3696 guide lines for 2007

You got a cool electric WWII combat rig? This is the place to show it off!

Moderator: hbartel

Lee Liddle
Posts: 3330
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 10:30 pm
Location: USA

Post by Lee Liddle »

I`ll bet that plane was way faster than 50mph. Are you suggesting to slow things down or speed them up?
crash_out
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:55 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by crash_out »

I'm really not that concerned with the speed. I don't want to open another can of worms, but it's the 28oz minimum weight I dislike the most. I know that it was set so the planes could be built using the traditional combat building techniques. By the WS and wing area rules, GWS planes are legal, but they don't fly well at 20oz, forget adding a half pound....Maybe to spark intial interest they could be grandfathered in at a reduced min weight for a short period of time. The GWS Corsair is right on at 35.5" WS, but at 28 ounces I don't think it'd fly very well. Perhaps put a weight break-under 18 ounces uses the power system for a twin-7x6 at 9k...
jj
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jj »

While I can see grandfathering in the GWS planes it would not really encourage participation as they break easily and badly. THat would bum out a prospective new combat pilot. The current planes, while not indestructable, are pretty strong and can take some not so perfect flights without being trashed.

That is always the trade off. Performance and durability. The GWS planes could fly with 3696 planes, but they wouldn't preform as well and they will have a very high mortality rate.
User avatar
boiler
Posts: 3336
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:16 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Post by boiler »

In a normal combat wind they would fly backwards.[;)]
crash_out
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:55 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by crash_out »

Yeah, but considering there aren't many planes available, at least someone wanting to give it a shot would have an option. You'd be surprised how much you can beef up a GWS warbird, and the kind of wind it can handle....Plus at 25 bucks a pop, that's half the price of the what the 3 or 4 "easily" available 3696 planes are going for.

I noticed in the first draft of rules, "X" planes, converted jets and rockets were allowed. Is this carried over? I wouldn't mind trying a prop-drive Me-262 or 36" Komet.....
jj
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jj »

I wouldn't object to someone flying a GWS plane. Heck, we're pretty agreeable to anyone that wants to join in and fly some combat. Just want them to know up front that their plane might not make it home.

Of course same could be said of any plane depending on how hard it hits.
jj
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jj »

I like the rules as they stand. Seems they have worked pretty darn well so far and have resulted in a fairly simple, fun class.
Personally I'd like to keep this as an E-only class simply to help establish an e-only class and keep the debating and bickering to a minimum. But we can also accomplish that by making the E/IC matter something left at the CDs discretion, to be published 2 weeks prior to an event.

I hope that leaving flexibility up to the CD to accomodate local preferences isn't too radical of an idea. Maybe by making some things optional at the CDs discretion could get us over some of the rule flaps we tend to get into.

Regarding GWS I'd like to clarify my opinion. I believe that the planes need to meet the specs as published, but that a CD May allow a deviation for new participants, for one or two contests max. Neff runs a club pylon event that calls for a specific standard engine, but for newbys to racing we allow for use of any similar engine for the first couple of events so they can try before they need to buy.

On props I'm up in the air. The MAS 9x6 has worked well and standardizing on the SSC prop seems to have worked well, but it does seem that experimentation would be in order. I suggest we keep the rules the same but let folks run provisional events with different props if they want to test it out (that is a provisional event for a not even provisional class)
crash_out
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:55 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by crash_out »

I agree. If someone shows up with a GWS plane and REALLY wants to fly it, as long as it's not grossly overpowered(ie having the 9x6 turning at 9k in a 16 ounce airframe), it should be left up to either the CD, or a popular vote of participants on allowing them in. I personlly wouldn't exclude them. As for the props, I'm going to stick with the MAS 9x6 E. Neither the APC nor MAS glow props will fit any prop adapter that I use on motors of this size. I do not have glow planes anymore, and I'm not going to go out and buy a bunch of glow props when I have enough electric props to start my own hobby shop....
User avatar
Ed Kettler
Posts: 3437
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2001 6:05 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Ed Kettler »

I am going to recommend that we allow twins to fly either 7x6 or 8x6 props. This is based on 10+ flights on the He-219 with a variety of props, and the 8x6 APC gas props make a huge difference in performance, making the 219 competitive versus a dog. If I can talk Container Girl's owner into flying tomorrow we can run some tests against his Macchi, which is pretty fast, just to make sure we don't upset the competitive balance
User avatar
Ed Kettler
Posts: 3437
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2001 6:05 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Ed Kettler »

Test flew the He-219 versus Cash's fastest plane, the MC202, to see what the 8x6 props could do. Overall, it is a significant improvement, especially in climb rate. The MC202 is still slightly faster and can turn tighter, so I think we still have a balanced playing field if we allow 8x6 props on twins. We'll see at LSN in a couple of weeks.

I'm very pleased with the performance of the Loong Max 2250 25C cells I'm using to run both motors. Flew for about 10 minutes today and the charger put in 1585 mah and the battery was barely warm after the flight. $27 each from United Hobbies.
Post Reply

Return to “Electric WWII Fighters”