108 MODEL AVIATION
Muncie, Indiana. A well-thought-out
pilots’ meeting included an introduction to
the Concours d’Elegance entries and
various competition classes.
The flying began Wednesday, with F3A
and Advanced in the morning. We had the
typical F3A class this year, with 26 pilots,
although a few big players were missing.
Andrew Jesky, a 2009 F3A US team
member, was leading that class after the
first two rounds, followed by Chip Hyde
and his fellow team member, Brett
Wickizer.
We had a small class of 14 pilots in
Advanced. Gary Courtney was leading
after the first two rounds, and Chris Odom
was on his heels.
Masters and Intermediate were
contested in the afternoon. Masters had a
rather small class compared to past years,
with only 32 pilots. Intermediate had its
normal turnout with 22 pilots.
In Masters, Tony
Frackowiak, a former
F3A team member, was
leading after the first two
rounds, followed very
closely by Archie
Stafford, George Asteris,
and Brandon Landry,
2008 Advanced winner,
rounding out the top
positions.
In Intermediate
[[email protected]]
Radio Control Aerobatics Albert and A.C. Glenn
Also included in this column:
• Bryan Hebert tames that
dog
2009 F3A Nationals
After just missing qualifying for the F3A
finals, A.C. and his father, Albert, go over
the Unknowns before A.C. does the warmup
flight for the judges. Jim Quinn provided
this column’s photos. Thanks, Jim!
After years of making the F3A
finals, Andrew Jesky pulled off
an amazing Nats win flying his
new Krill Model Spark. A.C.
and Albert hope to review the
model in the future.
IN THIS EDITION of “Radio Control
Aerobatics,” we will cover the 2009 RC
Aerobatics (Pattern) Nationals. We will
also begin a multiple-part series during
the course of the next few articles called
“Tame that Dog” (trimming your
airplane). To get to the best source of
trimming, we will go to those aircraft
designers known as airplane
“Whisperers.”
Some of you know them and have
flown models by Dick Hanson, Wayne
Ulery, Bryan Hebert, Mike Hester, and
others. If you have trimming problems,
they can tell you over the phone how to
fix it or, as Whisperers, look at your
model and tell you what it is doing while
flying or sitting.
This year’s RC Aerobatics Nationals
started Tuesday, July 13 at AMA’s
International Aeromodeling Center in
competition on Site 4, Riley Kissenberth
showed everyone what flying foamies all
winter did to his piloting skills, by leading
after the first two rounds. He was followed
by David Lampron.
Rain clouds opened up the morning of
Day Two, forcing F3A competitors to take
a two-hour break from flying. That made
for an extremely long day on the Masters
line later that afternoon. After Day Two,
the leaders from Day One were still
holding onto their positions.
The F3A semifinals began on Day
Three, with Andrew Jesky still in the lead.
He jumped out and grabbed the first round,
while Chip Hyde took the second round.
At the end of the week, Andrew won the
title, followed by Chip and Brett Wickizer.
Tony Frackowiak earned the Masters title,
with Archie Stafford coming in second. Gary
Courtney won Advanced, followed by the
young gun, Chris Odom. Riley Kissenberth,
“The Foamie Master,” won Intermediate,
followed closely by David Lampron—another
young gun.
This year’s Nationals was good, even with
the low turnout. It was great to see a lot of
new faces as well as a lot of familiar ones in
Muncie again. We are looking forward to the
2010 Nationals/F3A Team Trials.
If your model pulls toward the canopy or to
the belly on knife edge, you need to tame that
dog.
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:47 PM Page 108
November 2009 109
The Nats Intermediate winners (L-R): Riley Kissenberth, Dave
Lampron, Edwin Maston, Larry Kauffman, and Dean Funk. The
best Junior pilot was David Lampron.
Advanced winners (L-R) are: Gary Courtney, Chris Odom, Kevin
O’Connor, John Tarpinian, and Brian Clemmons.
Masters winners (L-R) are: Tony Frackowiak, Arch Stafford, George Asteris, Dave Snow,
Brandon Landry, Stephen Byrd, Gerry Budd, and Verne Koester.
The FAI winners (L-R): Andrew Jesky, the new National Champion; Chip Hyde; Brett
Wickizer; Mark Leseberg; Dave Lockhart; Don Szczur; Todd Blose; and Mike Kline.
Joseph Szczur (kneeling) won the top-scoring Junior award in Intermediate.
If it doesn’t fly straight up- and downlines,
you need to tame that dog. If it
doesn’t fly straight and level at different
throttle settings, you need to tame that
dog!
As we have written in previous
columns, preparation is crucial. Flying an
aircraft that is not properly trimmed can
be time-consuming.
We learned something the hard way. If
a few test flights are needed to remember
how to fly a certain model every time we
wanted to practice or compete with it, we
had a poor plan at a contest and a
frustrating situation at practice.
Sometimes, to be the best takes more
than skill; it takes a tamed airplane. Time
spent trimming a model at the beginning
of the season can make the difference
between a successful contest season and
one where, “I’m just here having fun.”
