|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
nice vid, seems to go pretty ok there. but did i spot the wing break off at the end there though? shame Schumacher haven't gone with a different design on the wing mount.
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
I reckon driving on indoor circuits was fun when I used to do it. There was very little debri that would make it into the drivetrain. Take running these cars on dusty loose tracks though,every last ounce of dust makes its way into all kinds of unwanted places. Case in point,aside from handling characteristics drivetrain reliability amongst the elements is definately an issue for many drivers. I like belt drive cars but the majority of drives prefer shaft drive cars with their sealed gearboxes. This 'WILL' play a part in the popularity of the car throughout the world. Personaly i dont care how intricate,open or out of the ordinary a car is,if its designed with top level competition in mind I'll give it a real good look.
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If you think about the 05 worlds track in Collegno - that's what I'm talking about - very rough and slippery with sharp jagged ruts through the corners. These style tracks are the biggest test for a buggy's drivetrain in terms of durability and reliability and are also a good test of a cars handling ability - as often the car is sliding into sharp ruts. I think at somepoint Schumacher need to (if they haven't already) test the car on a rough dirt track - just to be sure that the car does work everywhere
__________________
Schumacher Cougar SV-Durango Dex410-Top Photon |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Remember though these are close production "prototypes" so if they find that the wing mounts are an issue I am sure they could probably re-design them before release I think the only breakage on the two cars that I saw was when Matt managed to rip the front wishbone off before a qualifying run but hey thats could have happened with any car as it was quite a big off Watching both cars though they looked as good if not better than anything on the track which simons run in round 4 proved. Looking forward to seeing a few more in action
__________________
Robert Jaques, Schumacher Racing KC, K2. Team Associated SC5M "The Japanese Sniper" Team Autocare & Cycles |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
But it was still lapped after a minute or so
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
No wonder after my out lap!
Was as quick as Rich after i moved over for him. Regarding the wing mounts, that the first time we have damaged them but to be fair, i couldt of landed any harder on them.
__________________
Schumacher, Hobby Wing, Thunder Power, Anderson, Sanwa, Trishbits, P-Dub Racing, Rudebits, Inside Line, Nuclear RC, RC Domination, RPC |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Just got back from a day of design work on a new aircraft not due in service for another 5 yrs. Largest european aircraft manufacturer and we still work in imperial. (though we do seem to mix & match the units, depending on whether we're trying to show something as being a high or low number ) P.S. DCM, i know you're speaking to ash but that attempt at spelling is awful! Anyways, back to the car with looks only a mother could love...
__________________
Gareth Stanton |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
my spelling has ben terrible this week, but I do have all the kids off school for easter lol.
I know aircraft run a mix of imperial and metric, more it is in maintenance, the fact that some fastenners are no longer available in imperial, but, in saying that, any repair drawing I worked from was in metric, nothing in imperial except maybe material thickness.
__________________
dragon paints : team tekin : fusion hobbies :SCHUMACHER RACING : Nuclear R/C for all my sticky and slippery stuff - if it needs gluing or lubing, Nuclear RC is the man! |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Bloody rivets, repair drawings with both imperial and metric on!! God how I love not working on aircraft anymore.
__________________
2 x TRF 415 MRE's 2 x TRF 501X's I'm TRF-Tastic me Come to the blue side and feel the love!!
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Well, I've worked on the fastest passenger jet until recently and that was bloody imperial. Don't ask me what relative sizes the nuts and bolts are as my mind wokrks in metric (most were 11/32 that I needed to use, with a few 3/8ths thrown in for good measure). Still, I suppose you can't complain about it as its 40 years young and still going.
Any guesses as to what it is?
__________________
The Badger of Peskiness |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
Here's me thinking you Ozzys raced around kangaroo's, and here's me not racing on grass tracks with wooden jumps ... (tongue in cheek )
We have a lot of very different tracks in the UK, some smooth, some bumpy, some with flowing & rolling shapes and jumps, and some with obstacle after obstacle. Then there are surfaces - some tracks are completely high grip, some have a big variety. Id be confident in any car going well on rutted dirt or blue groove if it is a good allrounder on English outdoor tracks. I will reserve judgement until I have seen it go on other tracks than Worksop, as lets be honest - Simon & Matt are quick drivers and they'd be in the top 10 at Worksop with a Cat XLS even today. Chris |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Well, when flying it was the fastest, but now it's been retired, leaving The Queen Of The Skies.
Anyone else for a guess?
__________________
The Badger of Peskiness |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Cessna Citation X....... easy. *edit* - I'm confused. Concorde roughly that age, and was retired just 2-4 years ago I assume now, but fastest civilian aircraft for the last 14 years is the Citation X (M 0.82, damn efficient too. I would love to get the aerofoil co-ordinates for that plane!). If you mean fastest commercial, I am guessing a 747 as that's only a few mph off the Citation X IIRC?????
As for Gaz_Stanton, what? Largest aircraft manufacturer in Europe by far is EADS, so I am assuming you are talking about the XWB. It's being designed in metric, as with all Airbus. What part of the aircraft are you talking about? Of course sub systems for the aircraft which are sub contracted out (which there are an awful lot of) are designed to that companies standard. But Airbus design in metric using the Airbus system to define components, which is a mix between BS and ISO/DIN. I am really interested to know what was designed in imperial :S I f'kin hate imperial. 98% of the worlds countries use Metric, why can't the states just wake up. Change sucks, I know, but it's soooooo much better. I also love the way the Americans refer to it as English units too. |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
XWB yep. Although the CAD monkeys mostly use metric the aircraft is a mix of both. Eg some std pipework and equipment is only available in imperial sizes and with the $ price we're putting a lot more workpackages out to dollar zones. Plus a lot of the engineers have been around the various aerospace companies where imperial is the norm so often work in old money. You just have to be fluent in both.
__________________
Gareth Stanton |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Indeed, knowing both is a pain though. I'm glad aerodynamics is my thing. Mainly working with coefficients, no units, hurray!
How's the XWB looking? |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
It's those pesky Koalas you have to worry about and the digeredoo's used for track edging
__________________
Schumacher Cougar SV-Durango Dex410-Top Photon |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Ahem, well done Glypo for noticing my deliberate mistake (about fastest passenger jet). Didn't realise the 747 was so quick. The Queen Of The Skies is the majestic (and still flying the originals from 1966-68) VC10.
Still, you live and learn
__________________
The Badger of Peskiness |
#39
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Got any pictures of the tracks you race at, or link to pictures? Not for the purpose of this thread, I am interested in general really. |
#40
|
||||
|
||||
First one round the Emu and back
|
|
|