NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/models/rc/5221

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 2.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!att!fang!gator!inland!bloom
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc
Subject: Re: Quiet combat?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Dec 92 08:22:50 CST
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: rec.models.rc
Organization: Inland Steel Company; East Chicago, IN
Lines: 32

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
> I've read some recent posts about FAI rule changes and, in particular,
> silencers on combat engines.
>
> My interest was tweaked a bit. I've often wondered about the future of
> mufflers and CL combat. What's really going on in development in this area?
> And how do the real combat fliers feel about it?
>
> Thanks in advance for your comments.


I fly R/C, not combat, but I'm going to let you know how I feel anyway.
I posted about a year ago on the subject of "why don't the control-
line flyers use mufflers?"  It seemed strange that the AMA is such a
strong advocate for mufflers in R/C and yet had no stated public policy
for C/L.  I fly at Ned Brown Woods in Elk Grove Village and the C/L
engines are indeed quite loud and irritating; loud enough that you
cannot hear your R/C plane in the air.  The loudest engines are the
combat types practicing for competition.  The replies to my original
post explained that combat engines had to be loud because

1) it was a competitive event requiring the ultimate in engine performance
2) combat flyers during practice must use the same setup as in competition
3) AMA had no muffler requirement
4) there were no effective mufflers available that would survive combat
5) no mufflers could be designed to survive combat.

Well now it becomes obvious that if rule #3 is changed by the AMA then
a whole new world of technology is available to the combat flyers.  It's
amazing how the laws of physics change so dramatically in 1 year.