The first aircraft Whisperer we will
talk to is Bryan Herbert, who owns Hebert
Competition Designs. He is known for
such models as the Storm, Patriot,
Shinden, and his latest, the Valiant
monoplane and Shark biplane.
Bryan said:
“In the world of precision competitive
flying, we are faced with a couple of
challenges, the first being a reliable setup.
Whether propulsion selection or airframe
selection, what we choose to use can make
or break us in the heat of competition.
“We go through enormous effort to
build and install equipment, arrange our
schedules to practice, and dot every ‘i’
and cross every ‘t’ to get ready for the
local events, as well as the Nationals. I
will teach you how to get the most reliable
results from your setup, no matter what
design you are flying.
“Right now there are so many airplanes
from which to choose, from cottage
operations to the Naruki $10,000-a-copy
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:48 PM Page 109
machines from Japan. The bottom line is
there really is no poor design out there in
the ‘mainstream’ of Pattern.
“I’m not talking about the Pattern lookalikes,
hobby shop sellers, ‘it flies just like
a Pattern airplane’-type model. We will
have to discuss those another time.
“Using condition switches that our
modern radios come equipped with, we
have learned to satisfy the judges with
snaps or spins and have convinced
ourselves this is the only way it can be
done. We can manufacture a fake spin or
snap through manipulation of the stick and
sleight of hand to display what is accepted
as a perfect maneuver, instead of trimming
the airplane to perform the maneuver.
“While I do believe that condition
switches are a great tool, I hope I can share
some insight as to how to get a more
consistent result without the need for so
much programming, by making the
airplane as perfect as possible.
“The Number One rule in trim
perfection is setup, setup, setup! I hope I
get my point across. The closer you start to
perfection, the better the outcome.
“I’m amazed at how many guys don’t
know what their throws are in degrees or
measurements of any kind. This is a must
in order to know how to improve or refine
your setup in the trimming process and to
record and be able to transfer this
information from one airplane to another.
“I would like to briefly go over my trim
method. I call it the Triangulation
Trimming Method, because I use three
flight angles for feedback to let the
airplane tell me what to do.
“In order to boil it down to a head, and
get to the fine-tuning, I have refined what I
call a ‘Plus-Plus’ setup. The wing and the
stabilizer are both set positive to the
centerline or the desired flight angle that
the designer had in mind when he drew the
fuselage on the plans. This setup goes
against the grain of the old accepted way
of trimming.
“The last few rules cycles have raised
the bar for what is expected out of a
modern airframe. Who would have thought
that a top airframe would have about a
three-year life span because of constantly
evolving technology, building techniques,
and schedules? We just don’t get to know
our airplanes very well anymore before we
have to buy the latest airframe on the
market.
“Because our modern airplanes are
expected to be able to perform maneuvers
we would have only dreamed about just
five years ago, the demand for a perfect
airframe has gone up exponentially, while
our trimming skills have stayed the same.
“I’m going to let you in on a big secret.
There are no bad designs out there. There
are designs better than the others, but they
all have some good points.
“For the most part, we are just bad
trimmers. Those who consistently do well
are those that have learned how to set their
airplanes up for the most durable usage
and consistent performance.
“In the old days of retracts, we were
mostly interested in going as fast as we
could for the ease in manipulation of the
controls. The less we moved the sticks, the
lesser a mix was required. To do this, we
installed retracts and had what amounted
to pencil-like fuselages to keep the drag
down of the zero-zero setup that was in
full swing.
“The schedules were not very
demanding, and the only maneuvers we
ever had to really worry about, as far as
mixing was concerned, were the four-point
roll and a reverse knife edge. So, the need
for mixing was kept to a minimum,
because the maneuver demand was not
very high or complicated.
“Fast forward about 10 years, and
Christophe [Paysant-Le Roux] spanked
everyone at the World Championships with
a new airplane and flying style, using the
more powerful YS engines. It was his
throttle management. His style was lightyears
ahead of the rest of the world, with
this slow, deliberate throttle-management
flying that set the new trend for flying.
“At the same time, Dean Koger, Ron
Chidgey, and a few others like myself
decided to slow the airplane down. We
knew we were going to have to build some
drag into the airplanes and increase the
wing size; hence 1,150-square-inch wings
and fixed gear came about.
“But there was one problem; F3A
started using down-line and up-line snaps,
which really made this style of airplane
hard to fly. The snaps and reverse spins
especially, because the wings were so hard
to stall or keep stalled during the snaps or
spins.
“So we all started reducing the wing
size; eventually getting down to the 900 or
950 area and even larger fuselages for
transitional lift, and longer fixed gear for
the giant power plants. We now use 22-
inch-plus propellers. All this added drag
and we became quite happy with
ourselves. However, there is a downside.
“Briefly put, no drag is good; it robs the
airplane of efficiency. If the drag does not
produce lift, it is a detriment. That’s why
you see some taking the gear legs and
making them lifting devices. However, our
cool, user-friendly landing gear is
responsible for most of the trimming issues
we have today.
“Remember, we went from 1,150 to
950 squares; in essence, we reduced lift
and increased drag so as to compensate.
