expect SPA to abandon the rules it was founded on any time soon.

Duane

The original SPA rules had a date back earlier when I first started. I believe cutoff was 1972. And if my braincells are accurate, it was to the point where an original Kaos was permitted, but a Super Kaos was not legal.

The organization eventually expanded the time frame to the mid 1970s to capture a few more popular designs (I think that change came in 1996).

Of note, Rhett Miller originally flew the Compensator with a muffler. And I believe the original Curare was flown with a muffler as well. So from this perspective the 1975 cutoff/pipe/engine stuff is about the right balance.

I enjoyed flying the SPA events. Was a challenge and was a lot of fun. Simple, cheap, no complexity. Just fun. Perhaps I will get down to one sometime again soon.

SPA is SPA. It is a good formula. The only way to ruin a good event is to seriously mess with a tested and successful formula.

Using another formula and another event structure is easy to do. The BPA is a good start at that concept. But it is a very different type of event.

If Classic Pattern really "is about the planes," I need to say that the BPA style of airplane appeals most to me as a newcomer. I like noise and speed (and retracts and anything else that helps the plane appear sleek and attractive).

I've never competed in pattern, but I'm not against the idea. However, I know I don't like the modern pattern rules (with noise limitations) and would like to visit fields where BPA style of flying is performed.

I guess I don't know enough about SPA and BPA basic philosophies to pick and choose which aspects I want.

I have competed in R/C Combat, Quickee 500 and Sailplane racing enough to know that complexity (on the part of the airplane) usually only hurts the competitor himself. If one has retracts and pipes, and can't "dial them in" so they are reliable on the day of the event, that's his fault and he should have considered a simpler setup. So if you consider "keeping it simple" as a matter of rules designed to protect the competitor from himself, I dont' really see the point in that, other than it keeps the overall stress level (of ALL competitors) lower as it lowers the least common denominator (ie, everybody is "dumbed down"). A dedicated competitor who relishes complexity will have an advantage but only if he has the skills to go along with mastering the complexity. In that light, the advantage is deserved IMO.

I was toying of getting an SPA legal plane together, but was dismayed that my first choice of engine (the YS 110) would not be allowed in a 60 size plane (Kaos, or other plane of that size) which would have yielded a really fun airplane to practice with. My second choice (Saito 100) was also too large, so I never pursued the idea beyond dreaming.

Thanks for the reply....you managed to get my point across with a lot less words.

In some ways, the "SPA Experience" as I call it is hard to describe. We are a "family" of sorts. Getting together for contests is a little like a family reunion, but because of leaders like Bruce Underwood, there is a real effort put forth by the membership to welcome newcomers, and a high value is placed on the individual having a good time.

During my first couple contests, people came by just to ask if I was enjoying myself. I was disappointed with my flying, and I was told very quickly that having a good time is where it's atflying well and maybe winning something is "gravy".

This has nothing to do with what is "Classic", but we've already talked a lot about that.

The VR/CS folks are also a good group, but "pattern competition" is a very small part of the emphasis there, so I lean toward SPA because my first love is pattern....practicing and performing those maneuvers..then talking about them, comparing notes, and going back up there to work on them some more.

Asheville SPA is July 12-13-see you there-you're more than welcome to come down and get together again.

Duane

An OS .91 4-stroke is plenty of power for what we do. An original Kaos is a small plane. That would probably be too much engine for it. We have pilots fly with different versions of the Kaos, the Dirty Birdy, Daddy Rabbit, Phantom, (and of course the King Altair.....although with that plane a bigger engine would be nice. You have to manage airspeed on the King).

If you can get a hold of the July 2007 Model Aviation, it describes a lot about us, how and why things are as they are.

Duane

Not being very competition minded, I'm partial to the low-tech, pre-tuned pipe period in pattern ship development. Side exhaust, muffler equipped two strokes that swing small diameter props at high RPMS. This allows you to use authentic non-lengthened tricycle landing gears. Fixed or retractable gear - I guess I could go either way. Initially, I wouldn't bother with the complexity of retracts.

Tom

There are many competitive-minded people that still prefer the simplicity of the early planes. Even though they are basic, the early pattern planes will still perform. ANY pattern plane is still beautiful to watch in the hands of somebody who practices. They may be 40+ years old in some cases, but a "pattern plane" is still a pattern plane...they go right where you point them, and if set up properly fly smooth as silk. I especially like the way my King Altair flys...like a 2-meter plane years ahead of its time IMHO.

Look at Don Lowe's original Phoenix 1 in the attachment. This plane has rubber bands, control surfaces that were STITCHED on, (if you can believe it), and music wire landing gear...yet it flew fast and was beautiful to watch.

Personally I'm happy without some of the later "advances"...it's all what you were used to flying. People that came along in the 70s and 80s want the retract/tuned pipe experience...it's what "floats their boat". Even back in the 80s, I loved the beauty of aerobatics properly done, but DIDN"T feel comfortable with the speed. I'd have a sigh of relief every time I got it back in one piece. For me, slower gives me more time to think and relax.

