[canadianice]

Time to start thinking of setting out the formal guide lines in stone. We have had enough time to work out the bugs in our desings. Now we need some direction as to formal rules. And before any one jumps the gun on this and tries to push through any thing we all need to talk about it or it wil be dead in the water before it starts. :P :P :P

We already have two sides the plain bearing and Fx groups I say it is more about speed than engines. So lets work on that instead How can we limit speed. props. airfoil thickness, weight, drag. Any and all coments welcomed. Just a friendly reminder dont take things personal and dont make them personal it is about getting WW1 OFF THE GROUND,
LETS TALK .

If you fly an FX perhaps limit the prop to 9/3 10./3 make flying wires manditory[more drag] increase the lenght of your streamer drag and as an added bonus the other guys get amore to cut. Make a min thickness airfoil. reduce throtle settings after take off. : : Just a few of my thoughts keep them comming OK>

[Buzz]

Jeff,

I understand about you guys flying with FXs, but the plain bearing rule is a proven concept. Every plane at the humber club (save one of Johnny's Albatroses) uses plain bearing engines, and they fly well.

You cannot impose a half throttle rule after takeoff. There is no way everyone will comply, simply because its too easy to give it more juice when things feel desperate. Prop sizes wont matter that much anyways.

The key is going to have top be less horsepower and a greater minimum airfoil thicknesses. The American rules use 9/16". Should be more like 1"

Here are how the american rules stand right now:

Minimum Wing Span:

monplanes 48"
biplanes 42"
triplanes 36"

Minimum Airfoil Thickness 9/16"

Maximum Weight 4lbs

Allowable Engines
plain bearing 2 stroke

10' towstring with a 25' streamer

Scoring

ontime takeoff (2 minutes after start engine) 10 points
fly full round 10 points
streamer cut 25 points
remaining streamer 1 point per foot
midair collision minus 50 points from each contestant


This is a good starting point to create our own rules. I for one would pretend WW2 Scale combat doesnt even exist when compiling these rules and start totally from scratch.

The thing most inportant to me in this class is to have slow flying birds that need to rely on turn fighting to get there cuts, and have to extend after each engagement to pick up E again. I can slowly see this class turning into WW2 with biplanes and I dont like what I see. These planes by nature should be a challenge to take off, and perform overmanuevres.

Like you said Jeff, its not personal and I hope none of you take it that way, but if half of us can do it with plain bearing engines, then somethings wrong with the plaes that cant. I'm willing to bet its an airfoil thickness issue since we all seem to be within the same weight range.

As for the 4 stroke question, I would say to include 4 strokes of the .26 or .30 class.

I gottas run for now, but more on this subject later.

[Bent]

In the past couple of years we've collectively designed about a dozen WWI models that can R.O.G., yank and bank for 5 minutes without falling out of the sky and then land without stopping the prop. No small achievement and something we should all be proud of. It's obvious from the rounds we've flown that there's a wide gap in performance among the different models. Some are fast, some are slow, some turn on a dime, some don't like to turn period! We are never going to have a level playing field, even if everyone uses the same engine. This might be a good time to take a more scientific approach. I propose we create a specification sheet for every WWI model we have that includes: engine, prop, weight, wingspan, chord thicknesses, total wing area, construction technique, flying notes, top speed, and anything else you want to add. All that data will make it way easier to have meaningful discussions and to come up with the world's best WWI combat rules. Personally, I don't want the WWI rules to look anything like what we have for WWII...think outside the furball!

Here's a shot of my DVII undergoing a total revamp of the top wing.

[Cross Check]

Hi All,

I like Bent's idea of collecting the data on planes we have flown so far.

I'll dig up the specs of my Spad VII. It has a bit too high of a wingloading for me.

Anyone know if anyone else is flying WW1 combat with the original Dave West 'rules' we started with? Or flying WW1 combat at all?

I enjoy flying WW1. It is different than WW2. A fun game. It's challenging.

Take care,
Have fun,
Dave'crosscheck'Fallowfield
Maac 6437
Unabashed Combat Team

[Midairplarina]

I just do not know how one is going to get there Corro built Bipe down to 4 lbs my newport was after many crases up to 8.5 lbs/..

infact the Triplanes are stock at 6.5 LBS... any ideas mabe the rulling should allow for heavier planes unless they stay Balsa..

Question Gary what do your Albatross come in at?

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by Midairplarina

I just do not know how one is going to get there Corro built Bipe down to 4 lbs my newport was after many crases up to 8.5 lbs/..

infact the Triplanes are stock at 6.5 LBS... any ideas mabe the rulling should allow for heavier planes unless they stay Balsa..

Question Gary what do your Albatross come in at?

OMG!! That's gotta be a typo right Alex? 8.5 lbs?

My old D7 was at 4lbs and my new one is going to be even lighter.

Gary's sopwith tripe is under 4lbs I think.

[Midairplarina]

Seriously the Newport weight in at 8.5 lbs.. no joke.. and the triplanes fully built light as possible are 6.5 lbs.. so how can we cut weight back? im just curious.. id like the planes ot be 4 lbs but just do not see how it can be accomplised in corro.. and corro alone.. folded wings etc.. instead of single 4mill and ribs on the top.. with stick on adheasive? ill agree it looks nice but how strong would one bee on a triplane? im looking fro help in this area.. im confused on how othe people buliding out of corro are lighter than 5lbs..

[Buzz]

Alex,

For wings, 1 flat sheet of 4mm coro with lightening holes wherever possible, wood spar, and blue/pink foam ribs about 5/32 thick stuck on with double sided tabe.

Gary and I are starting to use the white foam (the small ball stuff) ahead of the spar now to the leading edge. (See the picture of Gary's D7 above)

Fuselages are 2mm coro sewn together, and horizontal stabs are 4mm coro with lots of holes, and rudder/fin is 2mm coro with souvlaki skewers to stiffen them up.

[TLyttle]

Surely as modellers models can be built to under 4lb. If not, why not? Clearly the material is at fault, ie, I can't get a solid-pine biplane down to 4lbs, so I use other materials!

You Easterners get the chance to attend Rheinbeck, anyone see any of those aircraft run vertical OOS? Why not look at a 5sec fullbore vertical rule? When the model stops climbing, regardless of power, it is either right or wrong. This makes the builder pay attention to his engine/material choices.

I remember flying a bit of c/l combat, and seeing a van FULL of models, all the same, all ready to fly, all for one pilot! Are you guys headed that way?

Oh. I forgot. This is a godhelpthehindermost competition, right?

[Bent]

Alex
The weight of the Albatros is 3 lb. 10 oz. Same weight for the Sopwith Triplane. The Fokker DVII is my heaviest one at 3 lb. 15 oz. I've never checked the accuracy of my scale so these readings might be a little off. Maybe we should swap scales and see what we come with