Format for speed competition
01-22-2004, 10:04 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Format for speed competition
If you were to set up a pure speed event, for a run at a radar system with a digital display. What type of rules would you guys like to see in place to govern such an event? Only one aircraft in the air at a time,and the flight will aproach the radar gun on a straight and level run. I am going to set up such an event. Any suggestions will be taken into consideration. I think that maybe a run what you brung event may work as long as everyone understands this going in. What do you guys think? Maybe breaking things down into classes? Maybe engine size? Gentlemen, you have the page.
01-22-2004, 10:38 PM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (50)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mira Mesa, CA
Posts: 5,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
Wow! Sounds fun!
I would think different classes would be a good idea since you will have many types of airplanes there.... Here are my initial thoughts:
Prop. planes: Quickee/pylon, Warbird, and sport (Prop jets, fast pattern planes etc.) Maybe broken up based on disp. like up to .40 glow then 40-60 glow then "open" for anything bigger-
Ducted fans
Turbines
I would think different classes would be a good idea since you will have many types of airplanes there.... Here are my initial thoughts:
Prop. planes: Quickee/pylon, Warbird, and sport (Prop jets, fast pattern planes etc.) Maybe broken up based on disp. like up to .40 glow then 40-60 glow then "open" for anything bigger-
Ducted fans
Turbines
01-22-2004, 11:08 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Charles Town,
WV
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
I would think that it would be important to make a run at the radar gun from two directions 180 degrees apart, then take the average. This would tend to equalize for wind and level the playing field taking drag and variable wind conditions into consideration.
I agree that the event should be broken into classes also. It would be unfair to run a trainer against a quicky.
I agree that the event should be broken into classes also. It would be unfair to run a trainer against a quicky.
01-22-2004, 11:44 PM
#4
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
I unfortunately, will not be able host the ducted fans or the turbines, as most of them would require a very smooth runway. I will strive to include them as soon as possible. I have some minor field limitations that will have to be dealt with first. I don't wan't to get bogged down in a multitude of classes either. I think that it will be a challenge to fairly place/categorize all of the serious speed-machines without including trainers. I think possibly prop-jets, deltas, pattern, sport and pylon would be the main class groupings. Each category could then be broken down according to displacement. I agree about both directions on the speed runs with the radar.
01-23-2004, 08:32 PM
#5
My Feedback: (7)
RE: Format for speed competition
The speed straightaway for rc boat hydros and monos are run according engine size.. It dosnt matter what the engine is pulling to do the speed. The only restriction is the displacement of the engine.. You have in the nitro classes 20, 40, 60, and 90 to1.8 classes gas is 2.6 and 3.5cc. With planes gas can be broader because of the variety size availabe, and nitro as well.... I wouldnt put planes in classes according to body style your talking speed and looking for proformance and creative in the area of speed it self? 
01-23-2004, 09:37 PM
#6
RE: Format for speed competition
My preference would be best out of three seperate runs, a run would be from opposite directions averaged together. That way if you go up too lean or rich you could try again. You should have an ondeck plane and then they have a time limit to get airborne and make their run. I don't think you should have classes, run what you brung and the fastest wins, period... Let me know when you have it and I'll come down and I know of at least one other person that would also come...
01-23-2004, 11:18 PM
#7
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kortessem, BELGIUM
Posts: 3,607
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
11 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
If you make it a "You run what you brung" contest, than there's a 99,8% chance that the guy with the most pocket money is going to win the contest...
You need to have some classes....
You need to have some classes....
01-24-2004, 09:33 AM
#8
RE: Format for speed competition
"If you make it a "You run what you brung" contest, than there's a 99,8% chance that the guy with the most pocket money is going to win the contest... "
I don't agree, if you look at it like that the person with the most money will win all the classes he enters. I think the person that wins will be the most inovative and the one that spends the most time refining his set up. I have a scale down DD that I run a Norvell .061 on and it didn't cost more than $50 for everything in it but I bet it's the fastest 1/2A you ever saw. The twin in the picture above is scratch built and other than the motors, which are not high dollar motors, cost very little to build. And then there's the Magnum, $300 for an ARF that screams out of the box. If we stick to prop planes I doubt you'll see too many planes above an honest 180mph, even if a Nelson shows up...
