Sep 28, 2012, 12:41 AM
Bye Bye VP Aug 2010 - Aug 2012
United Kingdom, London
Joined Jan 2005
6,255 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cliffkot I would think that would have to factor in wind speed? For example, it the wind were a steady 20 knots, and you flew directly into it at a 20 knot climb speed, the plane would be going straight up ( in a relatively level attitude of course) like an elevator. Is that how it works?
Yes, you are correct.

This highlights the importance of standard terminology. The term 'best rate of climb/distance' does not exist in aviation.
Latest blog entry: Foamie Resurrection
Sep 28, 2012, 04:18 AM
Kit Manufacturer
United States, MA, Southbridge
Joined Feb 2010
3,840 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gerry__ Yes, you are correct. This highlights the importance of standard terminology. The term 'best rate of climb/distance' does not exist in aviation.
well, in the case of it being perfectly vertical it would be infinite which isn't a useful number. it's a term most used in STOL comparisons for clearing obstacles in the mentioned box canyon example
Sep 28, 2012, 04:22 AM
Bye Bye VP Aug 2010 - Aug 2012
United Kingdom, London
Joined Jan 2005
6,255 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by coreman well, in the case of it being perfectly vertical it would be infinite which isn't a useful number. it's a term most used in STOL comparisons for clearing obstacles in the mentioned box canyon example
Ok, can you link to such a comparison? I still maintain that best rate of climb is constant and best angle of climb changes with wind strength.

Btw, a vertical climb out is 90 degrees, infinity doesn't apply.
Last edited by Gerry__; Sep 28, 2012 at 06:40 AM.
Sep 28, 2012, 05:29 AM
Kit Manufacturer
United States, MA, Southbridge
Joined Feb 2010
3,840 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gerry__ Ok, can you link to such a comparison? I still maintain that best rate of climb is constant and best angle of climb changes with wing strength. Btw, a vertical climb out is 90 degrees, not not intimate.
angle is 90, rate/horizontal distance is infinite/undefined (divide by zero)

Wing strength has nothing to do with these. If you meant WIND strength, that only changes the angle relative to the ground observer, not for the plane. The angle of attack will be the same regardless of the wind, the "river of air" will just carry that frame of reference back at differing speeds. you need to stop thinking about "flying from the tower"

best rate of climb is a function of the performance of the power plant and the drag of the airframe and will be at a fixed angle of attack for a given plane within the plane's frame of reference. The wind just moves that frame of reference relative to the observer, like watching someone walk down a flat car on a moving train. They don't walk any faster because they are walking towards the front versus the back of the train but they appear to relative to a person watching the train pass from a railroad crossing (ground frame of reference).

Rate of climb
Angle of climb
Angle of attack
Frame of reference
Sep 28, 2012, 06:44 AM
Bye Bye VP Aug 2010 - Aug 2012
United Kingdom, London
Joined Jan 2005
6,255 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by coreman angle is 90, rate/horizontal distance is infinite/undefined (divide by zero) Wing strength has nothing to do with these. If you meant WIND strength, that only changes the angle relative to the ground observer, not for the plane. The angle of attack will be the same regardless of the wind, the "river of air" will just carry that frame of reference back at differing speeds. you need to stop thinking about "flying from the tower" best rate of climb is a function of the performance of the power plant and the drag of the airframe and will be at a fixed angle of attack for a given plane within the plane's frame of reference. The wind just moves that frame of reference relative to the observer, like watching someone walk down a flat car on a moving train. They don't walk any faster because they are walking towards the front versus the back of the train but they appear to relative to a person watching the train pass from a railroad crossing (ground frame of reference). Rate of climb Angle of climb Angle of attack Frame of reference
Look, people are confusing rate of climb with angle of climb, but I'm not confused at all.

