There is a little Vanquish that flew FAI at a contest in D1 a couple of years ago. It was the CD's (Frank?).

I did not see anyone laugh at him.

I am going to fly my .90 size Yak at NATS this year. I hope I hear someone laugh. It means I was there and flew.

I just got my first 2M plane after 4 years in the hobby and flying pattern. It will not be cheap. But it has been my patient decision to invest in something I care so deeply about.

There is no requirement to fly a 2M plane.

@ Exeter Acres: I have not experienced that in D1. In fact, the Sportsman class at Pocono this year was won with a model half the size of the two 2m ships that came in 2nd (Integral) & 3rd (me Vanquish). The ARFs available now fly so well that size is no longer an entry barrier IMO, nor is the overall cost of the plane, within reason of course. The guy flying it is the winning edge and I definitely lost my own edge last weekend. Good lesson in Sportsmanship and what is what. To make matters worse, I blew a landing and broke a gear leg on the Vanquish. No problem, flew the Osiris for the rest of Saturday and fixed the 2m for Sunday. My scores did improve on Sunday as I felt better and began to fly right again (almost LOL), but the little plane that could carried the day. No big deal, here in D1 it's all about precision flying, fun and friendship. Snobbery is not in play and newcomers are welcome! I believe.

On a lighter not, it is not surprising but very amusing to see 'we' have been bickering about the same exact thing for the past 10 years and probably more

Worse, we may have to abandon electric and fly gassers to keep up with Matt! LOL (just kidding, I think).

That was Sal Piu and he flew it again this year.

Au contraire, Matt; you know very well I have

Brian Clemmons

i dont think anyone will laugh at your plane , guys we are forgetting one thing , flying of the plane is by the pilot , i know pilots who can ring f3a manuvers out of sport planes , remember the plane helps , but smooth thumbs and precision are what counts , and a good pilot with a trimmed plane with adequate power  can be competetive   , it will surprise  always remember think positive  ok

Oh, sorry, by "FAI schedulle" I mean both, but P will just do.

Regards

Brian,

For Pattern? I don't know that.... IMAC of course is a totally different matter

The OS33GT just became available last Winter. It's better than anything else I've worked with in the 30cc class engines. It's turning the same prop as the YS175 at similar rpm, throughout the throttle range. Except, it's gasoline power. It is also a couple ounces lighter than the YS CDI version....

Let me suggest you try it first before poo-pooing it.

Post 50, previous page

I do sincerely hope that pattern of the future i.e. FAI continues respecting the 5 kg 2m by 2m limit. That is all. If you want to fly bigger planes go to IMAC.

I know I'll regret asking this, but what does the 5kg have to do with the size? If you kept the 2x2 limit and allowed say 5.5kg max weight and had all planes weighed ready to fly. What horrors would happen??

To me, 5 kilos is a fairly safe target for a 2x2m size, either wet powered or e-powered, for many current models. Don't need exotic construction materials either; the Vanquish makes weight easily and that's a balsa, foam, ply plane that's within almost everyone's budget

I don't have that much of a problem with 5.5 kilos. However, I'd expect a bump in cost due to more weight latitude for bipes. These will likely cost more. It just might be the thing that drives Pattern to extinction because everyone would falsely believe that they must fly a bipe to compete, and they are just not gonna spend that kind of money for a plane

The question about 5.5 kilos is fair. It has current precedent too. Consider a YS powered model carrying around 20 ozs of 25-30%. Weight empty is 5.0 kilos, except, with fuel, it's pretty darned close to 5.5 kilos at takeoff....... If the rule was drafted such that all models were to be weighed fueled and RTF, then maybe, just maybe, there would be minimal impact

The answer is convoluted

I don't think you have to regret asking that question at all. That is a very logical question and one that I have been wondering about myself for several years now. I have remained silent on this topic in the past because I have only been flying pattern for a few years and thought maybe I just didn't understand, but now that I have successfully designed and built two 2meter pattern planes I understand just how useless this rule actually is. Think about it, if your plane is deemed over weight you will be disqualified because you are at a disadvantage. A minimum weight limit makes perfect sense, if your plane is too light you would be disqualified for having an unfair advantage. I hear people say the planes will become larger and more expensive if we remove the weight rule especially the biplanes. Well maybe the size rule needs to be fine tuned to keep the planes like they are now. And what about my cost to keep a prototype plane under the limit, not only money but countless hours doing questionable things in order to save a gram or two. and yes I know if I covered the wings and stabs I could have saved several ounces but I have heard that pattern planes are the Ferrari's of R/C planes and I want my planes to look like it. Back to the weight rule, can anyone give me a common sense reason why we have a maximum weight rule in the first place.

