Savoy (oz10627)

About this Plan

Savoy. Control line stunt model. Claus Maikis Savoy from Aeromodeller Jan, 83. 61.5 in span for 10cc motors.

Quote: "Stomping at the Savoy, by Claus Maikis.

WE STUNT FLYERS are often accused of being able to talk about dress fashion, colour combination and cockpit detail only. This remark is a slight understatement. Actually the range of discussion themes is much wider, it can even include rational considerations. What a happy situation if you are not forced to chase after the best technology, latest development, newest information, to keep on a par with the competition. If you only start a new construction when you've got the inspiration or the urge to do so. If you stand at your dealer's, holding that gleaming new engine in your hands, turning it over to hear that lovely 'smack' from the exhaust port, and then dreaming of that exciting new ship which can be built around it After you've built that exciting ship, you easily find a scientific excuse for its technical features. So far, I've built two aeroplanes around my Super Tigre ST60. Here follow the purely rational, scientific reasons for building the SAVOY.

For many years the Americans have stressed the importance of a very powerful engine for precision acrobatic aeroplanes It seemed that they were ready to make every effort to get the highest performance from their engines. For a long erne, I wasn't convinced of this. Now after about 15 years of flying Super Tigre 46 - which I still rate as one of the best stunt engines - I must admit that I've changed my mind. I'm now beginning to challenge my engines a little bit mote I enlarge the venture diameter to the point where the engine still starts well and draws fuel reliably. The desire for more power comes from several reasons.

Firstly, the world champion uses more power - pardon, that is not a good enough argument. Let's start again.

Firstly, during recent years, lap times of competitive stunt flying have steadily risen, that means; slowed down. For the average pilot, a slow flying aeroplane is easier to control. In order to obtain the slow lap time, you open the needle and set the engine at low rpms. While this works for level flight, you will soon run into trouble in vertical climbs. You have simply set your engine in a lower performance range. In the climb (especially after a hard corner which slows the engine down a little) there isn't sufficient power to overcome gravity which now acts against flight direction. Flying speed will decrease, lines will go slack - you know all that. Now a more powerful engine will overcome these problems. More power doesn't necessarily mean higher revolutions I think by now it is generally accepted that control line stunt flyers don't need revolutions, but torque. That's why OS40 users set their liners at a lower height; the exhaust timing is reduced, thus allowing the expanding gas to push on the piston for a longer time. This modification increases torque. An easier way of getting more torque is - to choose more volume.

Secondly, after trying a larger number of propellers. I have found (at least on my models) that 'more' prop will help the flying characteristics of the aeroplane. Independent from the brand. I have always had better results with a prop of bigger diameter and/or larger blade area. My aeroplanes always fly much smoother. While they lacked some sharpness in the corners, I had a definitely increased line tension. Now I could easily increase sharpness by adding some weight to the tail (smoothness in level flight remained almost the same) but the added 'pull' remained. I'm still experimenting with props, but I feel a prop with big diameter, large blade area, and round tips is a good point to start with. To use that kind of prop..."

Direct submission to Outerzone.

Supplementary file notes

Article.

Corrections?

Did we get something wrong with these details about this plan (especially the datafile)? That happens sometimes. You can help us fix it.
Add a correction