Dr. House meets Smokey The Bear

My bad I thought you were referring to an addon to this particular event.

Such as Fly it again with

Leg 1 and 2 in Class x

Leg 3 and 4 in Class y

Leg 5 and 6 in Class z

So forth.

Forcing a person to use a heavy bomber or jet of thier choice. Light aircraft maybe (challange just to get in the air for sure) while I am at it on this one I dare anyone to fly from U72 to 0U1 (I know it is backwards) in the default Cessna 172 with a full tank of gas. :icon_lol:

Of course Rob is not going to like us Pirating his event for our own enjoyment :d
 
Dangerousdave26 said:
My bad I thought you were referring to an addon to this particular event.

Such as Fly it again with

Leg 1 and 2 in Class x...

So forth.

Forcing a person to use a heavy bomber or jet of thier choice. Light aircraft maybe (challange just to get in the air for sure) while I am at it on this one I dare anyone to fly from U72 to 0U1 (I know it is backwards) in the default Cessna 172 with a full tank of gas. :icon_lol:

Of course Rob is not going to like us Pirating his event for our own enjoyment :d
Click to expand...

THIEVES!!!!!!!!!!!! but you know better. If it is FUN or helps the learning for the RTW do what smells good!

However, I did target this for faster, agile, controllable aircraft to encourage the testing of pilot skills and to let people see how choices can bite you in racing.

However, there is a variation I did think of: the Nur Ohadi event ... if'n youse bored, run it backwards and in a different plane. Don't clutter the thread with duennas but if you get some good or odd times and stories, tell all!

Rob
 
Gmta!

fliger747 said:
The FAA defines this. Category is for example: Airplane; Rotorcraft; ummm lighter than air etc. Class would be for example single engine land, multi engine land, single and Multi sea. These can be further subdivided into turbine powered, turbojet recip, and "large" aircraft with a max gross weight of 12,500# or greater.

I think we could come up with several RTW represenative categories. The idea having some real puddle jumper flights, perhaps some rotor wing (mebbe a penalty for reduced realism or crashes turned off) some tactical jets. The idea of having some appropriate challenges for each type. A minimul altitude? reach say 40,000. on the leg for tactical jets.

Ideas anyhow.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.. Tom, you say you're on the road again?? you been in YYC and peeking at the scraps of paper on my desk??? (and why didn't you tidy up after me???)

I'm off on a week's holiday starting tomorrow night so the rough-out may not get done til the end of the month but it looks like a candidate for one of the longer RTW practices as we get closer to the year-end.

This subject is now classified as CLASSIFIED! Deep Dark Secret!

Rob
 
Tucano eligibility

Hey Fliger,

Is there a list somewhere other than the RTW Race site that discusses aircraft that have been considered ineligible? As far as I can tell there’s nothing on that site restricting the Super Tucano, but being relatively new to racing I’m sure I haven’t seen all the behind the scenes discussions. :redf: If you’re correct, it would seem I’m 2 for 2 in picking ineligible aircraft (although I’m still not sure why the PC-21 isn’t eligible) and I’d like to try to avoid this problem in the future. As for the performance of the model I used, I flight tested against the specs on the net and if anything, I think it underperforms a bit and more closely matches the -312 performance rather than the -314. But it was easy to fly and good for a conservative run.

Vicious
 
Vicious said:
Is there a list somewhere other than the RTW Race site that discusses aircraft that have been considered ineligible? As far as I can tell there’s nothing on that site restricting the Super Tucano, but being relatively new to racing I’m sure I haven’t seen all the behind the scenes discussions. :redf: If you’re correct, it would seem I’m 2 for 2 in picking ineligible aircraft (although I’m still not sure why the PC-21 isn’t eligible) and I’d like to try to avoid this problem in the future. As for the performance of the model I used, I flight tested against the specs on the net and if anything, I think it underperforms a bit and more closely matches the -312 performance rather than the -314. But it was easy to fly and good for a conservative run.

Vicious
Click to expand...


I never saw that one either and of course we lost our data base of information so we will need to make a new list.

We should make another thread listing aircraft disqualifications and exceptions to the rules. I will let the Veterans from the team decide where it needs to be place in the standard forums or the Hide Out.
 
Calling all judges...

Question Rob, since this is your baby and you like flight test, is this plane legal? Yak-3 by gmax. gmaxac_yak3.zip @ avsim
It's a solid 30kts fast I think (check leg below); much like the P-51H or Hornet, must be overpowered or over-boosted or both!
Just looking for something different rather than the usuals or duplicating someone else flights.
May just use the WOP Fw-190D; can't win with it but it's different and challenging! (so is the Yak!)
Please advise. :d
 
John, just a quick look offered the following numbers:

(VK-105) 404 mph (650 km/h); (VK-107) 447 mph (720 km/h)
http://www.btinternet.com/~lee_mail/Yak-3.html

http://www.warbirdalley.com/yak3.htm

So depending on which engine is modeled I'd concur the it's 25-40KTS fast and closer to the
Yak-3RD (Yak-3D)experimental aircraft with an auxiliary Glushko RD-1 liquid-fuel rocket engine with 2,9 kN (650 lbf) of thrust in the modified tail, armed with a single 23 mm Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannon with 60 rounds of ammunition. On May 11, 1945, the aircraft reached 782 km/h (485 mph) at 7,800 m (25,585 ft). During the August 16 test flight, the aircraft crashed for unknown reasons, killing the test pilotBut... so what?? you're gonna get hurt anyway - go for it. :173go1:
...besides, MM Aerial Salvage may be there to help.