Randy Hicks

Team TALON extreme

The only reason is because it's always been that way.

Randy those are the FAI rules simple as that. And if relaxed things would get out of hand in a jiffy. Again....if you do not like it switch to IMAC! There you can fly 40 lb monsters.

This is the core issue to me. I cannot understand the logic of weighing one with and one without. Makes no sense to me. For those that say "FAI does it that way", well consider that FAI weighs helicopters in F3C with fuel or batteries and they have a 6.5kg limit. So the 5kg battery but no fuel thing in F3A is not some sort of sacrosanct thing embedded in the genes of FAI. The one observation above seems most spot on "We do it that way because that is the way we have always done it".

Really? So the answer is if you don't like it then get out? Wow.

No way if i have to choose between IMAC & F3A i will go with F3A.. anytime... people who just want to fly big planes now want to make pattern planes big in size.. modify or want to change the rules like weight & overall size.. but this will never happen

The fact is F3A is way above any class of RC flying that i know till this date you all will agree on this with me on this. F3A is the Future & Rolls Royce of RC planes.

So there is no confusion, I far prefer flying pattern over IMAC. I did IMAC for a spell and have not touched my big Extra for a long time. I like the 2 by 2 rule and the look and style of pattern planes. I am just lost when it comes to understanding why we weigh one plane with its fuel and the other without.

Take a plane filled with fuel (5kg empty) and make that the max weight, with fuel or batteries. Or keep it 5kg but weigh both ready to fly. As I already noted above FAI changed the heli/F3C rules to do this. They also increased the weight limit. They limit the swept area of the rotor disk, have no IC engine restrictions and limit electric to 51 volts (~ 12S lipo). Oddly, F3C helis have not grown in size, the swept area limits that, not the weight.

Keep the rules for size, sound, voltage, etc. To my feeble mind the way you keep the plane size stable is by not changing the size of the plane that is allowed. 2 meters is 2 meters. Period.

Freddy,
It doesn't matter whose rules they are , if it makes no sense, it makes no sense. If the planes are restricted to the current size and all other rules in place, what precisely will get out of hand. And by the way, did I say I wanted a bigger plane, I like everything about pattern except the weight rule that causes confusion at the nats and added cost to the pilots. And I also think that " get out if you don't like it attitude" works very well considering our boom in membership.

Randy Hicks

Team TALON extreme

The rules are the rules for sure, but they were developed by representatives of all the FAI registered countries, so it is not like just one guy said "it will be this way,period", so the rule stand and it is respected by all FAI competitors.

Why is it 2x2 and 5Kg? There has to be limits, if the weight rule changes to 5.5Kg for example, then the motors/engines will get bigger as there is never enogh power to many, and manufactureres are in a continued race with each other, so the airframes will change too,and so forth, but, at the end, everybody will have all airplanes at 5.5Kg, and again, the same people who has the weight issue, will have their planes at 6KG, and then again will want the weight limit to be rised, because the chinesse batteries are heavier, or this or that,etc.

So and increase in the weight limit will only result in a cost incresase of the sport, and those who can not make weight is because ussually can not or do not want to afford the right equipment, so it wil make the situation worse for those people again.

Like my friend Bryan H. says, "this is a professional category".

One thing is also true, most people who complaints about the weight rule, do not even fly FAI, some don't compete at ALL, so why making all this big deal about it?

So if you want to fly FAI, it is that way, period, if don't want to make the weight rule, there are other classes you can fly, AMA pattern is not bound to FAI, you should all try to get the weight limit off in Masters, that will be a start, but if you people have not been able to change AMA, what chances do you have with FAI??

Again you should probably tell your FAI representative,( who voted BTW for the 5Kg in the past for sure) to propose the weight change at the CIAM conference, this is the only way, and again, if you can not change AMA.........

Alejandro Pereira

I couldn't agree more with Rookie. The weight max rule is RIDICULOUS! It makes no sense and actually makes things more expensive and take more time to save each gram. After a wreck you can almost guarantee you will need a new plane to make weight, instead of doing repairs to the existing airframe. Nobody I have asked has given a GOOD reason for the weight maximum yet. If it was a minimum weight like pylon I would totally understand.

To quote Ricky Bobby "With all due respect!!!"

So the first line I quoted of yours is a total contradiction. You say increasing the weight will increase the cost of the sport, but also say those that complain cannot afford the proper equipment? Doesn't make sense to me.

And I do compete, I have spoken to representatives and I still haven't gotten a single answer as to why a heavier plane is an advantage.
<br type="_moz" />

Go giant scale if you cannot afford Pattern F3A.. just that simple... But in the end you will go were your passion is... & my passion is F3A.