We started moving our CG more rearward,
which allowed our wing angle of attack to
increase, thereby producing more lift at
level flying conditions. With these few
changes, we increased our workload
trimming and setting up an airplane that’s
happy through the whole flight envelope.
“Here are the problems we encounter
with the conditions laid out above. First,
with the CG moved rearward—it’s usually
around 35% of the MAC [mean
aerodynamic chord]—the airplane has a
left rudder tuck that’s pronounced mostly
on four-point rolls, reverse knife edge,
stall turns, knife-edge loops, etc.,
generally, whenever we use the left rudder.
Right rudder does not get affected by this
unless your CG is really rearward.
“The next problem is an up-line pull to
the canopy and a down-line pull to the
canopy. To take care of the up-line pull,
we increase downthrust. I have seen
upwards to 3.5° to correct this problem.
Then to fix the down-line pull, we mix it
out with the transmitter.
“These Band-Aids all seem to work
okay, and they are commonly accepted as
normal correction practices. Some are
even proponents of a rudder-to-throttle
mix, because they fly so tail-heavy.
“Now let’s talk about the snaps and
spins. Most of the snaps and spins
performed today are just tomfoolery, set
up with condition switches so the airplane
appears to be performing the maneuver.
We can use stick switched conditions that
enable the elevator to come in and out of
the maneuver, to give the appearance or
resemblance of the descriptions required
by the rule books, while the airplane has
never actually snapped or stalled.
“Stalled spin entries are the same.
Using the famous elevator rate switch
from high to low rate to show a nose drop,
which looks like a stalled entry, right
before the spin is just more of the same
and is accepted today as a required setup.
Why? Because of one big setup flaw: CG
position.
“Recently, the T-cantilizer phenomenon
has come about [that side-force-generator
seen mounted behind the canopy], touting
the end all for rudder mix. While I agree it
works for the most part, and I respect
Christophe as a World Champion designer,
you have just added another surface on the
airplane to trim, and it generally is another
Band-Aid for a poorly trimmed machine—
not a bad design.
“Yes, it will reduce rudder mix, mainly
because the cross-section of the gadget is
acting as a lifting surface and helping the
rudder authority. More authority, less
rudder use required, therefore, less mix.
But most of the time, it causes another
issue in the vertical up- or down-lines, that
you have to chase with mixes, and can be
abusive to the surface it is mounted on—
usually the canopy.
“I will start the basic foundation to my
trimming method in the next article. But I
hope I have laid a good foundation to help
you understand where we are coming from
and where we need to go to improve your
flying and trimming understanding and
skills.
“The method I want to share with you
for correcting these issues, which most of
us have come to accept and live with, is
something I have developed over the last
20 years. It is an extremely important
knowledge tool for your advancement in
Pattern flying and will dramatically
increase your chances for advancing your
understanding in setting up an airplane
every time.
“It is not a design exclusive. It’s
fundamental knowledge that will transcend
all designs and classes. When you are done
with this series of articles, you will walk
away understanding more about trimming
and setup than you ever thought you would
want to know.”
Thank you, Bryan, for your insight. It’s
likely that many fliers are surprised by
your thoughts and, we hope, will be
encouraged to try some of your trimming
ideas and learn more about how they can
be better pilots by understanding how their
airplanes work. MA
Sources:
Hebert Competition Designs
www.hebertcompetitiondesigns.com
National Society of Radio Controlled
Aerobatics
www.nsrca.org
Edition: Model Aviation - 2009/11
Page Numbers: 109,110,112
Edition: Model Aviation - 2009/11
Page Numbers: 109,110,112
108 MODEL AVIATION
Muncie, Indiana. A well-thought-out
pilots’ meeting included an introduction to
the Concours d’Elegance entries and
various competition classes.
The flying began Wednesday, with F3A
and Advanced in the morning. We had the
typical F3A class this year, with 26 pilots,
although a few big players were missing.
Andrew Jesky, a 2009 F3A US team
member, was leading that class after the
first two rounds, followed by Chip Hyde
and his fellow team member, Brett
Wickizer.
We had a small class of 14 pilots in
Advanced. Gary Courtney was leading
after the first two rounds, and Chris Odom
was on his heels.
Masters and Intermediate were
contested in the afternoon. Masters had a
rather small class compared to past years,
with only 32 pilots. Intermediate had its
normal turnout with 22 pilots.
In Masters, Tony
Frackowiak, a former
F3A team member, was
leading after the first two
rounds, followed very
closely by Archie
Stafford, George Asteris,
and Brandon Landry,
2008 Advanced winner,
rounding out the top
positions.
In Intermediate
[[email protected]]
Radio Control Aerobatics Albert and A.C. Glenn
Also included in this column:
• Bryan Hebert tames that
dog
2009 F3A Nationals
After just missing qualifying for the F3A
finals, A.C. and his father, Albert, go over
the Unknowns before A.C. does the warmup
flight for the judges. Jim Quinn provided
this column’s photos. Thanks, Jim!
After years of making the F3A
finals, Andrew Jesky pulled off
an amazing Nats win flying his
new Krill Model Spark. A.C.
and Albert hope to review the
model in the future.
