Control Line: Aerobatics
I'm going to tackle a difficult subject: Trimming to make the best-flying airplane. I have discussed almost every variable in a Control Line Stunter; however, there is one more useful area in evaluating the trimming process. The real question is how to define that area - the ideal airplane. This is certainly a matter of opinion, and I know we'll have responses to what follows, but here it goes. At the end of the flying season, I had the opportunity to test several fliers' models. The striking differences in the way the aircraft were set up prompted me to reflect on trimming, and a situation from my own experiences of making the tuned pipes work.
Control Line: Aerobatics
There's always discussion about how well individual engines run. "They two-[cycle]four [cycle] well," "they hold a constant speed," "they run smoothly," etc. I'm sure the writer has a valid reason for how he phrases his words - I know I do. The question is: "Did I really communicate what a good Stunt run is all about?" In a recent column, I described a good airplane as being "on rails, not seeing anything but the fuselage under hard maneuvering." You may have thought that was pretty simplistic, but if you've ever flown a well-trimmed model, you'll see that the description is on target. I've chosen to tackle the subject of engines because it complements the recent topic of flying characteristics.
Control Line: Aerobatics
I RECENTLY ACQUIRED some of the most perfect quarter-grain wood I've ever had (Riley Wooten's Lone Star Balsa supplied it). I originally ordered it as wing rib stock, but it was such beautiful wood, I had to use it for other things. I was ready to start my new Caudron with the built-up stabilizer/elevators. Since I prefer a flat stab, the light, quarter-grain 1/16 wood seemed to be an excellent choice (a stiff, light stab is important for an honest-flying airplane). I thought perhaps I could even adjust the interior structure to take advantage of the super-stiff skin.
Control Line: Aerobatics
WHEN THE NEWCOMERS issue rolls around, I ponder how to make this column useful and interesting to anyone who may want to participate in Control Line (CL) modeling - specifically Precision Aerobatics (PA). This is difficult for me because PA/Stunt has been a major portion of my life for almost 50 years. From the time I saw my first real Stunter, I was captivated by the airplane's beauty and the eloquence of the pattern flown by the pilot. At times my interests have shifted to activities such as competitive pistol shooting and restoring old Porsches TM, but not for very long. One thing that has surprised me throughout the years is that PA can be a lifetime sport.
Control Line: Aerobatics
WITHOUT GETTING TOO ESOTERIC, I'll continue the discussion on building good-flying Precision Aerobatics models by focusing on building light. Few Stunt fliers have ever said that their models were too light, and fewer still could consistently create exceptional-looking and exceptional-performing airplanes that drove down the limits. (I don't believe Aerobatics models can be built too light; they fly better as you build lighter, assuming that you maintain structural integrity and stiffness.) How many articles have you seen that read, "My airplane weighed 66 ounces, but I believe it can be made at 61 ounces"? I have said those words myself at times, but I have gotten better throughout the years. Al Rabe, Bill Werwage, and Bob Gieseke are modelers who have kept their models on the low end of the scale.