I don't agree, if you look at it like that the person with the most money will win all the classes he enters. I think the person that wins will be the most inovative and the one that spends the most time refining his set up. I have a scale down DD that I run a Norvell .061 on and it didn't cost more than $50 for everything in it but I bet it's the fastest 1/2A you ever saw. The twin in the picture above is scratch built and other than the motors, which are not high dollar motors, cost very little to build. And then there's the Magnum, $300 for an ARF that screams out of the box. If we stick to prop planes I doubt you'll see too many planes above an honest 180mph, even if a Nelson shows up...
01-24-2004, 09:50 PM
#9
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
I think, maybe I'm starting to get a handle on what will work. I think SACKRC has brought out a very good point. If we run the airplane classes in a fashion similar to the boats, I think that you would break down into two main classes. One being the flying wings ie: DD, Shrikes and such. The other obvious class is then the conventional airframe with tail. These two classes would then be broken down into displacement catagories. I think this is the direction I want to go in. I still need more input from you guys. What displacements should be grouped together? Should it be maybe 25 to 35, 40 to 46, 50 to 65 ??? evan-RCU, like you, I also want to have a "run what you brung" class. I also believe that it would be an interesting event. It could be called X-open, X for experimental and open for anything goes. {Any airframe, any engine and any fuel.} This class would only be governed by safety issues. All airplanes, for all classes would have to pass a safety inspection. Then there is also the fuel issue. Nitro content? Maybe the event host would supply the fuel so as to maintain parity on the fuel used. I think, the fuel should be standardized to one specific nitro content. 15% 20% 30% ??? OK guys, your turn. What do you think? I am sure their are some of you who are better versed in the engine side of this than myself.
01-24-2004, 09:56 PM
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pampa, TX
Posts: 5,133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
I would not force people to use any fuel. Many of us have quite a bit of time and effort invested (not to mention $$) in our engines, and they are set up to run a particular fuel. When you get into high performance, fuel is a critical element in the performance equation. To mandate a set fuel for all engines, some of which are set up radically different from one another, would be unacceptable to many.
01-27-2004, 08:12 PM
#12
RE: Format for speed competition
Dogwood, you're on the right track.
Chuck, I agree fuel can't be controlled. Usually fuel ends up controlling the modeller, too high a nitro and you have consistancy problems and flame outs...
Flyboy Dave, I disagree, you'd never get that Nelson powered mini shrike in the air long enough to get 2 passes for the radar, that's the neat thing about speed, you need finesse to get it consistently. I'd like to see a set up like that though, the take off would be wild, imagine the torque roll when you let it go...
Chuck, I agree fuel can't be controlled. Usually fuel ends up controlling the modeller, too high a nitro and you have consistancy problems and flame outs...
Flyboy Dave, I disagree, you'd never get that Nelson powered mini shrike in the air long enough to get 2 passes for the radar, that's the neat thing about speed, you need finesse to get it consistently. I'd like to see a set up like that though, the take off would be wild, imagine the torque roll when you let it go...
01-27-2004, 09:47 PM
#13
My Feedback: (7)
RE: Format for speed competition
ORIGINAL: Dogwood
I think, maybe I'm starting to get a handle on what will work. I think SACKRC has brought out a very good point. If we run the airplane classes in a fashion similar to the boats, I think that you would break down into two main classes. One being the flying wings ie: DD, Shrikes and such. The other obvious class is then the conventional airframe with tail. These two classes would then be broken down into displacement catagories. I think this is the direction I want to go in. I still need more input from you guys. What displacements should be grouped together? Should it be maybe 25 to 35, 40 to 46, 50 to 65 ??? evan-RCU, like you, I also want to have a "run what you brung" class. I also believe that it would be an interesting event. It could be called X-open, X for experimental and open for anything goes. {Any airframe, any engine and any fuel.} This class would only be governed by safety issues. All airplanes, for all classes would have to pass a safety inspection. Then there is also the fuel issue. Nitro content? Maybe the event host would supply the fuel so as to maintain parity on the fuel used. I think, the fuel should be standardized to one specific nitro content. 15% 20% 30% ??? OK guys, your turn. What do you think? I am sure their are some of you who are better versed in the engine side of this than myself.
