Community
Search
Notices
RC Pattern Flying Discuss all topics pertaining to RC Pattern Flying in this forum.

old vs. new designs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-12-2005 | 04:04 PM
  #1  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default old vs. new designs

I am thinking about flying pattern and was wondering what all you pro's think about the differences between a kaos or a Kwik fly to a Hydeaway,Prophesy, or any other newer designs. Which is better?
Old 04-12-2005 | 04:43 PM
  #2  
My Feedback: (16)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: tulsa, OK
Default RE: old vs. new designs

The more current designs fly better in my opinion.

Starting at some current smaller planes there is the CA models Epsilon (see patternproz.com), and PlanesPlus.com has a 110 size I think. Both are reported to fly well and are similar in size to a Kaos for instance.

The Hydeaway and Prophecy are also good planes as are several other designs.

What you want to spend on the plane is probably a big part of picking the plane.
Old 04-12-2005 | 04:51 PM
  #3  
8178's Avatar
My Feedback: (17)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,351
Received 13 Likes on 7 Posts
From: Atlanta, GA
Default RE: old vs. new designs


ORIGINAL: woops

I am thinking about flying pattern and was wondering what all you pro's think about the differences between a kaos or a Kwik fly to a Hydeaway,Prophesy, or any other newer designs. Which is better?
What pattern are you thinking about flying?
Old 04-12-2005 | 06:20 PM
  #4  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

starting basic
Old 04-12-2005 | 06:25 PM
  #5  
8178's Avatar
My Feedback: (17)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,351
Received 13 Likes on 7 Posts
From: Atlanta, GA
Default RE: old vs. new designs


ORIGINAL: woops

starting basic
AMA/FAI http://www.fai.org/ or SPA http://www.seniorpattern.com/ starting?
Old 04-12-2005 | 06:47 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: NYA, MN
Default RE: old vs. new designs

I am sure that the new designs all have something over the older ones, whether it's using composite materials or better aerodynamic designs.
I have been told by a good friend that competed allot when he lived CA the the biggest advantage you can have is to practice. I am also going to compete this year for my first time and have been reading everything I can on the subject. What I have been finding is to make sure your plane is trimmed and balanced properly, (Model Aviation has a great 2 part article on this in the February and April issues under Scale Aerobatics). The second thing is to fly the sequence, as often as possible. And not 10 times a day but a couple times per day, as many days as possible. I am going to try that approach and being no expert myself I will have to let you know if its working or not, it seems to make sense though. Good luck in your competitions.
Old 04-12-2005 | 07:08 PM
  #7  
petec's Avatar
My Feedback: (58)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
From: Beaver Falls, PA
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Geez..that's a can of worms. The newer designs fly better (read slower). My Dirty Birdy and KAOS are great planes but my Javelin and Pro0phecy are better for the current pattern because I don't have to keep the speed up.
Old 04-12-2005 | 07:09 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Fort Mitchell, AL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Give me a Dity Birdi any day. LOL. You just can't beat them for the cost of operation. LOL
Old 04-13-2005 | 06:22 AM
  #9  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Thank you for the thoughts.
Old 04-13-2005 | 10:52 AM
  #10  
My Feedback: (7)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Navarre, FL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

It is true that the newer planes fly and present better. The older designs in my opinion were so much sexier than these fat bodies that we fly now. I had a Cosmos and an Aurora which to me were the prettiest pattern planes around.
Old 04-13-2005 | 11:53 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Fort Mitchell, AL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

I agree the new birds look like bloated pigs. I also miss the days when you didn't have to take out a second mortage to be competative. LOL
Old 04-13-2005 | 12:34 PM
  #12  
8178's Avatar
My Feedback: (17)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,351
Received 13 Likes on 7 Posts
From: Atlanta, GA
Default RE: old vs. new designs


ORIGINAL: Paternguy

I agree the new birds look like bloated pigs.
I’m glad to hear that! I thought my eyes were going bad!
Old 04-13-2005 | 06:41 PM
  #13  
My Feedback: (41)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,347
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
From: Algonquin Illinois IL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Pattern today doesn't have to be hard or expensive. There are many low cost alternatives that are viable competitive planes. The Icepoint, Dream 110,Quest, Arresti3 and many others done with a 2 stroke engine are within the means of most modelers. The argument about pattern being too expensive doesn't really apply to these options. And yes they can be very competitive. I would venture to say that these planes are less expensive than some of the planes we flew in the 80's when adjusted for inflation. They are also much easier to build and they do fly well.
Now given all that you I would agree that you can also drop 5 grand on a plane. It's just not neccesary.
Mike
Old 04-13-2005 | 07:53 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Fort Mitchell, AL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

