Internet Surfer 2.0/Internet Surfer 2.0 (Wayzata Technology) (1996).iso/pc/text/mac/faqs.481

Text File | 1996-02-12 | 28.2 KB | 592 lines

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS);faqs.481



 _Before_*EVERY*_ flight:_

1) Start the engine (if applicable) and test the entire throttle range. Run
   it at full throttle with its nose in the air for 15 seconds or so.

2) Check the receiver flight pack with a voltmeter to ensure enough charge.

3) Check the control throw direction for all surfaces. It's very easy to
   do a repair or radio adjustment and forget to switch these.

If you can't find an expert that is willing to teach you, it is best to
start with a 2-3 channel model with a long wingspan and alot of dihedral.
The ideal thing to start with here would be a 2 channel glider. If you
MUST start with a powered plane, a 6' foot powered glider, like the Piece
O' Cake from Dynaflite is a good way to go.

            ::::::  -- Gliders   -- ::::::

A 2-channel (rudder+elevator) polyhedral [see below] glider is just about
the easiest way to learn to fly, and is highly recommended. Once you can
handle that you can move up to rudder-elev.-spoiler-flap competition
ships or (on the slope) rudder-elevator-aileron-spoiler aerobatic ships.

Sailplane plug (aka religious sermon): ... don't think glider flying is
just "launch, glide back"---It's very easy to get 30+ minute flights and
about 1000' altitude.  Remember, power flying is limited by the size of
the fuel tank (about 10 minutes) and gliders are limited by the receiver
batteries (about 2 hrs).  And glider flying is *much* more challenging (my
opinion, of course), while at the same time being easier to learn. And no
fuel costs, no starting hassles, no cleanup afterwards...  Also, many
cities have ordinances prohibiting model engines, which means the flying
fields are outside city limits.  BUT, since sailplanes don't have those
nasty, messy smelly things, we can fly in any large enough area!

>Are most gliders hand launched, or do they have a small engine to get
them up?

Gliders are usually launched by a "hi-start"---a section of rubber with
about 500' of line. It is hooked to the plane and pulled back---the
rubber then pulls it up kite-like. (It is NOT like a catapult launch!).
Launches of heights up to 500' can be obtained on a good day. The launching
procedure is simple---keep the elevator neutral (for now) and keep it
flying straight. At the top the glider will just fly off the line. A small
engine can also be used but it creates a lot of drag which is very
detrimental to gliding performance. Hi-starts range from around $20 for
light-weight models to $100 for heavy-duty ones.

Winches are also used---it's very similar to a high-start except that you
(the pilot) always have control over the line tension so you can usually
get better launches. It does take more skill, though; as a beginner you
don't need to worry about winches just yet.

Flying at the slope you just chuck the plane into the wind---that's it!

>How do sailplanes stay up?

Since a sailplane has no engine, it follows that it must always sink
through the surrounding air. The trick then is to find some air that's
going up faster than you'll sink through it... and for our purposes,
there are two kinds of such air:
  ---air heated locally will tend to rise. The heating could be by the
     sun on a parking lot or a bonfire or a .... This is called "thermal
     soaring"---the columns of rising air are called thermals. This needs
     some skill/experience, and mostly involves smooth flying and a good
     idea of how your plane reacts. An easy way is to just follow more
     experienced fliers (some of which are birds) into them.
  ---wind striking a slope will rise to go over it. You just fly in front
     of the slope where the air is going up. With a steady wind this is
     easy to fly in, with challenges provided by aerobatics etc. This is
     called (surprisingly) "slope soaring." Landing is more challenging
     while at the slope unless you have a large field or something at the
     top.

Recommendations:
Sailplanes:
   6' or 2m class: (recommended)
     Carl Goldberg Gentle Lady, Dynaflite/Craft-Air Drifter II, Airtronics
     Olympic 650, SIG Riser, Great Planes Spirit, etc. These are all
     polyhedral ships with rudder and elevator controls. All are highly
     recommended.
     Carl Goldberg Sophisticated Lady: basically a souped up Gentle Lady,
     it is in general not recommended---it's heavier and the T-tail
     structure is very easy to break, even on a slightly rough landing.
   100" or standard class:
     These models fly better but are more cumbersome to launch and transport,
     and are also slightly more expensive. Try Dynaflite/Craft-Air Butterfly,
     Airtronics Olympic II, SIG Riser 100 etc. These are basically scaled up
     versions of the 2m ships above.