IN THIS EDITION of “Radio Control
Aerobatics,” we will cover the 2009 RC
Aerobatics (Pattern) Nationals. We will
also begin a multiple-part series during
the course of the next few articles called
“Tame that Dog” (trimming your
airplane). To get to the best source of
trimming, we will go to those aircraft
designers known as airplane
“Whisperers.”
Some of you know them and have
flown models by Dick Hanson, Wayne
Ulery, Bryan Hebert, Mike Hester, and
others. If you have trimming problems,
they can tell you over the phone how to
fix it or, as Whisperers, look at your
model and tell you what it is doing while
flying or sitting.
This year’s RC Aerobatics Nationals
started Tuesday, July 13 at AMA’s
International Aeromodeling Center in
competition on Site 4, Riley Kissenberth
showed everyone what flying foamies all
winter did to his piloting skills, by leading
after the first two rounds. He was followed
by David Lampron.
Rain clouds opened up the morning of
Day Two, forcing F3A competitors to take
a two-hour break from flying. That made
for an extremely long day on the Masters
line later that afternoon. After Day Two,
the leaders from Day One were still
holding onto their positions.
The F3A semifinals began on Day
Three, with Andrew Jesky still in the lead.
He jumped out and grabbed the first round,
while Chip Hyde took the second round.
At the end of the week, Andrew won the
title, followed by Chip and Brett Wickizer.
Tony Frackowiak earned the Masters title,
with Archie Stafford coming in second. Gary
Courtney won Advanced, followed by the
young gun, Chris Odom. Riley Kissenberth,
“The Foamie Master,” won Intermediate,
followed closely by David Lampron—another
young gun.
This year’s Nationals was good, even with
the low turnout. It was great to see a lot of
new faces as well as a lot of familiar ones in
Muncie again. We are looking forward to the
2010 Nationals/F3A Team Trials.
If your model pulls toward the canopy or to
the belly on knife edge, you need to tame that
dog.
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:47 PM Page 108
November 2009 109
The Nats Intermediate winners (L-R): Riley Kissenberth, Dave
Lampron, Edwin Maston, Larry Kauffman, and Dean Funk. The
best Junior pilot was David Lampron.
Advanced winners (L-R) are: Gary Courtney, Chris Odom, Kevin
O’Connor, John Tarpinian, and Brian Clemmons.
Masters winners (L-R) are: Tony Frackowiak, Arch Stafford, George Asteris, Dave Snow,
Brandon Landry, Stephen Byrd, Gerry Budd, and Verne Koester.
The FAI winners (L-R): Andrew Jesky, the new National Champion; Chip Hyde; Brett
Wickizer; Mark Leseberg; Dave Lockhart; Don Szczur; Todd Blose; and Mike Kline.
Joseph Szczur (kneeling) won the top-scoring Junior award in Intermediate.
If it doesn’t fly straight up- and downlines,
you need to tame that dog. If it
doesn’t fly straight and level at different
throttle settings, you need to tame that
dog!
As we have written in previous
columns, preparation is crucial. Flying an
aircraft that is not properly trimmed can
be time-consuming.
We learned something the hard way. If
a few test flights are needed to remember
how to fly a certain model every time we
wanted to practice or compete with it, we
had a poor plan at a contest and a
frustrating situation at practice.
Sometimes, to be the best takes more
than skill; it takes a tamed airplane. Time
spent trimming a model at the beginning
of the season can make the difference
between a successful contest season and
one where, “I’m just here having fun.”
The first aircraft Whisperer we will
talk to is Bryan Herbert, who owns Hebert
Competition Designs. He is known for
such models as the Storm, Patriot,
Shinden, and his latest, the Valiant
monoplane and Shark biplane.
Bryan said:
“In the world of precision competitive
flying, we are faced with a couple of
challenges, the first being a reliable setup.
Whether propulsion selection or airframe
selection, what we choose to use can make
or break us in the heat of competition.
“We go through enormous effort to
build and install equipment, arrange our
schedules to practice, and dot every ‘i’
and cross every ‘t’ to get ready for the
local events, as well as the Nationals. I
will teach you how to get the most reliable
results from your setup, no matter what
design you are flying.
“Right now there are so many airplanes
from which to choose, from cottage
operations to the Naruki $10,000-a-copy
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:48 PM Page 109
machines from Japan. The bottom line is
there really is no poor design out there in
the ‘mainstream’ of Pattern.
“I’m not talking about the Pattern lookalikes,
hobby shop sellers, ‘it flies just like
a Pattern airplane’-type model. We will
have to discuss those another time.
“Using condition switches that our
modern radios come equipped with, we
have learned to satisfy the judges with
snaps or spins and have convinced
ourselves this is the only way it can be
done. We can manufacture a fake spin or
snap through manipulation of the stick and
sleight of hand to display what is accepted
as a perfect maneuver, instead of trimming
the airplane to perform the maneuver.
“While I do believe that condition
switches are a great tool, I hope I can share
some insight as to how to get a more
consistent result without the need for so
much programming, by making the
airplane as perfect as possible.
“The Number One rule in trim
perfection is setup, setup, setup! I hope I
get my point across. The closer you start to
perfection, the better the outcome.