It still doesn't justify the fat bloated apearance of the modern bird. Its been a long time since i was able to look at a new "competition bird" and say wow what is that. The just don't have that eye catchind apeal of the planes I remember seeing as a kid on the flight line. Dirty Birdi, Curare, Tipo, UFO (my alltime fav), Even through the 80's La1, Sl1, Atlanta. Those were just coll looking sleek sexy machines. But just like me the older I get the better they were. LOLOLOL
Old 04-13-2005 | 10:24 PM
  #15  
rodney tanner's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: La Herradura Edo. de Mexico, 53920 MEXICO
Default RE: old vs. new designs

I´ll throw in my 2CW. . .
I think it really comes down to what level / class you want fly. The newer designs have really evolved to fly the new more complex schedules. My (Typhoon 2000 based) Tempest is just great for the Advanced schedule I am flying this year. But I know a lot of people thet show up every Sunday with a UFO, or a Kaos and really enjoy basic aerobatics. In a year or so I hope to be flying the Masters class. I will probably be flying a Brio with an OS160 FX. It will most probably end up costing between $2,500 and $3,000, as my last three pattern plans have - the airframe is normally about 35% of the total. I normally take about 6 to 8 months to buy all the parts required - easier to budget for that way. New, fat or ugly? The Brio will be worth every penny :-)
But, as they say, I have never met a Pattern plane I did´nt like.
Old 04-14-2005 | 06:02 AM
  #16  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

So the old are good for lower classes, but the new (which cost 10-15 times more) are better for the higher classes?
Old 04-14-2005 | 08:53 AM
  #17  
Member
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Haifa, ISRAEL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Hmmm Stop insulting the modern planes. To me they actually look better than a tip.
Old 04-14-2005 | 09:23 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Fort Mitchell, AL
Default RE: old vs. new designs

I have flown the modern birds, and they fly great, I just think they are ugly as sin. LOL
Old 04-14-2005 | 10:07 AM
  #19  
My Feedback: (55)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,395
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Tomball, TX
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I started flying pattern ships in 1969 and
I've flown all kinds since then. I liked and enjoyed them all but the new birds, to me, are
better looking and definitely fly better. I think most of us who remember the "old days"
remember those airplanes better than they actually were. A couple of years ago I flew in
a SPA pattern event and flew a borrowed Johnny Casburn Lucky Fly with a Webra 60 blackhead
and got to fly a few of the other ships that were there. While it was a lot of fun, the flying ability
of the old designs can't compare to todays new designs. Totally different style of flying.
But, everyone should fly what they enjoy, thats what hobbies are for.

tommy s
Old 04-15-2005 | 06:12 AM
  #20  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

How much would an airframe to a new design cost? Something with traditional construstion materials. I was reading the latest pattern column in MA and I definately don't want composite!
Old 04-15-2005 | 07:49 AM
  #21  
flyintexan's Avatar
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,207
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
From: tomball, TX
Default RE: old vs. new designs

I think you could easily spend $75-$100 on good, contest grade wood. Everything else depends on how much you want to spend... c.f. wing tube ($50+), landing gear ($50-$125), tailwheel, control rods, etc., etc. Are you going to buy foam cores, cut them yourself, or build up wing panels?

There are some good flying airplanes out there that can be built cheaply from plans. A list of plans was compiled recently..see link below.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_26...tm.htm#2600745
Old 04-15-2005 | 04:04 PM
  #22  
My Feedback: (121)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,302
Received 39 Likes on 38 Posts
From: glen allen, VA,
Default RE: old vs. new designs

You can also get the MK Topstar or Topstar II kits from Singapore Hobbies. Presheeted foam wings/stabs and all wood fuselage construction. A bit more work than glass/composites. You can get one delivered for about $550.
Just my 2 cents... or $550
Old 04-16-2005 | 10:47 AM
  #23  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Thanks for all the suggestions. I have 2 kaos laying around unfinished that I was given. I will finish those and design my own that will work in FAI. What limitations for planes in that class(wingspan, length, etc.)?
Old 04-16-2005 | 04:53 PM
  #24  
patternflyer1's Avatar
My Feedback: (11)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Tracy, CA
Default RE: old vs. new designs

2 meters by 2 meters, under 11 pounds are the restrictions
Old 04-16-2005 | 05:25 PM
  #25  
50%plane's Avatar
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: California
Default RE: old vs. new designs

Thanks Patternflyer1. Are there any more restrictions such as materials or height?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.