Costs:

>What kind of cost am I looking at for a solid training glider or
>powered plane, with all gear?

$200 is in the ballpark. $120 for a 4-ch radio, $60 for a 2m glider,
covering and other supplies. ARF Gliders---$100 + radio + supplies.

Powered planes: about $350-400---$120 radio, $70 plane, $120 engine + supplies.

(By "supplies," I mean things like rulers, knives etc.)

>Where can I mail-order stuff from?

Try Tower Hobbies (1 800 637 4989) and Sheldon's (1 800 228 3237) [Inside
CA, 1 800 822 1688]. Also look in modelling magazines for ads. Try Radio
Control Modeler, Model Airplane News, Flying Models, Model Aviation.

================================ End of Part 1 ==============================
--
--
  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / [e-mail]
  "Take this cross and garlic; here's a Mezuzah if he's Jewish; a page of the
    Koran if he's a Muslim; and if he's a Zen Buddhist, you're on your own."
   Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to [e-mail]
Xref: bloom-picayune.mit.edu rec.models.rc:11697 news.answers:4469
Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!enterpoop.mit.edu!eff!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!arizona!cs.arizona.edu!sham
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc,news.answers
Subject: R/C Flying: FAQ Part 2 of 2/rec.models.rc
Summary: A Beginner's Guide to Radio Controlled Flying
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Dec 92 15:00:13 GMT
Expires: 18 Jan 93 15:00:08 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Followup-To: rec.models.rc
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Arizona
Lines: 305
Approved: [e-mail]
Supersedes: <[e-mail]>

Archive-name: RC-flying-FAQ/part2
Last-modified: May 13 1992

============================== Part 2 ========================================

              ::::::  -- Powered (gas)  -- ::::::

Even though "wet" power is called "gas", it's not the same as car
gasoline. Model fuel is usually a mixture of a lubricant (synthetic or
castor oil), methanol and nitromethane. The power plants are usually
called engines, as opposed to electrics, which use motors (see below).
Engines are available in 2-stroke (louder, cheaper, and more powerful
for the same displacement) and 4-stroke (a more scale sound, less
vibration, but more expensive). Engine displacements are usually
measured in cu. in. the US (A 60 engine = 10cc [actually 0.61 cu. in.]).

Compared to beginner's gliders, powered trainers are more difficult to
master.  This means that everything about instructors and equipment
checks goes DOUBLE for powered planes. There are many, many ways a
beginner can make mistakes and destroy a model that he/she has spent
alot of time and money on. With the typical powered trainer, going it
alone is foolhardy and will likely end with a destroyed model and a
very disappointed modeler.

If you can't find an expert that is willing to teach you, it is best to
start with a 2-3 channel model with a long wingspan and alot of
dihedral. The ideal thing to start with here would be a 2 channel
glider. If you must start with a powered plane, a Sig Kadet is one of
the more docile trainers.

If you have an instructor, but have not flown R/C before, you can start
with something a bit more advanced. The Great Planes PT-20/40/60 series
are good.  You can build these with ailerons, but due to their large
dihedral, they can also be flown without ailerons. It won't hurt to
have them built-in. Even though they will not be very effective, they
will get you used to using them. Other recommended planes are the
Midwest Aerostar and the Goldberg Eagle.

If you have an instructor, and have flown R/C gliders, you might want
to start with something still more advanced, say a Great Planes Trainer
20/40/60 or the like. These have a fully symmetrical airfoil and less
dihedral. They are capable of more in the way of aerobatics, but are
trickier to fly due to higher speed and less stability.


             ::::::  -- Electric Flight  -- ::::::

>I didn't know that you could put an electric motor and batteries
>in an airplane.  Isn't that kind of heavy?

Modern NiCd batteries are pretty amazing.  You can charge them in 15
minutes, take power out of them at up to 50 amps or so, and do it all day.
That capability is what makes electric flight possible.  Electric power can
be used for any kind of flying---gliders, aerobatics, even racing.  It's an
excellent choice for sport flying.

