Radio Control: Sport Aerobatics
LAST month, I promised to answer the question Doug Dahlke (Oshkosh, WI) sent to me about what part of the propeller was more important in producing thrust. Part of the reason I put off answering the question is that last month's article was already too long, and the other reason is that it is a difficult question to answer for a reader group with widely varying backgrounds. My background is in aeronautical engineering. I could make an explanation which would satisfy an engineer but leave many of the rest of the readers scratching their heads. On the other hand, I could make the explanation so simple that I'd insult 90% of the readers.
Radio Control: Sport/Aerobatics
AS THIS was written during the waning days of 1980, I was thinking about all the good things I was supposed to do in RC during the year and never quite got to. If those are added to the things which I shouldn't have done but did, they look disturbingly like topics for resolutions. Perhaps you have been doing similar thinking and also have a bunch of potential resolutions rattling around in your head, too? Let's compare a few notes, because I suspect that many of us share the same thoughts at this time of year. How many of you said to yourselves last winter, "I'm going to finish that Superblivet 6 this winter, practice all spring and knock their socks off on the Pattern contest circuit this summer." Many of us say things like that, but rarely do we carry through.
Radio Control: Sport/Aerobatics
JUST AFTER sending in my last column, I received a long, delightful letter from Greg Lovick (Grapevine, TX) on the subject of propellers. Since several of my previous columns dealt with propellers, many readers wrote either to agree with me or to "straighten me out" on what was written. I still believe that everything which appeared in print is technically accurate. Anyway, most of Greg's letter is printed here to "cap off" the discussion on propellers. If any of you still prefer to continue the "discussions" after reading the following letter, feel free to write me.
Radio Control: Sport/Aerobatics
RECENTLY, a letter came to me via Model Aviation's publisher, which brought two thoughts to mind as column subjects. The letter came from Jeff Rankin (Reasnor, IA), who reported on problems he had with a new airplane he had finished, flown and crashed. An edited version of Jeff's letter follows: "I have a question concerning engine torque and right thrust. I'm not what you'd call a seasoned flier; however, I can usually get a plane up and back down with no trouble at all. However, I had a little trouble with a plane lately, and I'm not quite sure what happened. Just an idea.
Radio Control: Sport/Aerobatics
MY MAILBOX contained a letter which reminded me that old news is still news to someone who hasn't heard it before. The letter was from Robert Krieger (Buffalo, IA), who wrote: "Looking over the Model Aviation December 1980 issue I got stuck on the statistics in your column." (This was the article on the 1980 Nats. The statistics he refers to are the matrices of facts about the top 10 finishers in each class. RVP) "Of the forty you listed, 35% used OS engines, 27% Rossi, and 20% Supertigre-why? What is it about these engines that these people like? "This is my first year in RC, and I'm addicted, so naturally I'm wondering why all these good fliers are using these particular engines. Also, the Tiporare, Curare and Phoenix class aircraft stood out as favorites-any opinion as to why?"
