Pilot and Instrument panel
 

Hello All,
I finally decided to cave in. I have been flying IMAC for years without a pilot and instrument panel. I decided it would be time to install a pilot bust in my 3.1M Super Extra since the top of his head is an ideal spot for me to mount a satellite receiver. What figures are popular and where do you like to buy from?
Rick

RE: Pilot and Instrument panel
 

Rick.... I have not used these... But have known pilots who have.
http://www.extremeflightrc.com/html/...es.html#pilotx

The one I use came from Czechoslovakia & my wife re-painted.

Hope this helps.
Wayne

RE: Pilot and Instrument panel
 

If you're looking for realistic, consider the Red Aero RC pilots. They can be bought without paint too, so a fresh coat with your colors can be applied.

www.redaerorc.com

Good luck! Also, consider panels that can be sized on the computer, printed, then laminated and put in your aircraft for a light weight, realistic solution.

Al.

I am putting my first IMAC planr together, and was about to ask the same. Isn't a pilot and instrument panel REQUIRED? Or is this not a rule that is enforced, like the weight limit at pattern contests? .LOL?...


Dale

Dale, the rule states that the model should have those items and if not there is to be a 3% points penalty. With the exception of the regionals I have not ever seen this enforced in the SW. When I was flying Intermidiate Zak and I finished close enough that had the CD enforce the rule I would have ended up willing. Seemed like a BS way to win to me so I glady took my second place finish. That being said it is CDs discretion. I may want to eventually compete IMAC again and am currently putting together a Comp ARF 3M Extra. issue is that the canopies do not seem to be available anymore. I was able to borrow one and lay up a glass canopy. I hope that if I do decide to fly a local contest that I will be allowed to do so with the points penalty. Maybe a CD will read this and share his opinion.

Hello... This information is completely wrong.
Firstly... if a pilot (other than the Basic class) does not have a pilot/panel in the aircraft, the penalty is 1%.
RULE 6.6: A realistic three-dimensional human pilot and viewable instrument panel shall be appropriately installed in all Scale Aerobatic aircraft. (A one [1] percent flight score penalty will be assessed for noncompliance.)

Secondly... this rule is definitely enforced in ALL 6 regions since the IMAC scoring software requires that information when the scorekeeper sets up for the contest on the morning of. The deduction is automatically calculated throughout the contest.

I am not sure how long ago you had that experience (and I hope it did not deter you from continuing), but since 2009 all regions were standardized, and this is one of the requirements for a contest to be included in the Regional Points system.
Hope that helps.
Wayne

Wayne, I have not been competing on a regular basis, I think my last contest was in April of 2010 and I did not have a pilot figure nor was I penalized for it. I would agree that an organization such as IMAC would want to standardize in all regions and I agree with that philosophy but in the 10 years that I was a serious competitor I do not recall seeing this particular rule enforced. This would mean that all aircraft would have to be checked somehow or go with the honor system and have that information asked on the registration form. IMO a CD has enough on his plate to begin with to be running around or trying to coordinate someone to look into canopies. To be honest what has driven me away from returning to IMAC is the decline in participation. On Saturday I was racing at a club whom hosted an IMAC contest in April and had the results posted. There were 3 advanced pilots and no unlimited. I had flown at this clubs IMAC contests for years and those classes always drew closer to 8 advanced and 5 unlimited pilots. IMO part of what is driving participants away is the complexity of sequences. As I was practicing for that last contest I was fortunate enough to have Fred Weaver ( Caller for TOC pilot Dave Von Linsowe ) come up and ask what sequence I was flying and when I informed him that it was the current year unlimited known sequence his opinion was that it was more difficult then any TOC sequence he had seen. I just think that most guys can't afford the amount of practice time it takes to do the current upper class sequences well.

So my question is, where to find a lightweight pilot bust? Styrofoam would be perfect...

when I first got into IMAc back in the late '80's, the sequences were VERY close to the IAC big guys. Now, the IMAC sequence bears little or no resemblance......since IMAC moved to Muncie it seems to have become "big business", with sequences driven by a need to prove "my huge plane can beat your huge plane in manouvers no real plane can attempt!" - Just my 2 pennies..

Not sure what you are referring to as we use the IAC legal catalog...

but would Love to have more folks on the sequence committee....

Yes the individual maneuvers are taken from the IAC catalog but the combinations are not. Take the current unlimited sequence. 10 snap rolls, some maneuvers have 2 snaps. I'm not sure they do that in the IAC. Difficult to say for sure as you need to be an IAC member to view their sequences. IMAC snap rolls are very different then full scale as well. We tend to do them very fast and shallow compared to full scale. Back when I was more active it seemed as the majority of the guys on the sequence committee were not active competitors. The last contest I attended and the one that started my pull from IMAC was my first contest in unlimited and it was the first contest of the season. In the unknown there was a hammerhead with an outbound inverted cross box exit at the right end of the box followed by an immelman to upright negitive snap coming back in cross box to 1 3/4 spin. I personally felt that was a bit much of an unknown for the first contest of the season. Keep in mind I described but two maneuvers in a sequence of 10.

IMAC differs from IAC in several areas as we are flying R/C models, not full scale aerobatic planes. Personally, I would be bored after 10 minutes flying the IAC sequence; it is designed to be flown by today's generation of full-scale aerobats, which generally have less than 1.5:1 power-to-weight ratios, significant wing loading, etc. Our R/C models are capable of so much more than their full scale brethren, where we put a motor/prop combo creating 100lbs of thrust on a 40 pound model, wing loading is extremely light, and there is almost zero chance of pilot injury in the case of a catastrophic mechanical malfunction.

IMAC sequence construction is done keeping in mind today's R/C models, not their full-scale counterparts. My hat's off to the IMAC Sequence Committee, who put in long hours creating, testing, and revising countless known and unknown sequences each year.

Pete

As for pilots, you can get foam pilots from Aircraft International, which weigh almost nothing. I use the Hangar 9 pilot, it's prepainted, pretty light, and IMO looks much better.

Pete

My point exactly. Guess I'm just old enough to remember the "pure" IMAC...and it wasn't my intent to denigrate the efforts of the Sequence Committee. They work very hard, but the results are sequences that "celebrate" the 3:1 pwr Pete mentioned. The original "California" IMAC seems a dim memory.

And my 50cc SBach is absolutely incapable of flying above the intermediate level, won't do it, nada, can't.