>What are the advantages and disadvantages of electric flight
>compared to wet power?

Electric power systems are heavier for a given power output.  This means
that planes must be built lighter, which may be more challenging
(especially for the beginner).  That's really the only significant
disadvantage.  The big advantages are that electrics are quiet and clean.

To me, the biggest advantage of all is that electric flight is unusual and
interesting.

>What is the best way to get started in electric flight?

That depends on what you want to do and where you're starting from.

If you've never flown RC before, and you want to start with an electric
plane rather than a pure glider, I recommend an electric glider like the
Airtronics Eclipse.  This will give you the best chance to stay ahead of
the plane.  In the sport/trainer category, I hear a lot of good things
about the Leisure Amptique.

If you know how to fly RC, you have a lot of choices.  The simplest and
most available electric power systems use six or seven cells.  These are
called "05" systems, and are very similar to the power system of an RC car.
You can find all sorts of planes in kit or plan form which will work well
with these systems.  Outstanding examples are the aforementioned Eclipse
and Amptique, old timers such as the Leisure Playboy and Astro Viking, a
variety of semi-scale kits from Davey Systems, all sorts of gliders, and
the aerobatic ElectroStreak from Great Planes.  Any two-meter glider kit
can be easily adapted to six or seven cell electric by a moderately
competent builder.  Just stick a motor in the nose, battery under the wing,
and go.

If you want more performance, good ground handling, or just like larger
planes, there are larger power systems available, all the way up to systems
which will handle a 60-sized power plane.  The cost and complexity, of
course, go up with size.  Any reasonably well-designed power plane kit or
plan can be adapted to an appropriately chosen electric power system.  The
first step is to leave out half the wood---all power planes are grossly
overdesigned.  Electric motors generate very little vibration, which helps
you get away with lighter structures.

>What are the elements of an electric power system?

The power system includes a battery, a motor, a control, and wiring.  The
battery is almost always made up of Sanyo NiCd cells in the appropriate
number.  Motors vary from the simple, cheap "can" type (otherwise known as
"540" or "550" style), through more sophisticated styles adapted from RC
car motors, up to the cobalt powerhouses.

Controls can be a simple on-off switch controlled by a servo, a directly
controlled on-off switch, or a proportional electronic control.

If you are going to fly a glider or old-timer type plane with less than a
500-watt motor, think seriously about getting battery packs made of Sanyo
900 SCR cells.  They are significantly lighter than the more usual 1200 mAH
(sub-C) cells and give excellent performance.

>  What do the various letters used to refer to NiCd cells mean?

A:  SC is the basic cell.  SC cells will take fast charging and have
reasonably low internal resistance.  SCR cells have lower internal
resistance and a somewhat flatter discharge curve, that is, they put
out nearly the same voltage from beginning to end of the discharge.
SCRs are best for high current drain applications.  SCE cells have
somewhat more capacity for the same physical size, but also have
higher internal resistance.  They are best for low current drain
use (less than about 10 Amps.)  The higher capacity of SCE cells
will not be realized at high current drains, and they will heat up
more than SCR cells.


Many kits nowadays come with a power system.  In most cases, these systems
are adequate for the application.  It won't hurt to try what's there to
start with, you can always experiment later.  If the kit you choose doesn't
come with a motor, of course, you'll have to choose one.  If you are a
beginner, go with the recommendations of the kit manufacturer.  If you are
an experienced RCer, you probably don't need my help.

For a six- or seven-cell glider or old-timer with a cheap motor, an on-off
switch is sufficient control.  For anything else, you will have much
greater enjoyment with a proportional throttle.  Get a high-rate control,
they are much more efficient at part throttle.  There are several good
brands out there, but I like Jomar for good controls at good prices.

>What support equipment do I need?

You need a charger of some sort.  If you are using six or seven cells, any
RC car charger will do the job.  You don't need peak detecting or any of
that fancy stuff to start with.  For larger packs, there are good
high-voltage chargers around.  Check out Astro Flight and TRC, among
others. Remember, the biggest enemy of NiCads is heat, so try and keep those
batteries cool when charging. Expect to pay about $40.

>How are motor sizes specified?