“I’m amazed at how many guys don’t
know what their throws are in degrees or
measurements of any kind. This is a must
in order to know how to improve or refine
your setup in the trimming process and to
record and be able to transfer this
information from one airplane to another.
“I would like to briefly go over my trim
method. I call it the Triangulation
Trimming Method, because I use three
flight angles for feedback to let the
airplane tell me what to do.
“In order to boil it down to a head, and
get to the fine-tuning, I have refined what I
call a ‘Plus-Plus’ setup. The wing and the
stabilizer are both set positive to the
centerline or the desired flight angle that
the designer had in mind when he drew the
fuselage on the plans. This setup goes
against the grain of the old accepted way
of trimming.
“The last few rules cycles have raised
the bar for what is expected out of a
modern airframe. Who would have thought
that a top airframe would have about a
three-year life span because of constantly
evolving technology, building techniques,
and schedules? We just don’t get to know
our airplanes very well anymore before we
have to buy the latest airframe on the
market.
“Because our modern airplanes are
expected to be able to perform maneuvers
we would have only dreamed about just
five years ago, the demand for a perfect
airframe has gone up exponentially, while
our trimming skills have stayed the same.
“I’m going to let you in on a big secret.
There are no bad designs out there. There
are designs better than the others, but they
all have some good points.
“For the most part, we are just bad
trimmers. Those who consistently do well
are those that have learned how to set their
airplanes up for the most durable usage
and consistent performance.
“In the old days of retracts, we were
mostly interested in going as fast as we
could for the ease in manipulation of the
controls. The less we moved the sticks, the
lesser a mix was required. To do this, we
installed retracts and had what amounted
to pencil-like fuselages to keep the drag
down of the zero-zero setup that was in
full swing.
“The schedules were not very
demanding, and the only maneuvers we
ever had to really worry about, as far as
mixing was concerned, were the four-point
roll and a reverse knife edge. So, the need
for mixing was kept to a minimum,
because the maneuver demand was not
very high or complicated.
“Fast forward about 10 years, and
Christophe [Paysant-Le Roux] spanked
everyone at the World Championships with
a new airplane and flying style, using the
more powerful YS engines. It was his
throttle management. His style was lightyears
ahead of the rest of the world, with
this slow, deliberate throttle-management
flying that set the new trend for flying.
“At the same time, Dean Koger, Ron
Chidgey, and a few others like myself
decided to slow the airplane down. We
knew we were going to have to build some
drag into the airplanes and increase the
wing size; hence 1,150-square-inch wings
and fixed gear came about.
“But there was one problem; F3A
started using down-line and up-line snaps,
which really made this style of airplane
hard to fly. The snaps and reverse spins
especially, because the wings were so hard
to stall or keep stalled during the snaps or
spins.
“So we all started reducing the wing
size; eventually getting down to the 900 or
950 area and even larger fuselages for
transitional lift, and longer fixed gear for
the giant power plants. We now use 22-
inch-plus propellers. All this added drag
and we became quite happy with
ourselves. However, there is a downside.
“Briefly put, no drag is good; it robs the
airplane of efficiency. If the drag does not
produce lift, it is a detriment. That’s why
you see some taking the gear legs and
making them lifting devices. However, our
cool, user-friendly landing gear is
responsible for most of the trimming issues
we have today.
“Remember, we went from 1,150 to
950 squares; in essence, we reduced lift
and increased drag so as to compensate.
We started moving our CG more rearward,
which allowed our wing angle of attack to
increase, thereby producing more lift at
level flying conditions. With these few
changes, we increased our workload
trimming and setting up an airplane that’s
happy through the whole flight envelope.
“Here are the problems we encounter
with the conditions laid out above. First,
with the CG moved rearward—it’s usually
around 35% of the MAC [mean
aerodynamic chord]—the airplane has a
left rudder tuck that’s pronounced mostly
on four-point rolls, reverse knife edge,
stall turns, knife-edge loops, etc.,
generally, whenever we use the left rudder.
Right rudder does not get affected by this
unless your CG is really rearward.
“The next problem is an up-line pull to
the canopy and a down-line pull to the
canopy. To take care of the up-line pull,
we increase downthrust. I have seen
upwards to 3.5° to correct this problem.
Then to fix the down-line pull, we mix it
out with the transmitter.
“These Band-Aids all seem to work
okay, and they are commonly accepted as
normal correction practices. Some are
even proponents of a rudder-to-throttle
mix, because they fly so tail-heavy.
“Now let’s talk about the snaps and
spins. Most of the snaps and spins
performed today are just tomfoolery, set
up with condition switches so the airplane
appears to be performing the maneuver.
We can use stick switched conditions that
enable the elevator to come in and out of
the maneuver, to give the appearance or
resemblance of the descriptions required
by the rule books, while the airplane has
never actually snapped or stalled.
“Stalled spin entries are the same.
Using the famous elevator rate switch
from high to low rate to show a nose drop,
which looks like a stalled entry, right
before the spin is just more of the same
and is accepted today as a required setup.
Why? Because of one big setup flaw: CG
position.
