The Rabe Rudder
Not many weeks go by that someone doesn't ask me for information on setting up a "Rabe rudder" properly.  In the past, I've loaned out countless video tapes showing how I did this, so maybe it's time for a review of this topic in Stunt News.  Why not just leave the rudder offset the same amount all the time?  With a low-RPM motor or small, lightweight prop, you can do that without a severe penalty.  When we all flew Fox .35-size ships, the only "variable" was whether to use a cambered vertical stab or use rudder offset, and how effective to make it.  But time and progress brought thicker airfoils, bigger displacement motors, larger diameter props, longer tail moments, etc., and problems started to become obvious: a 'softness' on the top of the hourglass, the outside part of the square eight, and the overhead eight...especially with .60-powered ships. The 'band-aid' fixes were shorter lines and/or extra tip weight...but these 'fixes' caused their own problems in other parts of the pattern. Al Rabe is generally credited as the originator of the  'variable kickout' rudder that's so widely used now-it's almost universally called the "Rabe rudder."  A ship with a big displacement motor spinning a heavy, carbon (or even worse, multi-blade) prop is more prone to need the variable rudder kickout on outside turns.  The heavier the prop, higher the RPM, and sharper the outside turn, the more 'kickout' is needed.  Mike Rogers came up with the "ball link on the elevator edge" system shown in the drawing, which allows several adjustments to accommodate different airframe/motor/prop combinations.  This linkage is easy to install, and you can leave it off the ship until it's completely buffed out.

This linkage is shown on the Typhoon 60 drawing, so if you'd want to use it for a smaller ship, all the dimensions would be proportionally smaller.  The nominal settings shown will get you in the ballpark.  I have bench-trimmed many "Rabe rudder" set ups and like to start with linkage in the 'slow' movement hole (furthest from rudder).  I set it so movement is neutral on rudder when the  elevators are in neutral.  This is too little travel most times, but I fly the ship anyway to get a benchmark.  From there I go one turn more (shorten rod) and watch line tension at top of the hourglass and the outside part of square eight increase until its equal to "inside manoeuvre" tension.  As you shorten the rod, the rudder kicks in sooner, and as you move to a hole in horn closer to rudder, travel increases (more total rudder effect).
Many theories abound as to how and why a "Rabe rudder" works-I'll leave that explanation for the scientific-minded.  I don't worry about the science, frankly-I just know from flying that it does work.  My first .60 design, the Sweeper, goes back 30(!) years, and starting with the Sweeper, any of my .60 ships that didn't have a "Rabe rudder" required more than the optimum tip weight to counteract the tendency to turn in on certain parts of the stunt pattern.  Jim Greenaway convinced me to try one on the Red Baron, and I was shocked at how effective this trim feature was.  I was so impressed that I retrofitted all the planes in my air force, and every one of them showed a big gain in performance.  In 1996, when I was developing the 5-blade props for the Spitfire, I found the "Rabe rudder" extremely effective in counteracting the forces of a very heavy prop.  Joe Adamusko has had similar experience, as have Dave Midgley, Mike Rogers, Bob Baron, Jose Modesto, Jim Greenaway, and many other top fliers...including Al Rabe, of course.

Obviously this can be custom-tailored to your flying style.  I prefer to trim for solid line tension-it's one less thing to think about during the flight-while some like to back up during parts of the pattern or use their arm like a fishing pole to 'whip' model.  Watch the expert pilot of your choice, and you can generally see how he prefers his trim.  '96 NATS winner Bob Baron had solid line tension everywhere, especially in the wind.  Bob has a very relaxed style-he seldom whips or backs up. If you design your own ships, try for 10-15 sq. in. of movable rudder, deducting any 'counterbalance' area as not part of the measured area.  If you use more area than that, make a proportionally longer horn or move the horn back from the hinge line.  Both will reduce travel and increase leverage.  If you're retrofitting an old ship, you can usually sink a piece of tubing into the bottom of the outer elevator and repaint this small notch without anyone even knowing it's a retrofit.  I've done it many times in only a few hours.  Once you've tried a "Rabe rudder", you will probably include one in all future ships.  If you've already tried one and been unconvinced, though, maybe you just didn't have it adjusted in its usable range.  Of course, some people prefer no adjustable rudders or rudders that are adjustable but are not linked to the control system.  That's fine-there's always more than one way that can be made to work, for sure.  Even if you install and adjust a "Rabe rudder" on a ship, if it turns out that it really doesn't fit your needs, it's a simple thing to make it 'static', rather than dynamic...with the bonus of built-in, precise offset adjustment.

Over the last ten years, countless words and pages have been published on the benefits of .40-size motors vs. .60s.  It was an era of everyone trying to prove their system "best", and in many ways all the arguing had a negative impact on the hobby.  Time has a way of evolving the breed, and I suspect that with so many fine .60s available now, that displacement size will dominate.  It's been a long time coming, but more and more fliers seem to have arrived at the same conclusion, including World champs, NATS champs, local contest winners, and sport fliers. There is room in the hobby for everyone-including those who prefer .60s-and so the "Rabe rudder" will become an even more common trim feature.  (By the way, it can definitely improve the handling of a .40-powered ship!)   As more and more pilots learn to exploit its potential, feedback from other pilots sharing their experiences will benefit all. If you'd like a more solid feel to your setup,
this is one modification I think is really worth trying.

Windy Urtnowski