Light vs. Legs - What's your preference?
05-13-2010, 04:03 PM
#1
Light vs. Legs - What's your preference?
OK, guys, how about this. What is your contest strategy when it comes to
planes? Today we have the two plane rule that allows a pilot to switch
planes freely during a contest. That expands your options when you are
considering what kinds of planes you build or buy. It also gives you
options on a day to day and round to round basis. What are your thoughts?
Light vs. Legs? Simplicity vs. Complexity?
Light - looking at the more competitive gliders we see a lot of very very
light RES planes showing up at contests, flying in the unlimited class.
These are 2.5 - 3.5M birds with wing loadings frequently under 6 ounces.
They launch hard, fly slow and seem to defy gravity. The spoilers are very
effective and they are built strong enough to take hard contest landings.
The AVA, Topaz, Soprano and the Bubble Dancer would be typical of this
group. We can even look at the Bird of Time and the Sky Bench Bird series
as examples of kit planes that may fall into this category too.
Simple - In addition, because they are simpler planes with no trailing edge
controls, they also produce a lighter pilot load. Their lightly loaded
bent wings are good lift indicators. They also make them extremely stable
giving the pilot more freedom to scan the skies with less concern about the
attitude of the plane or which switches have been thrown. This stability
also makes them much easier to fly at long range. And finally you can
typically use a simpler radio for these planes. Spoiler to elevator is
likely to be the only mixing you would need for these RES planes.
Most can be ballasted into the 8-9 oz wing loading range giving them wind
tolerance or the ability to run out farther and faster then when they are at
their lightest weights. They don't get the legs of a full house higher wing
loading, camber controlled ship, but they can face some wind or run faster
when the pilot deems that the best approach.
Legs - Typically I am thinking of full house planes in the 2.5 to 3.7M range
that carry wing loads of 8-11 oz. More control, more flexibility and able
to range out farther and faster because those higher wing loadings and
modern air foils give them the legs to do it. However they can't float
like the light RES planes. The Supra, Thermal Dancer, Graphites, Organic,
Pikes, Sharon, Icon, Aegea and a host of others are good examples.
Complexity - To take advantage of that flexibility you add complexity to the
flight in the form of camber changes, trim changes and the like. You will
also want a more flexible radio in order to manage all those trim options
during the flight. It is easier to make a mistake such as flying through
sink with your thermal camber setting on. This increases pilot load,
perhaps taking some time and attention away from reading the air. And their
flatter wings make them less stable requiring more attention when flying at
great distances.
When the wind comes up many of these planes can take on very high ballast
loads making them strong contenders in the wind. That extra weight also
makes them hotter at the landing tapes, able to punch through the wind but
requiring more breaking to slow down for the landing.
Two plane rule -
Do you choose a single type of plane and have that for your primarily and
back-up/alternate plane, or do you choose to have one of each?
Assuming you have both types, do you choose one plane on a "conditions
today" and stick with it? Or, do you choose on a round by round basis,
judging which would be good for the type of air you see.
What recommendation would you make to a new pilot looking for his first
contest ship? Light and simple or Legs with complexity?
planes? Today we have the two plane rule that allows a pilot to switch
planes freely during a contest. That expands your options when you are
considering what kinds of planes you build or buy. It also gives you
options on a day to day and round to round basis. What are your thoughts?
Light vs. Legs? Simplicity vs. Complexity?
Light - looking at the more competitive gliders we see a lot of very very
light RES planes showing up at contests, flying in the unlimited class.
These are 2.5 - 3.5M birds with wing loadings frequently under 6 ounces.
They launch hard, fly slow and seem to defy gravity. The spoilers are very
effective and they are built strong enough to take hard contest landings.
The AVA, Topaz, Soprano and the Bubble Dancer would be typical of this
group. We can even look at the Bird of Time and the Sky Bench Bird series
as examples of kit planes that may fall into this category too.
Simple - In addition, because they are simpler planes with no trailing edge
controls, they also produce a lighter pilot load. Their lightly loaded
bent wings are good lift indicators. They also make them extremely stable
giving the pilot more freedom to scan the skies with less concern about the
attitude of the plane or which switches have been thrown. This stability
also makes them much easier to fly at long range. And finally you can
typically use a simpler radio for these planes. Spoiler to elevator is
likely to be the only mixing you would need for these RES planes.
Most can be ballasted into the 8-9 oz wing loading range giving them wind
tolerance or the ability to run out farther and faster then when they are at
their lightest weights. They don't get the legs of a full house higher wing
loading, camber controlled ship, but they can face some wind or run faster
when the pilot deems that the best approach.
Legs - Typically I am thinking of full house planes in the 2.5 to 3.7M range
that carry wing loads of 8-11 oz. More control, more flexibility and able
to range out farther and faster because those higher wing loadings and
modern air foils give them the legs to do it. However they can't float
like the light RES planes. The Supra, Thermal Dancer, Graphites, Organic,
Pikes, Sharon, Icon, Aegea and a host of others are good examples.
Complexity - To take advantage of that flexibility you add complexity to the
flight in the form of camber changes, trim changes and the like. You will
also want a more flexible radio in order to manage all those trim options
during the flight. It is easier to make a mistake such as flying through
sink with your thermal camber setting on. This increases pilot load,
perhaps taking some time and attention away from reading the air. And their
flatter wings make them less stable requiring more attention when flying at
great distances.
When the wind comes up many of these planes can take on very high ballast
loads making them strong contenders in the wind. That extra weight also
makes them hotter at the landing tapes, able to punch through the wind but
requiring more breaking to slow down for the landing.
Two plane rule -
Do you choose a single type of plane and have that for your primarily and
back-up/alternate plane, or do you choose to have one of each?
Assuming you have both types, do you choose one plane on a "conditions
today" and stick with it? Or, do you choose on a round by round basis,
judging which would be good for the type of air you see.
What recommendation would you make to a new pilot looking for his first
contest ship? Light and simple or Legs with complexity?
05-13-2010, 07:55 PM
#2
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,425
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
RE: Light vs. Legs - What's your preference?
If it was really calm I'd want medium light so it has SOME legs and can cover more ground to either side. But as soon as even a moderate breeze comes up I'm looking for a good "runner". A faster model that doesn't give TOO much up for the speed has far more good points than bad.
11-25-2010, 11:09 AM
#3
RE: Light vs. Legs - What's your preference?
One of the members of our club, a top pilot, flies competition in all weather conditions with a Super AVA. That is about as light a wing loading as you can get. If he doesn't win, he places very highly most of the time.
