What's so great about inverted flight?

RknRusty wrote:I never learned when to quit.

Not always a bad thing. Perhaps that is one of the reasons you fit in here so well.

Bob

'Somone' putting our new club trainer through it's paces couple weekends ago.
I managed to get the fin on the deck but didn't realise I was on camera.

OhOh I'm in for a 'talking to' next months meeting.

Inverted flight is something many people have tired but few master.

In my evolution as a CL pilot I destroyed several Sterling S-3 Ringmasters before I got it right. The Ringmasters were patched together combat casualties that were sacrificed as my learning curve advanced. I don't believe that anyone can claim that inverted flight can be achieved with any confidence without similar sacrifice.

These were larger .35 planes on 60 foot lines which seemed to move slower than their 1/2A counterparts on much shorter lines. Setting up the plane with proper rudder offset and outboard wingtip weight are important too.

In short "there no gain without pain". The "pain" to be experienced depends on how badly you wish to learn to fly inverted.

I pretty much went right to it. I first did it with my Stuntman23. I was worried about confused muscle memory, but I found that when I could see the rudder pointing down, it just felt natural. The only problem is that turning the other direction makes me dizzy like a beginner. I guess the inner ear has to adapt to the change in direction. That was a surprise, so I could only fly a few laps at a time. But loops and 8s from inverted didn't bother me. I hit a tree limb flying my Streak upside down the other day, but it emerged from a spray of green confetti and kept on flying. I had wandered away from my marker.

I thought I would revisit this. I spend half my flights inverted anymore, outside loops are cake too. Practice makes perfect as they say now I just need to get better at some other stuff. My wingovers suck, I want to do a reverse one! I probably should start try to tackle overhead stuff too.

Control line rules!

Ron

Kim wrote:CLOVER LEAF---CLOVER LEAF !!!!!  Then...REVERSE CLOVER LEAF---REVERSE CLOVER LEAF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your a funny guy!!!! May be a while before I hit that. I will do it though! I'll probably be in my 50's, but I'll do it!

Ron

Next time I fly 1/2A, I'm going to do vertical 8s. No way in hell I'm ready to do it with the Shoestring yet. I might start from inverted at the top so the bottom loop is an insider. Or I might climb from normal flight into an S that sets me up for the top outside loop leading into the bottom insider. I flew it great in my mind, and then when I had the motions figured out, I shadow flew it in the kitchen and it didn't seem as easy.

I need to practice wingovers from inverted too. They are hard to get straight over the top. I thought I was, but an observer said I wasn't. It's an unnatural body position. I don't ant to fall over backwards.

I was thinking of inverted pull-outs. They look way cool.

cribbs74 wrote:I was thinking of inverted pull-outs. They look way cool.

Yeah, that's on my list too. Haven't done it yet. It's hard to do a level pullout with a fast twitchy 1/2A. I can fly wingovers with the SS much more neatly.

More line and bigger arc.  That's why it's easier in my opinion. Much slower.

You might want to check out both the beginners and the full AMA stunt (Precision Aerobatics) pattern. A "proper" wingover starts from level flight, goes up for the wingover, pull out inverted, go half a lap inverted, then back to vertical for second wingover, this time pulling out to level flight.

A lot of doing stunts is the way you place your body. I still stumble around but if you watch some good stunt guys at a contest, watch THEM and not just the plane.

The problem most of us have is trying to stunt with a plane that is not properly trimmed. Trimming is half the battle...I guess staying off the ground is the other half. :-)

George

Forgot to add some stuff in the last post:

Many (most) CL planes were designed before there was a TD .049. When they say .049-.09 for instance, they were talking about Cub .049 and .09, or engines of that vintage. A TD .049 may equal the Cub .09 for power.

Fox had a regular .049 that was average. Duke came out with a second version that was much better. The FAI .049 was a different engine. It was created for competition. I don't believe parts are interchangeable. I do not have the standard Fox .049 to compare.

Randall Hopkins and Richard Rikel (H&R engines) bought all the remaining parts for the FAI .049 from Fox and assembled them. Richard passed away, I'm not sure when, but Randall continued assembling the engines. I bought two of the FAI's  from him. They were test run with RPM figures included. You could exchange or order one that had not been run if you wanted it for a collection.

Randall eventually sold the company to Doug Martin. I believe Doug had some new parts and glow plugs made. He had plugs for the standard Fox .049, the FAI version, and the Fox .07. I have no idea if and where they are now available.

George

Here is a pic. The two left ones are the FAI .049 (with and without tank) and the right one is a Fox .07 (bought new in the mid fifties).

Ken Cook wrote: Remember one thing in regards to the Fox.09, it was very underpowered and very over rated. The Fox .049 - .07 on the other hand were very powerful and would do a tremendous job. I have a Fox Comet .07 now which is quite difficult to find plugs for and other parts. The .049 shares the same plug setup. The Fox .09 has a plug that is very different and difficult to find. Ken

I think I have some fox .049 plugs i could send your way.

Jim

Jim I now have a Fox .07 and am .049. I could use a spare plug.

Ron

cribbs74 wrote:Jim I now have a Fox .07 and am .049. I could use a spare plug.

Ron

I am out of town right now, will look for them Monday when I get home.

Drag this to just before 00:35 and watch his body position when he does the wingover in the advanced pattern.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GXFelZaO9LI#!

Looks so easy in theory. Doing it is another matter. I need to figure out the "jerk" to get the plane to go from level to snap upright. Mine looks like a big smooth transition. Longer lines would slow things down a bit.

Some of my problem is the dumb trees as I worry about snagging them. This forces me to fly up higher. I would like to start all my maneuvers straight out and level from me.

cribbs74 wrote:Looks so easy in theory. Doing it is another matter. I need to figure out the "jerk" to get the plane to go from level to snap upright...

That's actually the one part I can do. I don't do any jerk, just full up with my wrist. Maybe try a little tail weight, that might make the turns tighter.

RknRusty wrote:Drag this to just before 00:35 and watch his body position when he does the wingover in the advanced pattern.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GXFelZaO9LI#!

Bear in mind as you watch that both of these gents are former National Champions and this flight is at a NW Regionals in 2011...you are watching a couple of the best flyers.

George