Motors are traditionally specified by a system which attempts to equate
them to wet engines.  There are significant problems with this, but they
probably aren't of concern to beginners.  An "05" motor takes a six or
seven cell battery and puts out 75 to 120 watts, and so on up to a "60"
which takes 28 cells and puts out 1200 watts.  Incidentally, there are
about 750 watts in a horsepower.

The actual power output for a given voltage (number of cells) depends on
the load.  Unlike wet engines, electric motors put out more power with more
load.  If you don't like the performance you get from your plane, you can
try a bigger propellor---up to a point.  More power, of course, means less
run time.

In the ideal world, motors would be specified by the total power they are
capable of supporting and by the number of cells (or voltage) with which
that power is produced.

>What's a cobalt motor and why would I want one?

Rare-earth magnets, of which the most common type is samarium cobalt, are
stronger for a given weight and volume than ferrite magnets.  Perhaps an
even more important reason for getting a cobalt motor is that they also
have better brushes, bigger shafts, better bearings, are built more
carefully, and so on.  For the serious electric flier, they are worth the
extra expense.

>Where can I get this stuff?

Electric equipment is somewhat specialized, and most hobby shops aren't yet
sufficiently enlightened to carry very much.  You can use RC car equipment
for a lot of things (after all, they developed this stuff in the first
place) and your local hobby shop will have lots of that.  If you want to
get more sophisticated, get the catalogues from Hobby Lobby and Hobby Horn
(both have ads in all the usual magazines.)  Both catalogs contain a lot of
detailed information that I can't fit in here.  Hobby Horn has good prices
on mainstream stuff.  Hobby Lobby sells the lines of several European
manufacturers, and tends to have higher prices for fancier (or at least
more unusual) stuff.  I haven't dealt with CS Flight Systems on the East
Coast, but I read good things about them.


           ::::::  --  Some Aerodynamics  --  ::::::

The aircraft can rotate around three axes: the fore-and-aft axis (or the
_roll_ axis); the spanwise (nose-up/nose-down) axis or the _pitch_ axis;
and the nose-left/nose-right, or _yaw_ axis.

Speed:

The cross-section of the wing has a shape called an _airfoil_. It has the
property that when it meets the air (usually at some small angle, called
the _angle_of_attack) it generates an upward force (lift) for a small
backward force (drag). The amount of lift (and drag) depends on the
airspeed and a value called the _lift_coefficient_ (and a few other
things like surface area and density of the air). If the plane is in
unaccelerated flight, the upward force (approximately equal to the lift)
is equal in magnitude to the weight of the plane, which is a constant. It
thus follows that the total lift generated by the wing is always constant
(at least in unaccelerated flight). [One example of accelerated flight is
turning---see below]

The above mentioned _coefficient_of_lift_ (abbreviated Cl) depends on the
angle of attack. Usually, as the A-of-A is increased, Cl increases; to
keep the lift force constant, speed can decrease. So to fly fast, we
decrease Cl (and A-of-A); to slow down, increase Cl (and A-of-A). Since
the wings are fixed, we alter the A-of-A by pitching the entire plane up
or down. This is done with the elevator.  The elevator is thus the speed
control.

Turning:

To turn a body moving in a straight line, a sideways force must be
applied to it. For a plane, the best method for generating a force is to
use the wings. To get them to act sideways, we roll the plane: now part
of the lift is acting sideways and voila! a turn. To roll the plane, we
use the ailerons (the movable surfaces at the wingtips). Also, notice
that now since part of the lift is acting sideways, the lift force in the
upward direction is reduced; but the upward component of the lift needs
to be equal to the weight of the plane i.e.  we need a little more lift
from the wings, which we can do by increasing Cl---i.e. by pulling a bit
of up-elevator. That's why to turn in a plane you push the stick sideways
in the direction of the turn and then pull back a bit to keep the nose
level.

What happens if you try to turn with the rudder alone? The application of
the rudder will cause the aircraft to yaw, and it will continue to travel
in the same straight line (more or less), skidding. (Think of a car on a
perfectly slippery road---if you try to turn just by turning the wheel,
you'll skid but won't turn). So we need a roll to turn.

