Where is RC Scale Combat going?
Greg Rose [[email protected]]
One question that I have heard a number of times is, "Where is RC Scale Combat going?" The question is prompted by issues including a decline of participation in Scale RC Combat as well as some confusing conflicts between the rules of the two most popular Scale events: 2610 and 2548.
Before I get into the issue of any decrease in RC Scale Combat activity, I must point out that even with any decline in the number of Scale Combat events and Scale fliers, Scale RC Combat is still one of the most popular AMA rule-book events.
Although it is true that the numbers show that Scale Combat is less popular than Open Combat, remember that the same rule holds true in general sport-flying. A quick visit to any club's flying field is likely to show many more non-Scale models than Scale models sitting on the flightline. There are many other AMA SIGs that would love to have as many active fliers as RC Combat enjoys.
So where are the Scale Combat fliers? Well, many of them are at the Combat events, but they are flying Open or Slow Survivable Combat (SSC).
I am a huge supporter of Scale Combat, but I have to admit that maintaining a Combat squadron of Scale models is harder than keeping the same-sized squadron of Open or SSC models in the air. Scale airplanes are harder and take more time to build, are more difficult to fly, and get broken easier than Open designs. (Okay, those are generalizations.)
By comparison, the negatives for Open and SSC are short: they don't look as cool as Scale, but that's about it. If Open wasn't as much fun as Scale, you might be able to put up an argument, but we all know that's not the truth. Open Combat is every bit as fun as Scale Combat.
I've talked to a number of "inactive" Scale Combat fliers who are now flying Open, and there seems to be a common theme to their responses. The top reason given for flying less Scale was time—or more accurately, lack of time—for that category. Another issue some Scale fliers mentioned was having two different Scale events: 2610 and 2548. During the Nats in Muncie, Indiana, I talked to 2610 supporters and 2548 supporters and got the feeling that the problem isn't so much that the two events compete with each other as much as it is the uncertainty of which type of model to build.
This, in a roundabout way, gets me to the subject of this column. Which aircraft designs offer the best opportunity for the Scale RC Combat flier to build a model that best fits into the differing rules structures of 2610 and 2548?
I'm going to put engine differences aside for this debate. Even if you can't find an engine that you are happy with for both events, you can certainly find two engines with the same footprint that would allow you to swap them before any meet. The key issues come down to size and weight.
The size of models in the 2610 event is based on 1/12 scale plus or minus 10%. The size of models in the 2548 event is based on a 48-inch minimum wingspan. Almost any Combat airplane is allowed in 2610, but only fighters on the approved 2548 list, which contains roughly 60 single-engine fighters, are allowed. (I chose to review only the single-engine designs because, despite their extremely high "cool" factor in either set of rules, twins are only a novelty in Scale Combat.)
I had to specify roughly 60 because a number of 2548-listed fighters, such as the Supermarine Spitfire and Mitsubishi A6M Zero, had major production variants with different wingspans. A couple of other listed aircraft, such as the Reggiane Re 2000, Re 2001, and Re 2005, are listed separately although they all have the same wingspan.
Three 2548-listed aircraft have sufficient spans that they can be built with 48-inch wingspans and still meet the 2610 requirement for 1/12 scale plus 10%. They are:
- Focke-Wulf Ta 152H (high-altitude fighter)
- Fairey Fulmar (fleet fighter)
- Fairey Firefly (fleet fighter)
The fleet-fighter concept produced larger single-engine British designs because they were built as two-seaters—one for the pilot and one for the navigator (not a gunner).
Two of these designs, the Ta 152H and the Fulmar, have been popular Scale Combat choices during the last several years, and the fact that they can satisfy the size requirements of both 2610 and 2548 shouldn't hurt their popularity. As long as the engine and scale-documentation requirements for 2548 are met, these models—possibly with a removable weight added to reach the higher weight requirements of 2548—could meet all the requirements of both sets of rules.
Most Scale fliers aren't going to be satisfied with a choice of three aircraft—particularly a choice of three relatively obscure designs. So, in order of closeness to the 48-inch maximum span allowed in 2548 while still meeting the 1/12 scale plus 10% of 2610, the following list includes designs that have potential as crossover, or convertible, fighters:
- Grumman F6F Hellcat — 47.0 inches at 1/12 scale plus 10% (only 1 inch off 2548 maximum)
- Republic P-47N — 46.8 inches
- Hawker Typhoon — 45.7 inches
- Hawker Tempest V — 45.0 inches
- Vought F4U Corsair — 45.0 inches
- Republic P-47C/D — 44.8 inches
- HF (high-performance)-wing Spitfires (C wing extended, used on Mk V, Mk VII, Mk VIII) — 44.0 inches
- Hawker Hurricane — 44.0 inches
(Positions and numbering above reflect closeness to the 48-inch span rather than any official ranking. The P-47C/D and the Spitfires/Hurricane crowd the lower end of the list but remain attractive choices for many fliers.)
Concerning that extra weight the model has to lift for 2548, how about using removable drop tanks? You could adjust the weight so that with them you're ready for 2548. Take them off and you're ready to fly 2610! They would look great in the air as added weight or as a visual reference for which event your model was set up to fly—a benefit you don't get with the internal weights I have seen used.
Regardless of which Scale event you like, or even if you prefer Open Combat, go build some models and join in the fun!
Until next time, build straight, fly safely, fly Combat, and always be sure to check your six!
MA
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