Like I also said, rate of climb/distance isn't a recognised term in its own right.
Latest blog entry: Foamie Resurrection
Sep 28, 2012, 08:11 AM
Registered User
Joined Jan 2010
3,736 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gerry__ Yes, you are correct. This highlights the importance of standard terminology. The term 'best rate of climb/distance' does not exist in aviation.
Terminology is confusing enough without people inventing new ones, but "rate" is the ratio of any parameter to any other parameter. Rate of climb can be expressed as feet per minute or feet per mile.
Last edited by kaptondave; Sep 28, 2012 at 12:39 PM.
Sep 28, 2012, 08:42 AM
Registered User
Joined Jan 2010
3,736 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cliffkot I would think that would have to factor in wind speed? For example, it the wind were a steady 20 knots, and you flew directly into it at a 20 knot climb speed, the plane would be going straight up ( in a relatively level attitude of course) like an elevator. Is that how it works?
I don't know what you mean by "20 knot climb speed". Flying directly into a 20 knot wind with an airspeed of 20 knots the plane would remain stationary with respect to the ground but would not necessarily be going straight up. It could be gaining or losing altitude, or neither, depending on angle of attack.
 Sep 28, 2012, 10:46 AM RCHN #150 Lawrenceville, GA Joined Nov 2007 6,013 Posts There are reasonably priced "finders." Check this web site. http://www.loc8tor.com/gps Rick
 Sep 28, 2012, 10:58 AM Proud member of LISF and ESL LI, New York, USA Joined Mar 2003 25,423 Posts Article on plane locators http://www.flyesl.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=237
Sep 28, 2012, 11:14 AM
Tossing planes into the snow
Joined Nov 2011
3,512 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rickn816 There are reasonably priced "finders." Check this web site.
Hello big brother! Now you can keep track of your truck, your boat, bicycle, motorcycle, even your girl. (see the pictures in the ad) It doesn't say how much it weighs, but it would have to have a battery and transmitter powerful enough to send a signal to a satellite (and then there are the user-fees after you have bought it. It says it is ideal for dogs and large animals but is too large for a cat to "carry comfortably".Still, for large and expensive planes, it might be worth while.
Sep 28, 2012, 11:57 AM
Tossing planes into the snow
Joined Nov 2011
3,512 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by aeajr Article on plane locators http://www.flyesl.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=237
These options look like more realistic solutions for glider pilots. That other option is more suited to keeping track of your girlfriend while you are at work, even if she made a quick detour to Hawaii. I haven't lost a plane yet, but have come close a couple of times. One of them I found the next day, after a sleepless night and a total of 5 hours of bashing through the bush.
 Sep 28, 2012, 12:06 PM Closed Account Joined Aug 2011 530 Posts ... Last edited by Radio.Active; Jun 13, 2013 at 10:17 AM.
Sep 28, 2012, 01:05 PM
Registered User
United States, TN, Johnson City
Joined Jul 2011
287 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by rwelder Well I am officially done with my RP. I guess it just wasn't meant to be. I went out after lunch today to the hill I flew from last night. I launched it into a gentle breeze and up it went. I had to work to keep the climb rate steady and the wings level. Once it got up fairly high, it started to bank to the right. As it was completing the turn it started to bank steeper and steeper. I had full opposite aileron to try and correct the bank and also tried to pull up. It dove full power into the ground. Thankfully it didn't hurt anyone or anything else. I expect I can strip the electronics and the engine might have survived but the rest is toast and I am not willing to buy the parts to rebuild it. I think I would rather put them into a HK P2K, HK Spectre 1800 or R2H Passer X. Thanks to all for trying to help me with the RP.
I agree with Radio Active. It is really unfortunate about your RP experience, but I hope you won't give up on electric sailplanes. The regular Radian is much easier to set up and fly and you have all the expensive parts in hand from your old RP. I have scale, UM,sport and 3d planes to choose from when I go flying and I never go w/o my Radian!
 Sep 28, 2012, 01:21 PM Registered User Canada, ON, Pickering Joined Nov 2006 800 Posts I have 3 different types of these locators, had 2 crashes, neither one the locator worked, properly installed. In the first crash Hobby King one worked perfect each start up, in crash and after never worked again, luckily my ESC beeps when not used for a while and I heard that! Was not damaged, radio was still on. Crash 2 , same type of locator more expensive not from hobby king, battery disconnected and of course not a sound. Found both planes without the locator working, lucky! Biggest problem with sound locators is very poor range of the sound, especially in grass or corn field. Second is, in many crashes Battery gets ejected or disconnected from RX, so locator goes dead. Really need separate power for locator. GPS would be better if the range was sufficient, most of the dog/key locators do not have the range. Gliders fly high and far and can fly away for miles. I did see a very nice small GPS locator on a free flight model with 2mile range and 2 day battery power, the guy said to check free flight groups as they are available and no where near the ripoff price of those low quality, dog/key things. Have to do some investigation or try to find him again for more info. Lot of these also do not work well with 2.4 radios and can be a bear to setup to turn on if signal goes down. Last edited by ddruck; Sep 28, 2012 at 01:27 PM.
 Sep 28, 2012, 01:27 PM Proud member of LISF and ESL LI, New York, USA Joined Mar 2003 25,423 Posts Your friend is probalby talking about the Walston system. Very very popular among free flight and competition glider pilots. I use them in my gliders. I own one and I move it around. \$150 for the transmitter in the plane. Club owns the receiver, about \$300. Found one 2 miles away after it landed on a house. The beepers have their place. They are cheap enough you can put them in the plane and forget it. No need to move them around. Sound range is typically only 50 to 100 feet but that is often enough. In brush or tall grass or even on top of tall trees you can be within 20 feet but not be able to see it, but with a beeper you can hear it. Has worked for me many times.