Control Line: Navy Carrier
THIS month I'll cover some less-well-known Carrier subjects by Lockheed and Boeing and an over-center bellcrank, spring loaded for full deflection in both directions. Lockheed was not well known for building carrier-based aircraft, though they have provided numerous land-based aircraft to the Navy. There are, however, two Lockheed jets qualifying for our event. The Navy acquired three P-80A Shooting Star fighters from the Air Force for evaluation. One was fitted with arresting and catapult gear and tested aboard the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1952, Lockheed began development of a trainer for use aboard aircraft carriers. The resulting aircraft, the T2V-1 Seastar, showed its P-80/T-33 heritage. The Navy purchased a total of 149. Three-views of the Seastar can be found in Swanborogh and Bowers' United States Navy Aircraft Since 1911.
OS2U Kingfisher
THE VOUGHT OS2U KINGFISHER has long appealed to me as a potential prototype for the Navy Carrier event. The Kingfisher wing, with its straight leading edge and relatively low taper as compared to other aircraft, lends itself to easy building and proper proportions for modeling. Its mid-wing configuration gives good high-speed trim without dihedral and allows a low-drag fuel tank installation. The only thing that kept me from building one much earlier was previous lack of documentation of its use on a carrier.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
THE ORIGINAL Carrier scoring system, and the proposed change which will be voted on in September, placed primary emphasis on the high-speed portion of the flight. Because of this emphasis, there was no alternative to high speed for a long time. Thus, the top places went almost exclusively to the best engines. The current scoring system was devised to place more emphasis on low speed and require a balanced performance for consistently high scores. The multipliers used and the ratio method of low-speed scoring achieve this objective for the low speeds that can be reached without stalling the model (about 15 mph).
Control Line: Navy Carrier
THE CLCB Final Vote on the 1982-83 rules changes is in, and was reported in the Competition Newsletter section of MA last month. There are four significant rules changes that affect equipment or the running of the event, plus some clean-up/clarification items. Most of the changes have the effect of making official rules out of the more commonly-accepted interpretations of the existing wording. The major change is in engine specifications for Profile Carrier. Sleeve bearings will no longer be required, greatly reducing the advantage currently held by machine-shop conversions of ball bearing engines. The vibration-prone ST .35 is no longer the only competitive production engine for the event. We didn't get the change to .40 engines that would have given us a wide variety of suitable commercially-available engines-engines that could have been used in Class I as well. We did gain access to the .35-class engines developed for the AMA Combat event.
Control Line: Navy Carrier
AS THIS WAS being written, the Control Line Contest Board (CLCB) was deciding which of the various proposals and cross-proposals will be placed on the Final ballot for rules to be effective in 1982. The results of the CLCB Interim ballot will probably appear in the Competition News section of the next issue of Model Aviation. The issues to be decided on this ballot are scoring and landing definition. I will not speculate about what the CLCB decisions might be. This summer will provide all of us with an opportunity to evaluate all of the proposed changes to our present rules. By trying the proposed changes at flying sessions, and by taking the time for candid discussions of the relative merits of existing rules versus proposed changes, we will be able to make intelligent decisions based on experience rather than emotions.