But most of the trainers we see don't have any ailerons! How do they
turn? They use a configuration of the wings called _dihedral_ (or, for most
gliders, _polyhedral_).

     Flat                  Dihedral                     Polyhedral
                           ~-_                     _-~
-------O--------     ~~~----___O___----~~~        ~~~~~~~----O---~~~~~~

       ^                       ^                 ^           ^         ^
 0 angle between       small angle between        small angle between 2 wing
 2 wing panels         2 wing panels              panels and also small angle
                          within each panel (Gentle Lady)
                                OR
                         0 angle between 2 wing panels
                         and small angle within each
                         panel (Olympic 650)

When we apply rudder (say left rudder) to a plane with dihedral, what
happens?  The plane yaws; the right half of the wing then sees a greater
angle of attack than than the left half:

              / / / / / / <--- airflow direction
          ._______________________.
          |___________|___________|
        left wing    right wing

(You can try this out if you don't believe it: take a piece of paper and
fold it slightly, like dihedral; then look at it end on, but slightly
off-center, i.e.  from the point of view of the approaching airflow. You
will see that you can see more of the underside of one half than you can
of the other.) And what does an increased angle of attack do? It
increases the Cl and the lift generated by that half! So we now have the
right wing generating more lift and the left less; the result is a roll
to the left. With polyhedral we get the same effect, only to a larger
extent.

The Stall:

If you try to fly slower and slower by pulling back on the stick (i.e.
applying up-elevator) you will reach a point where the plane "falls out
of the sky" or the stall. What happens is that an airfoil will only
"work" up to a certain angle of attack. When that angle is exceeded, the
airflow above the airfoil breaks up and the result is an increase in drag
and a drastic decrease in lift, so that the wings can no longer support
the plane. The only remedy is to reduce the A-of-A i.e. to push the nose
down. This may be a little difficult to do when you see your plane
falling---the natural tendency is to pull back on the stick, to "hold the
plane up."

A development of the stall is the spin. Volumes can be written about it,
and have been; go to the library and check any book on introductory
aerodynamics.

If you want to know more about Aerodynamics as it applies to Model
Aircraft (the small Reynolds' number regime, as it is sometimes called)
check "Model Aircraft Aerodynamics" by Martin Simons.

--
--
  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / [e-mail]
  "Take this cross and garlic; here's a Mezuzah if he's Jewish; a page of the
    Koran if he's a Muslim; and if he's a Zen Buddhist, you're on your own."
   Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to [e-mail]
Xref: bloom-picayune.mit.edu rec.autos:93169 rec.autos.tech:48672 rec.autos.sport:25110 rec.autos.driving:14707 rec.autos.vw:10579 alt.autos.antique:2400 news.answers:4703
Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!enterpoop.mit.edu!biosci!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!udel!intercon!psinntp!balltown!welty
From: [e-mail] (richard welty)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech,rec.autos.sport,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos.vw,alt.autos.antique,news.answers
Subject: rec.autos: Welcome to to the new reader
Keywords: Monthly Posting
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 20 Dec 92 05:00:04 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Followup-To: rec.autos
Organization: New York State Institute for Sebastian Cabot Studies
Lines: 261
Approved: [e-mail]

Archive-name: rec-autos/part1

[most recent changes, 19 November 1992: description of alt.hotrod -- rpw]

               === Welcome to Rec.Autos.* ===

This article is sent out automatically each month, and contains a general
description of the purpose of each of the automotive newsgroups, and
some suggested guidelines for discussions.  The keywords `Monthly Posting'
will always appear to make killing this article easy for users of
newsreaders with kill facilities.  This article is posted to all autos
groups, but followups are directed only to rec.autos.  If you don't
understand what this means, ask your system administrator for help, or at
least for copies of the newuser documentation.  Failing that, please
subscribe to the newsgroup news.announce.newusers and read the
documentation provided there.

