vasek

My Feedback: (4)

I have nothing against progress but when i look at the new pattern planes i get nostalgic...[8D]

Am i the only one?

bem

My Feedback: (1)

Hi,

Not a pretty sight of you ask me. A fat flying barrel. What is that thing on the top and underside of wing?

/Bo

R_G

My Feedback: (1)

I don't care for the direction that the current pattern planes are going either! That thing in the above photo looks like a deformed Porpoise! No style! Can't beat the looks of a Classic Pattern model!

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Specificaly the UFO!

Trisquire

You gotta slow the downlines somehow.

dhal22

those things on top and under the wing are wild guess's.

R_G

My Feedback: (1)

Yep!

R_G

My Feedback: (1)

Seems to me that it should be possible to slow the downlines and still maintain an attractive design. Split rudders, spoilers, variable pitch props, etc?

I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder! I'm sure the folks flying these models feel they are elegant and stylish designs. Just not my cup of tea. The important thing is to have fun no matter what you fly!

dhal22

well said Ralph.

TonyF

My Feedback: (92)

Let's see a UFO do a Figure M with 1/2 roll integrated into the 1/2 loop. The designs today are done to meet the schedule requirements. Ability to fly on the fuselage has become very important. And they do fly incredibly well.

But I still like the looks of the Phoenix!

ChiefK

I understand that these designs are made to perform maneuvers that our "classic" pattern airplanes cannot do well, but it doesn't matter how fantastic the color scheme is... the beast still looks ungainly (on the ground). It's sort of like wondering how today's kids can ever feel the way us "adults" do about the music we grew up with.

ChiefK

dhal22

a regular posting classic pattern author predicted than modern pattern plane design was headed in the direction of a blimp shape may have irritated most over on the modern pattern forum but still makes me giggle when i think about his post.

KLXMASTER14

Whatever toots your horn.... or blows up your blimp..... or whatever.

smacfe

Whatever floats your bloat!

impactiq

My Feedback: (57)

Pretty soon a modern pattern plane will be a "profile" plane.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

My guess is that they are devices that are intended to smooth the air flow over the empennage. Sort of like a stator in a turbine engine.


Ed Cregger

vasek

My Feedback: (4)

i guess the regulations/design criteria determine the look. Do you guys remember the NASCAR of the seventies? Didn't look like a car either but they did something about it! now nascar racers look like cars (not some star-treck ship see pic).

When a pattern plane no longer looks looks like a plane but a bloated killer-whale it's time to change the design parameters! IMHO of course

crankpin

My Feedback: (15)

I have to agree with Tony here. I would bet that if the price came down on these modern pattern plane's, a lot of us would be flying them. I was ready to get the Oxai, (?), 110, cost $1295.00, plus shipping. Fortunately for my wallet, I was able to get another Focus Sport from Steve Wall. My present pattern skill's would not do any justice to a more expensive plane.

Vince

daggets

it s looks like a whale beached! an , worse of all.... its electric!!!!!!

dhal22

yeah well that Plymouth Roadrunner was never electric powered. [sm=punching.gif]

GerKonig

Pattern planes are built for one mission: fly pattern, win contests. I bet this "fat" plane would kick all "old planes" sad ass mentioned by the old timers right out of contest in 30 seconds or less!:-) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and I like better a Corsair than an F-16)

Gerry

Trisquire

Sure, if you want to be flipping switches for the whole flight.

dhal22

what would the modern pattern pilots do if they were forced to use a basic 4 channel transmitter with no programming available?

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

No, you don't. If the pilots put enough pressure on the governing body, all of the rules that pressure the judges to downgrade for overspeeding in the downlines could be removed. Then again, why should they? We pattern flyers have tried every shape possible over the decades, except pizza box flyers. Hmmm...?


Ed Cregger

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Since it will never happen, the point is moot.

The planes and routines that are flown in pattern today may as well have evolved on another planet somewhere. I cannot relate to any of it.

Eventually, I expect the contests to be held with digital representations of models that are shared on the internet. No engine costs, no LiPo battery costs, just the person winning who can twiddle the sticks the best.

Years ago I was flying a CGM Anniversary Cub with the full size wing. It was powered by an Enya 80-4C and it weighed (AUW) 7.5 lbs. I had mounted the engine in sidewinder fashion. Just an old habit.

What was neat about the Cub was that it would climb in knife-edge flight if rolled on the left side, but would not maintain knife-edge flight at all on the right side. I showed several different pattern flyers what this Cub could do and we talked about it for a few years, trying to figure out what was magical enough about it to permit it to climb in knife-edge flight. It moved along briskly with the Enya at W.O.T. while spinning a MAS 13x6.

It finally occurred to me that the CGM Cub's extra fat (non scale) fuselage was what permitted it to fly in climbing knife-edge flight when the cylinder head of the engine was pointing straight up. Had I known about such a thing, I would have mounted the engine inverted and then directed the exhaust flow out of the bottom of the cowl.

Anyway, I wasn't surprised to learn that folks were leaning toward designing fat fuselages for their pattern ships.


Ed Cregger