“Recently, the T-cantilizer phenomenon
has come about [that side-force-generator
seen mounted behind the canopy], touting
the end all for rudder mix. While I agree it
works for the most part, and I respect
Christophe as a World Champion designer,
you have just added another surface on the
airplane to trim, and it generally is another
Band-Aid for a poorly trimmed machine—
not a bad design.
“Yes, it will reduce rudder mix, mainly
because the cross-section of the gadget is
acting as a lifting surface and helping the
rudder authority. More authority, less
rudder use required, therefore, less mix.
But most of the time, it causes another
issue in the vertical up- or down-lines, that
you have to chase with mixes, and can be
abusive to the surface it is mounted on—
usually the canopy.
“I will start the basic foundation to my
trimming method in the next article. But I
hope I have laid a good foundation to help
you understand where we are coming from
and where we need to go to improve your
flying and trimming understanding and
skills.
“The method I want to share with you
for correcting these issues, which most of
us have come to accept and live with, is
something I have developed over the last
20 years. It is an extremely important
knowledge tool for your advancement in
Pattern flying and will dramatically
increase your chances for advancing your
understanding in setting up an airplane
every time.
“It is not a design exclusive. It’s
fundamental knowledge that will transcend
all designs and classes. When you are done
with this series of articles, you will walk
away understanding more about trimming
and setup than you ever thought you would
want to know.”
Thank you, Bryan, for your insight. It’s
likely that many fliers are surprised by
your thoughts and, we hope, will be
encouraged to try some of your trimming
ideas and learn more about how they can
be better pilots by understanding how their
airplanes work. MA
Sources:
Hebert Competition Designs
www.hebertcompetitiondesigns.com
National Society of Radio Controlled
Aerobatics
www.nsrca.org
Edition: Model Aviation - 2009/11
Page Numbers: 109,110,112
108 MODEL AVIATION
Muncie, Indiana. A well-thought-out
pilots’ meeting included an introduction to
the Concours d’Elegance entries and
various competition classes.
The flying began Wednesday, with F3A
and Advanced in the morning. We had the
typical F3A class this year, with 26 pilots,
although a few big players were missing.
Andrew Jesky, a 2009 F3A US team
member, was leading that class after the
first two rounds, followed by Chip Hyde
and his fellow team member, Brett
Wickizer.
We had a small class of 14 pilots in
Advanced. Gary Courtney was leading
after the first two rounds, and Chris Odom
was on his heels.
Masters and Intermediate were
contested in the afternoon. Masters had a
rather small class compared to past years,
with only 32 pilots. Intermediate had its
normal turnout with 22 pilots.
In Masters, Tony
Frackowiak, a former
F3A team member, was
leading after the first two
rounds, followed very
closely by Archie
Stafford, George Asteris,
and Brandon Landry,
2008 Advanced winner,
rounding out the top
positions.
In Intermediate
[[email protected]]
Radio Control Aerobatics Albert and A.C. Glenn
Also included in this column:
• Bryan Hebert tames that
dog
2009 F3A Nationals
After just missing qualifying for the F3A
finals, A.C. and his father, Albert, go over
the Unknowns before A.C. does the warmup
flight for the judges. Jim Quinn provided
this column’s photos. Thanks, Jim!
After years of making the F3A
finals, Andrew Jesky pulled off
an amazing Nats win flying his
new Krill Model Spark. A.C.
and Albert hope to review the
model in the future.
IN THIS EDITION of “Radio Control
Aerobatics,” we will cover the 2009 RC
Aerobatics (Pattern) Nationals. We will
also begin a multiple-part series during
the course of the next few articles called
“Tame that Dog” (trimming your
airplane). To get to the best source of
trimming, we will go to those aircraft
designers known as airplane
“Whisperers.”
Some of you know them and have
flown models by Dick Hanson, Wayne
Ulery, Bryan Hebert, Mike Hester, and
others. If you have trimming problems,
they can tell you over the phone how to
fix it or, as Whisperers, look at your
model and tell you what it is doing while
flying or sitting.
This year’s RC Aerobatics Nationals
started Tuesday, July 13 at AMA’s
International Aeromodeling Center in
competition on Site 4, Riley Kissenberth
showed everyone what flying foamies all
winter did to his piloting skills, by leading
after the first two rounds. He was followed
by David Lampron.
Rain clouds opened up the morning of
Day Two, forcing F3A competitors to take
a two-hour break from flying. That made
for an extremely long day on the Masters
line later that afternoon. After Day Two,
the leaders from Day One were still
holding onto their positions.
The F3A semifinals began on Day
Three, with Andrew Jesky still in the lead.
He jumped out and grabbed the first round,
while Chip Hyde took the second round.
At the end of the week, Andrew won the
title, followed by Chip and Brett Wickizer.
Tony Frackowiak earned the Masters title,
with Archie Stafford coming in second. Gary
Courtney won Advanced, followed by the
young gun, Chris Odom. Riley Kissenberth,
“The Foamie Master,” won Intermediate,
followed closely by David Lampron—another
young gun.
This year’s Nationals was good, even with
the low turnout. It was great to see a lot of
new faces as well as a lot of familiar ones in
Muncie again. We are looking forward to the
2010 Nationals/F3A Team Trials.
If your model pulls toward the canopy or to
the belly on knife edge, you need to tame that
dog.