Introduction to the Rec.Autos newsgroup hierarchy:

rec.autos.tech

is intended for technical discussions of automobiles, their design,
construction, diagnosis, and service.  Other discussions are largely
inappropriate, especially For Sale ads.

rec.autos.sport

is intended for discussion of legal, organized competition involving
automobiles.  Technical discussions are appropriate insofar as they apply
to competition vehicles.  Discussion from either of two viewpoints,
spectator and participant, is encouraged.  Arguments about sports cars are
largely inappropriate, as are most other discussions.  For Sale ads are
inappropriate unless they are for competition vehicles and/or equipment.
Discussions of illegal events are marginal; one should probably avoid
advocating breaking the law.  (remember, the FBI reads Usenet!)

rec.autos.driving

is intended for discussions related to the driving of automobiles.
Also, if you must discuss 55 vs. 65, or radar detectors, or <insert
your pet driving peeve> boneheads, do it here.

rec.autos.vw

is intended for discussion of issues related to the use and ownership
of automobiles manufactured by Volkswagen (this includes VWs, Audis,
Seats, etc.)  It was created on the grounds that the info-vw mailing
list was very successful.  It should not be presumed from the existence
of this group that it is appropriate to create many groups to cover many
different marques; groups specific to individual marques should only be
created on demonstration of sufficient interest, via some avenue such as
a mailing list.

rec.audio.car

is not properly part of the rec.autos.* hierarchy.  it is, however,
the correct place for discussion of automotive audio equipment, and
so is mentioned here.

alt.autos.antique

is not part of the hierarchy, but of potential interest to the rec.autos
reader; it is intended for the discussion of older cars (usually
more than 25 years old, although this is not a hard-and-fast rule.)

alt.hotrod

is not part of the hierarchy, but also of potential interest to the
rec.autos reader.  it is gatewayed to the moderated hotrod mailing
list, and is for serious discussion of modifying and developing
performance vehicles.

rec.autos

is intended to capture discussion on all other automotive topics.


Crossposting:

Crossposting occurs when more than one newsgroup name is included on
the Newsgroups: line in the article header; such articles will appear
in all of the newsgroups listed.

Crossposting is one of the most misunderstood and misused facilities on
Usenet.  You should only post to a group because you feel an article is
appropriate; you should NEVER crosspost just to reach a particular
audience.  This distinction is subtle, but important.  Radar Detector
articles, for example, are more-or-less appropriate in rec.autos.  They are
almost never appropriate in sci.electronics or rec.ham-radio, and the fact
that you might want to reach the audience in sci.electronics or
rec.ham-radio is NOT adequate justification for posting to either group.

Crossposting between any or all of the rec.autos.* groups is usually
inappropriate; if you find yourself doing so, consider whether or not it is
truly advisable, before sending your article.  Consider setting Followup-To:
to point to only one newsgroup if you feel you must crosspost.

Crossposting between rec.autos.* and misc.consumers is chancy at best; in
particular flame wars over the speed limit in the US and/or the use of
radar detectors should NEVER be crossposted between any of these groups.

Most readers of sci.electronics and rec.radio.* couldn't care less about
the police radar and radar detector arguments that go on endlessly in
rec.autos.

It is an excellent idea to check the Newsgroups: and Followup-to:  lines of
articles before posting a followup.  In particular, be wary of posting to
misc.test, rec.arts.startrek.*, or talk.bizarre, or any combination of these
three.  The life you save may be your own.

Distribution:

There is a field in the header of any news article which allows you to
(partially) control where the article goes; it is called the Distribution
field.  It may be very useful for many reasons; it should also serve
as a reminder that news is a very large and widespread system.

The distribution of rec.autos.* is fairly extensive.  As of this writing,
the Automotive newsgroups are known to reach most of Europe, Australia,
New Zealand, and some locations in Japan.  With this in mind, I offer the
following hints about use of the Distribution: field in your article
headers, and on article content.

1) Please take care not to send for-sale ads about clapped out Ford
Mavericks in New Jersey to France or California; i doubt that anyone in
either place will care, except for my girlfriend, who for some strange
reason likes Mavericks (but only 4-door Mavericks, at that.)

2) When posting technical questions, please include the market for which
your car was manufactured.  For example, there are a number of differences
between a European-market Ford Escort and a US-market Escort.  Likewise,
all 1750cc and early 2000cc Alfa Romeos reached the US with Spica Fuel
injection; European market cars usually got carbs (often Webers).  These
differences can be important to your readers; make your situation clear.
Failure to do so can lead to pointless flame wars and a significant
spread of misinformation.