The great thing about RC is the variety...there is something for everyone, and you can go to where you're most comfortable. Personally I'm most comfortable with SPA-style vintage pattern planes, but I enjoy watching the BPA planes in the hands of someone else.

cool picture!!

gary

i have no pattern experience. my 1st plane was a trainer about 1980 or so. i flew a lot in the early 90's and then left the hobby until about 3 yrs ago. online research brought me to rcuniverse, the beauty of the planes in the classic pattern forum stopped me dead in my tracks. i stopped any forays into other types of rc planes when i found this forum. however, i don't like to see wheels. i'm not a good enough pilot to fly ballistic pattern but i can fly a plane with a pipe and retracts at senior pattern speed and enjoy my plane more because i don't see the wheels. i just like retracts.

david

From 1969 to date, I’ve only built a couple of pattern aircraft with fixed gear and each time I did it I was thoroughly disappointed with the results. I learned my lesson on the last one and thank goodness for the fine folks at Spring Air and their excellent quality $149. retracts!

there's not much else on a plane that's not used up in the air except wheels. besides, a full bore pass down the runway just looks better without wheels hanging out. i was attracted to the classic pattern forum because of the looks of the planes and that includes not seeing wheels. however i don't begrudge someone who builds a plane with wire axles and wheels. i'm just stating my preference. i like football, baseball, boats, tall busty blondes and planes with retracts. that's not too difficult i don't think.

david

I've always been a 61 two stroke guy, even flew turnaround with 60 size Cursor's and Boxers an eclipse and others. But I have to admit that the help I received with my 91 four stroke on the WM Intruder showed what I had been missing. I do understand the SPA way of thinking. I have the Magnum 91fs and running 20% CP Heli it is a real powerhouse. Easy to tune and dead bone reliable. When into 61's I had Webras then FSRs and finally OS Hanno's with the Hatori or Carbon fiber pipes. These were also very relaible and easy to tune AFTER the initial setup. The problem is strictly the cost of that setup vs the Magnum or OS 91fs. Uses the out of the box muffler and makes huge maneuvers easy at relativly low speeds. I do believe in retracts as a matter of personal preference and will build all my new aircraft for them (left down for contest work). I still have 6 Webra 61 BH's and 5 OS Hanno's in the shop all in running shape. I think that the classic era should include the SPA Antique era, the SPA era and the BPA era aircraft. The biggest change to the pattern events was the change to the turnaround format and that seems to be the end of the classic era.

The modern SPA format is very encouraging to the novice pilot who wants to do pattern without "spending the motherlode" for an even modestly competitive AMA type ship. We ghad our workshop up here in Connecticut and had 2 Kaos (1 with a 61 two stroke and 1 with a 70 four stroke), two Skylark 56's, a Senior Falcon and my WM Intruder plus an interested newcomer with a 25 size low wing sport plane. Any of these aircraft could have been the winning aircraft. This is the beauty of the SPA format as a wide variety of planes are very capable. The choices get a little slimmer (still numerous though) in the BPA setup.

A joint contest such as the Florida one would be really neat to watch. I would suspect we will see more of these where noise regulations permit.

Peace

Mark O

I don't think that the SPA has much to do with the subject of this thread - Classic Pattern. Four stroke powered, fixed gear tail draggers with servos sticking sticking out everywhere are hardly Classic Pattern aircraft and really should be called "F3A Lite". Classic Pattern to most everyone I talk to is a tribute to the planes that were flown before the turnaround pattern evolved and snap maneuvers permeated RC aerobatics. That type of flying was unique and exhilarating and spawned many beautiful and great flying airplanes that lots of us still like to fly in the way they were designed - whether or not there is organized competition for them or not. Thats the beauty of our hobby - there is a way for all of us to express our interest.
Scott

I have to agree with Mark on the change of planes happend when the format was changed. To me Classic Pattern is all planes that fly pre-turnaround. The biggest concern that I can see here is some want retracts and some dont. Then some want a pipe, muffler, 2 stroke, 4 stroke... When it comes to a competitor preparing himself for an event in a class, he (or she, sorry) will do so by means of whatever will put a smile on their face. It maybe getting a few practice flights in after work everyday, or it might be tinkering with their equipment. Believe me you can really get complicated "massaging" any four stroke. And there is no restrictions on running them "uncapped".

I do understand where theheadaches come from also. I have been working on my Aurora and am not too happy at the moment, so I'm getting a little Falcon 56 ready to play with. When the Aurora is ready I'm sure that that too will be just as reliable after the initial set up is done.

DM

Retracts look cool....I'll certainly admit that.

Personally I've never flown a plane with them. The grass field I fly from now is a little on the rough side, and would "do a number" on retracts within a week or two. Only two of us fly pattern-type aircraft. Most fly large sport planes or taildraggers.

Just to make one more point, if there are folks with retracts that would like to give SPA a try, they can just leave them down during the contest. I know that sounds weird to those that have to have them, but the rules are simple & basic....and I didn't make them

Duane