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:47 PM Page 108
November 2009 109
The Nats Intermediate winners (L-R): Riley Kissenberth, Dave
Lampron, Edwin Maston, Larry Kauffman, and Dean Funk. The
best Junior pilot was David Lampron.
Advanced winners (L-R) are: Gary Courtney, Chris Odom, Kevin
O’Connor, John Tarpinian, and Brian Clemmons.
Masters winners (L-R) are: Tony Frackowiak, Arch Stafford, George Asteris, Dave Snow,
Brandon Landry, Stephen Byrd, Gerry Budd, and Verne Koester.
The FAI winners (L-R): Andrew Jesky, the new National Champion; Chip Hyde; Brett
Wickizer; Mark Leseberg; Dave Lockhart; Don Szczur; Todd Blose; and Mike Kline.
Joseph Szczur (kneeling) won the top-scoring Junior award in Intermediate.
If it doesn’t fly straight up- and downlines,
you need to tame that dog. If it
doesn’t fly straight and level at different
throttle settings, you need to tame that
dog!
As we have written in previous
columns, preparation is crucial. Flying an
aircraft that is not properly trimmed can
be time-consuming.
We learned something the hard way. If
a few test flights are needed to remember
how to fly a certain model every time we
wanted to practice or compete with it, we
had a poor plan at a contest and a
frustrating situation at practice.
Sometimes, to be the best takes more
than skill; it takes a tamed airplane. Time
spent trimming a model at the beginning
of the season can make the difference
between a successful contest season and
one where, “I’m just here having fun.”
The first aircraft Whisperer we will
talk to is Bryan Herbert, who owns Hebert
Competition Designs. He is known for
such models as the Storm, Patriot,
Shinden, and his latest, the Valiant
monoplane and Shark biplane.
Bryan said:
“In the world of precision competitive
flying, we are faced with a couple of
challenges, the first being a reliable setup.
Whether propulsion selection or airframe
selection, what we choose to use can make
or break us in the heat of competition.
“We go through enormous effort to
build and install equipment, arrange our
schedules to practice, and dot every ‘i’
and cross every ‘t’ to get ready for the
local events, as well as the Nationals. I
will teach you how to get the most reliable
results from your setup, no matter what
design you are flying.
“Right now there are so many airplanes
from which to choose, from cottage
operations to the Naruki $10,000-a-copy
11sig4.QXD_00MSTRPG.QXD 9/24/09 4:48 PM Page 109
machines from Japan. The bottom line is
there really is no poor design out there in
the ‘mainstream’ of Pattern.
“I’m not talking about the Pattern lookalikes,
hobby shop sellers, ‘it flies just like
a Pattern airplane’-type model. We will
have to discuss those another time.
“Using condition switches that our
modern radios come equipped with, we
have learned to satisfy the judges with
snaps or spins and have convinced
ourselves this is the only way it can be
done. We can manufacture a fake spin or
snap through manipulation of the stick and
sleight of hand to display what is accepted
as a perfect maneuver, instead of trimming
the airplane to perform the maneuver.
“While I do believe that condition
switches are a great tool, I hope I can share
some insight as to how to get a more
consistent result without the need for so
much programming, by making the
airplane as perfect as possible.
“The Number One rule in trim
perfection is setup, setup, setup! I hope I
get my point across. The closer you start to
perfection, the better the outcome.
“I’m amazed at how many guys don’t
know what their throws are in degrees or
measurements of any kind. This is a must
in order to know how to improve or refine
your setup in the trimming process and to
record and be able to transfer this
information from one airplane to another.
“I would like to briefly go over my trim
method. I call it the Triangulation
Trimming Method, because I use three
flight angles for feedback to let the
airplane tell me what to do.
“In order to boil it down to a head, and
get to the fine-tuning, I have refined what I
call a ‘Plus-Plus’ setup. The wing and the
stabilizer are both set positive to the
centerline or the desired flight angle that
the designer had in mind when he drew the
fuselage on the plans. This setup goes
against the grain of the old accepted way
of trimming.
“The last few rules cycles have raised
the bar for what is expected out of a
modern airframe. Who would have thought
that a top airframe would have about a
three-year life span because of constantly
evolving technology, building techniques,
and schedules? We just don’t get to know
our airplanes very well anymore before we
have to buy the latest airframe on the
market.
“Because our modern airplanes are
expected to be able to perform maneuvers
we would have only dreamed about just
five years ago, the demand for a perfect
airframe has gone up exponentially, while
our trimming skills have stayed the same.
“I’m going to let you in on a big secret.
There are no bad designs out there. There
are designs better than the others, but they
all have some good points.
“For the most part, we are just bad
trimmers. Those who consistently do well
are those that have learned how to set their
airplanes up for the most durable usage
and consistent performance.
“In the old days of retracts, we were
mostly interested in going as fast as we
could for the ease in manipulation of the
controls. The less we moved the sticks, the
lesser a mix was required. To do this, we
installed retracts and had what amounted
to pencil-like fuselages to keep the drag
down of the zero-zero setup that was in
full swing.