This is an EXERCISE and maybe we'll all learn from it. Obviously, if it was a real RACE there'd be penalties galore and rejected aircraft. I posted the rules so people would start thinking RTW formats and procedures, but at this point I can't see why we shouldn't be flexible. My preference is that anyone try to follow the posted rules precisely the first time around and then feel free to test/experiment afterward.

However, the altitude cap must be adhered to in any case.
(notice how fussy I've been about guys re-flying after they saw the error of their ways?).

I'd think that any serious team practice will be far more rigid about following rules so we understand how penalties hurt (and how they are scored)

Rob
 
Vicious said:
Is there a list somewhere other than the RTW Race site that discusses aircraft that have been considered ineligible? As far as I can tell there’s nothing on that site restricting the Super Tucano, ... (although I’m still not sure why the PC-21 isn’t eligible) and I’d like to try to avoid this problem in the future. As for the performance of the model I used, I flight tested against the specs on the net
Vicious
Click to expand...

Fot the RTW there is no "Eligible List" but just the set of rules and parameters shown on the official site. "NEW or OTHER" Aircraft eligibility is dealt with on a case-by-case basis (someone squawks, the Officials rule)
The PC-21 was ineligible under the "minimum ten" rule as of last Feb. If that has changed (ie. they delivered and are operating enough) then it will likely be eligible as long as it meets the real-world performance and is still an acceptable class (turboprop, 2 engines or less - and/or cabin class) for 2009. At this point The Race Management has made no statements about rules.
(Summary: wasn't eligible Feb 2008; may now qualify; Cabin Class a/c may/may not be allowed in the upcoming race in 2009)

The Super Tucano should be eligible IF it's proven to meet the real numbers (more info on test methods and supporting data is available). There are many other aircraft that have been released between Races that will have to be confirmed if someone wants to use them.

For this event, I said "RTW-allowed" and that implies 'as of the last rules&decisions' so that's what raised a flag on the PC-21- however you will not be shot for using it. The SuperTuc was not queried by last Feb so it's in limbo but I'll leave the performance testing to those with time and experience - it may be worth a place in the hangar for 2009 so for this event... fly it and see.

Also see the post in reply to jkCook28 above for more on the 'philosophy' :wiggle: - "the more we learn the more questions we have"

Rob
 
I just flew this again in an online MP session with a buddy from the UK. We chose Twotters this time and the weather was much more forgiving to the point where we could get in and out of all the fields without leaving aircraft parts behind in the bushes! However, we stood no chance as far as speed is concerned as the Twotter is just too slow for races. :costumes:

We also had a couple of altitude busts where we were concentrating more on clearing trees than watching the altimeter! It's tough to watch both and stay on course...lol.

Interesting points on aircraft eligibility too Rob. I wonder how Lionheart's Epic LT/Dynasty would fare under those rules? More than 10 LT's (the owner build version) have been made but I am not sure about the certified Dynasty version. It's fairly fast for a single turboprop, has good range, can get over most bad weather and get into and out of short fields.
 
It was some race or another it was weeded out for a hot FM. Might have been the Carribean race, cann'a remember which one. Generally it is possible to get a planes performance parameters within 1% or so if one has the desire and the right info is available. There are lot of factors that differentiate the way the numbers can read and what the actual performance is.

These are fun races anyway. Additional participation than just the event is always desireable. We are of course looking to sucker more team mates in for the RTW.

Just back from Hong Kong, but will be home this evening. Which Tucano is it? i will try to look at this one and see if it has legit potential as a RTW racer, we can always use some new steeds.

Cheers: T.
 
Here's the Tucano link Tom: http://www.simshed.co.uk/tucano.html

My initial thought was the Epic LT, but could find no concrete info on completed aircraft...Dynasty is still not certified so none will be out there in use.

Maybe I'll live out on the edge and try that Yak for kicks...liquid fuel rocket included! :costumes:
 
Aircraft eligibility

SG
Thanks for the clarification regarding aircraft eligibility. I just don’t want to waste time learning aircraft that have already been ruled out for various reasons so I was hoping that there might be a complete list of questionable aircraft.

Fliger
The model I flew was a T29 made by RanchoJEN. I downloaded the file (emb314.zip) from flightsim.com. I’ve found several sources that show a top level speed of 310 kts, but I can only crack 300 so it doesn’t seem too hot, but perhaps there was a climb performance issue. Thanks for checking it out. I don’t think it has much utility in the race, but maybe there’s so challenge leg where its ease of flying could be beneficial.

Vicious
 
Vicious PC-21 Run

Just a quick run to get some idea how well the PC-21 could do, if eligible. It produced an easy 48:43. The ability to reverse pitch on approach and rollout is tremendous.

Vicious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top