I think, maybe I'm starting to get a handle on what will work. I think SACKRC has brought out a very good point. If we run the airplane classes in a fashion similar to the boats, I think that you would break down into two main classes. One being the flying wings ie: DD, Shrikes and such. The other obvious class is then the conventional airframe with tail. These two classes would then be broken down into displacement catagories. I think this is the direction I want to go in. I still need more input from you guys. What displacements should be grouped together? Should it be maybe 25 to 35, 40 to 46, 50 to 65 ??? evan-RCU, like you, I also want to have a "run what you brung" class. I also believe that it would be an interesting event. It could be called X-open, X for experimental and open for anything goes. {Any airframe, any engine and any fuel.} This class would only be governed by safety issues. All airplanes, for all classes would have to pass a safety inspection. Then there is also the fuel issue. Nitro content? Maybe the event host would supply the fuel so as to maintain parity on the fuel used. I think, the fuel should be standardized to one specific nitro content. 15% 20% 30% ??? OK guys, your turn. What do you think? I am sure their are some of you who are better versed in the engine side of this than myself.
I wouldnt be concerned about nitro. its hard to regulate and supply. and i dont think you can be consistant above 40%... I do beleive that motor classes is the way to go and the airframe is any thing within a safety guide line...and fuse/wingspan dimentions to a minimum basis to keep stability/safety in mind..
01-28-2004, 10:19 AM
#14
RE: Format for speed competition
You might want to require that the airplane has flown before also.... The AMA and IMAA have rules, maybe just spoken, that you don't take a new unflown plane to an event... That would cover some of the safety factor...
01-28-2004, 08:02 PM
#15
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
I think maybe the classes will be engine displacement grouped. The airplane manufacturers engine displacement recommendations will be the guideline for max displacement for their particular airframe. Kit or ARF will be subject to this rule. Non production will fall into the X-open category. No restrictions on brands of engines,pipes or fuel for any class. You may run a production airframe with an over spec engine,but it will automatically fall into the x-open class. Airframes that deviate from production form will automatically go into X-open. I am not even going to consider a tech inspection on the different engines to determine if an engine is stock or not. Most of you guys wouldn't go for it anyway. We will just have to depend on each others honesty and integrity.
01-30-2004, 01:44 PM
#16
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
You still need a little more fine tuning! Example; One of the most popular fast planes is the Patriot with a Jett50. Since GP reccommends a .40 to .46 it would have to go into your X-open category and compete against Chuck Auger's Rossi81/Whip combo which would be 50 MPH Faster!
01-30-2004, 05:14 PM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pampa, TX
Posts: 5,133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
Yep, and that same Patriot would have to fly against this guy in Florida with a massaged Jett 90 in his Patriot... Oh the humanity!
Speaking of which, any new progress on that Patriot??
Speaking of which, any new progress on that Patriot??
01-30-2004, 07:44 PM
#18
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
Gentlemen, I keep throwing out ideas, and you keep showing the problems with the groupings. That's OK; I need the input. Now, if you will also show me some workable alternatives to my ideas, I will be very encouraged to continue in this endeavor. As you guys know,good radar equipment is not cheap. I am serious about putting on a legitimate speed competition event. But, I am not going to invest a sizable amount of money without knowing that I can put on an event that everyone can compete in and feel that he or she has at least a reasonably good chance of being competitive in their class. This is something that I really want to do. We need a really good annual event in the Southeast. I believe that I have a flying field that could be an excellent place for this event. All I need to know is that you would be interested in participating in such an event. What are some livable class definitions? I need your help here.
01-30-2004, 07:59 PM
#19
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pampa, TX
Posts: 5,133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
How about just set up the radar gun and have guys fly at it?? There are so many combos out there, and no rulebook guidelines, that it's gonna be right hard to set up any format. A relaxed, run what ya brung format would be a lot of fun. A nitpicked-to-death rules bending fest would be about as fun as camping in an ant bed.
FWIW, Radar isn't an approved method of measuring speed per the FAI. The Budweiser rocket car supposedly broke the sound barried years before the current land speed record holder. It was timed with USAF Doppler radar which sounds like it's pretty accurate, but the speed was not recognized since it was based on Radar.