“The schedules were not very
demanding, and the only maneuvers we
ever had to really worry about, as far as
mixing was concerned, were the four-point
roll and a reverse knife edge. So, the need
for mixing was kept to a minimum,
because the maneuver demand was not
very high or complicated.
“Fast forward about 10 years, and
Christophe [Paysant-Le Roux] spanked
everyone at the World Championships with
a new airplane and flying style, using the
more powerful YS engines. It was his
throttle management. His style was lightyears
ahead of the rest of the world, with
this slow, deliberate throttle-management
flying that set the new trend for flying.
“At the same time, Dean Koger, Ron
Chidgey, and a few others like myself
decided to slow the airplane down. We
knew we were going to have to build some
drag into the airplanes and increase the
wing size; hence 1,150-square-inch wings
and fixed gear came about.
“But there was one problem; F3A
started using down-line and up-line snaps,
which really made this style of airplane
hard to fly. The snaps and reverse spins
especially, because the wings were so hard
to stall or keep stalled during the snaps or
spins.
“So we all started reducing the wing
size; eventually getting down to the 900 or
950 area and even larger fuselages for
transitional lift, and longer fixed gear for
the giant power plants. We now use 22-
inch-plus propellers. All this added drag
and we became quite happy with
ourselves. However, there is a downside.
“Briefly put, no drag is good; it robs the
airplane of efficiency. If the drag does not
produce lift, it is a detriment. That’s why
you see some taking the gear legs and
making them lifting devices. However, our
cool, user-friendly landing gear is
responsible for most of the trimming issues
we have today.
“Remember, we went from 1,150 to
950 squares; in essence, we reduced lift
and increased drag so as to compensate.
We started moving our CG more rearward,
which allowed our wing angle of attack to
increase, thereby producing more lift at
level flying conditions. With these few
changes, we increased our workload
trimming and setting up an airplane that’s
happy through the whole flight envelope.
“Here are the problems we encounter
with the conditions laid out above. First,
with the CG moved rearward—it’s usually
around 35% of the MAC [mean
aerodynamic chord]—the airplane has a
left rudder tuck that’s pronounced mostly
on four-point rolls, reverse knife edge,
stall turns, knife-edge loops, etc.,
generally, whenever we use the left rudder.
Right rudder does not get affected by this
unless your CG is really rearward.
“The next problem is an up-line pull to
the canopy and a down-line pull to the
canopy. To take care of the up-line pull,
we increase downthrust. I have seen
upwards to 3.5° to correct this problem.
Then to fix the down-line pull, we mix it
out with the transmitter.
“These Band-Aids all seem to work
okay, and they are commonly accepted as
normal correction practices. Some are
even proponents of a rudder-to-throttle
mix, because they fly so tail-heavy.
“Now let’s talk about the snaps and
spins. Most of the snaps and spins
performed today are just tomfoolery, set
up with condition switches so the airplane
appears to be performing the maneuver.
We can use stick switched conditions that
enable the elevator to come in and out of
the maneuver, to give the appearance or
resemblance of the descriptions required
by the rule books, while the airplane has
never actually snapped or stalled.
“Stalled spin entries are the same.
Using the famous elevator rate switch
from high to low rate to show a nose drop,
which looks like a stalled entry, right
before the spin is just more of the same
and is accepted today as a required setup.
Why? Because of one big setup flaw: CG
position.
“Recently, the T-cantilizer phenomenon
has come about [that side-force-generator
seen mounted behind the canopy], touting
the end all for rudder mix. While I agree it
works for the most part, and I respect
Christophe as a World Champion designer,
you have just added another surface on the
airplane to trim, and it generally is another
Band-Aid for a poorly trimmed machine—
not a bad design.
“Yes, it will reduce rudder mix, mainly
because the cross-section of the gadget is
acting as a lifting surface and helping the
rudder authority. More authority, less
rudder use required, therefore, less mix.
But most of the time, it causes another
issue in the vertical up- or down-lines, that
you have to chase with mixes, and can be
abusive to the surface it is mounted on—
usually the canopy.
“I will start the basic foundation to my
trimming method in the next article. But I
hope I have laid a good foundation to help
you understand where we are coming from
and where we need to go to improve your
flying and trimming understanding and
skills.
“The method I want to share with you
for correcting these issues, which most of
us have come to accept and live with, is
something I have developed over the last
20 years. It is an extremely important
knowledge tool for your advancement in
Pattern flying and will dramatically
increase your chances for advancing your
understanding in setting up an airplane
every time.
“It is not a design exclusive. It’s
fundamental knowledge that will transcend
all designs and classes. When you are done
with this series of articles, you will walk
away understanding more about trimming
and setup than you ever thought you would
want to know.”
Thank you, Bryan, for your insight. It’s
likely that many fliers are surprised by
your thoughts and, we hope, will be
encouraged to try some of your trimming
ideas and learn more about how they can
be better pilots by understanding how their
airplanes work. MA
Sources:
Hebert Competition Designs
www.hebertcompetitiondesigns.com
National Society of Radio Controlled
Aerobatics
www.nsrca.org