adamd11pl

Hi,
Who has experience with P05 AND P07?
What about energy consumption? How many mAh is needed to complete P07 in comparison to P05?

regards
AD

TonyF

My Feedback: (92)

I've been flying mostly P-07 since the Nats. I have noticed that it takes longer to fly then P-05, so I assume it will take a bit more amperage. I fly for a set time every flight and I usually complete the pattern then fly a few more manuevers. But P-07 usually ends very close to my set time.

Now to find out who designed that insane F-07 pattern!

David Kyjovsky

With my setup (Hacker C50 XL14, 1:6,7 etc, Polyquest XP 2500 2p10s), I have never had a problem to make the P-05, in any kind of (legal) wind. With P-07, in wind, I sometimes lose power before/in the last maneuvre (hexagonal loop). I charege to 41V though, for the sake of the pack lifespan. Charging to 42 for competitions, I should be ok, as it means some 8 to 10% extra charge. But still, it is a little bit worrying.

TonyF, I think that P-07 is strange too. Or rather ugly and not difficult enough... given the ever improving skills of the average F3A pilot.

P-05 seemed better balanced to me.

MTK

The P07 pattern reminds me of the now two year old AMA Masters schedule, which isn't current. Back then, F3A'rs were flying P03.

I suppose that if one can't fly 9's and 10's on every maneuver, there's alot of room for improvement, BUT there is a lot to be said for boredom too

MattK

darkvader

Hi

Do you have any figures about mAh consuption on P07 flights, with no wind, soft wind and hard wind conditions?
Does the new F3A TP 5200 mAh packs had enough energy to the P07, or its better to return to the 6000 mAh ones ?
I mean, reaching to the near limits of pack capacity, the probability to get it unbalanced should rise, correct ?

Regards

DV

j woodward

HI All,

I flew P07 for the first time today. Seems to be a combination of some P05 & F05 maneuvers. Seemed easier than P05. Also seems like this pattern will be able to be flown quite easily in the box, where as P05 seemed to always stretch the limits. This pattern seemed much more "power-on" than P05 (also noted by my caller).

I flew the first pattern around 170M. For the second flight I moved it in to around 140-150 and it felt cramped - especially inbetween the 3rd and 4th maneuver (1/2 square loop on corner with 1/2 rolls and the reverse cuban). Also, the Immelman needs to be on the gigantic side to allow for the square loop on corner with 1/2 rolls from the top. Looks like they sort of gave us a break on this pattern.

Although this is in the E forum I thought I'd post some comments on the pattern even though I flew it glow. It also felt like this pattern can be flown in a wide speed envelope, where as I definately felt that you were at advantage to fly P05 slow. Any other P07 comments? Its nice to see that the turn-around maneuver prior to the 8 point roll from inverted leaves plenty of room for roll.

Thanks,
Jim W.

patternrules

My Feedback: (6)

Thanks Jim I have flown it about 30 times with same feeling as you, glad it wasn't just me who felt cramped on the 3 and 4, and the big emmelman.
Steve Maxwell

Angus Balfour

Best schedule they've ever come up with. Great fun to fly and challenging to

P-07 on the other hand is just outright dull. Feels like all you're doing is large looping manoeuvres. I found it took longer to get through aswell.

A

Dean Pappas

Hi Gang,
I have found that with the setup in my E-Pattern testbed, I consumed 2.8 and 3.0 A-H for a P-05, and between 3.0 and 3.1 A-H for F-05. That's at 60 A at W.O.T. with a 17-12 prop on an Axi 5330/18, in a draggy eleven pound 4 ounce plane. The plane is a Hangar 9 Funtana 90. It's a great fooling around plane, but not a proper Pattern ship! Every application of the rudder produces an ugly belly pitch, and no one mixing percentage works in all maneuvers.
hope that helps,
Dean Pappas