A lot of the small planes are very hard to get an accurate radar fix on, and the speeds vary widely from reflections off the prop. But setting up a timed speed trap is a lot of work, radar is much easier.
FWIW, Radar isn't an approved method of measuring speed per the FAI. The Budweiser rocket car supposedly broke the sound barried years before the current land speed record holder. It was timed with USAF Doppler radar which sounds like it's pretty accurate, but the speed was not recognized since it was based on Radar.
A lot of the small planes are very hard to get an accurate radar fix on, and the speeds vary widely from reflections off the prop. But setting up a timed speed trap is a lot of work, radar is much easier.
01-30-2004, 09:14 PM
#20
RE: Format for speed competition
I think you're back to just using the engine size and type plane, Delta w/up to .10, delta .11-.25, delta .26-.40, delta .41-.60etc and Airplane with stabs(elevators) etc... It doesn't matter what engine size was recommended, only what engine size is used. Then the .40 powered whip doesn't fly against the .91 powered whip. And the X class would be like the big dog trophy class.... You won't be able to please everyone so don't try. Make up the rules and if the poeple want to fly they'll show up... If I was doing it I wouldn't even seperate the types of airframes, just do motor size classes.
I've seen many, many, many slower planes win simply because the faster guy wanted more power, leaned her out and ended up slower.
I've seen many, many, many slower planes win simply because the faster guy wanted more power, leaned her out and ended up slower.
01-31-2004, 06:52 AM
#22
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Stolberg, GERMANY
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
Gentleman,
as we all know the key for serious speed is founded in the airframe/airfoil. That’s the key challenge, nothing else!
A highly competitive engine/pipe/prop combo to be perfectly matched to that specific airframe is obligatory.
Preferably a highly modified engine, but as said before that’s not the real challenge...
BOTTOM LINE: The contest MUST be defined by motor size classes in order to let the special revver brother win who realized the absolutely best aerodynamics.
---
BTW: Chuck is right. Please don’t use radar guns. The airframes with the highest speed potential will definitely be too narrow to be measured accurately during competition. Use DOPPLER instead which is very cheap and precise. But don’t forget the barbecue grill
as we all know the key for serious speed is founded in the airframe/airfoil. That’s the key challenge, nothing else!
A highly competitive engine/pipe/prop combo to be perfectly matched to that specific airframe is obligatory.
Preferably a highly modified engine, but as said before that’s not the real challenge...
BOTTOM LINE: The contest MUST be defined by motor size classes in order to let the special revver brother win who realized the absolutely best aerodynamics.
---
BTW: Chuck is right. Please don’t use radar guns. The airframes with the highest speed potential will definitely be too narrow to be measured accurately during competition. Use DOPPLER instead which is very cheap and precise. But don’t forget the barbecue grill
01-31-2004, 07:47 PM
#23
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Claxton, GA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
The barbecue grill is already taken care of. I'll go ahead and show my ignorance. I was thinking that radar was based on the Doppler theory. Please explain. Any thing that is more accurate and saves money will have my attention.[sm=confused.gif]
02-01-2004, 03:59 AM
#24
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Stolberg, GERMANY
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Format for speed competition
Dogwood,
with respect to the doppler shift software please go to Philly’s hompage
http://www.philsrcworld.fsnet.co.uk/speed.htm
and for more details to John Hughan's hompage
http://www.alphalink.com.au/~hughan/frames.html (Low Cost Speed Measurement by Doppler)
And you may want to try these older but very informative threads here on RCU:
“Measuring speed with acoustics and a tape recorder...“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_47.../tm.htm#479136
“How Fast is it going?“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_11...tm.htm#1152581
“Speed trap“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_84.../tm.htm#847920
with respect to the doppler shift software please go to Philly’s hompage
http://www.philsrcworld.fsnet.co.uk/speed.htm
and for more details to John Hughan's hompage
http://www.alphalink.com.au/~hughan/frames.html (Low Cost Speed Measurement by Doppler)
And you may want to try these older but very informative threads here on RCU:
“Measuring speed with acoustics and a tape recorder...“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_47.../tm.htm#479136
“How Fast is it going?“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_11...tm.htm#1152581
“Speed trap“
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_84.../tm.htm#847920
