Author Topic: Jimmy Casale (Read 20898 times)

Bill Little · « **on:** July 22, 2011, 03:02:10 PM »

OK, guys, which of Jimmy's planes that have been published are NOS. 30 legal? Especially those originally powered with the ST .60? I do not have the complete FM plans list "yet" so I am at a bit of a loss here.

Thanks!
Big Bear

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2011, 09:20:01 AM »

Currently it's just the original black Spectrum, from the July 1980 issue of Flying Models, plan #CF-542. It used a OS 45 FSR at the time.

The first Nats winner (the Spectrum Mk III) was the 1983 plane, published in Flying Models in 1984. Got a few years to wait yet, for that one and the other two Nats winners to be Nostalgia-class legal.

Bill Little · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2011, 01:58:29 PM »

Quote from: Mike Ferguson on October 18, 2011, 09:20:01 AM

Currently it's just the original black Spectrum, from the July 1980 issue of Flying Models, plan #CF-542. It used a OS 45 FSR at the time.

The first Nats winner (the Spectrum Mk III) was the 1983 plane, published in Flying Models in 1984. Got a few years to wait yet, for that one and the other two Nats winners to be Nostalgia-class legal.

Thanks, Mike. Well the MK III is only about a year and 3 months away!

Big Bear

builditright · « **Reply #3 on:** October 20, 2011, 03:23:04 AM »

If anyone can help me find Casale, I would deeply appreciate it,
I've been trying to reach him for several years now to get permission
to do his Spectrum.

Bob Hunt · « **Reply #4 on:** October 20, 2011, 03:38:49 PM »

Well, first off, it's not only Jimmy that needs to give permission... His Spectrum designs were published by Flying Models (I know, I was the Editor there when they were published...) and they own the rights to the design. The proper protocol is to get in touch with the designer (Jimmy in this case) and ask them if they want the design published. If they do, then they would have to contact the magazine that holds the rights to the design (FM in this case) and ask to have the kit rights reassigned to them. Then they could make a deal with a kit manufacturer for royalties or whatever.

Later - Bob Hunt

proparc · « **Reply #5 on:** October 21, 2011, 11:15:08 AM »

Quote from: Bob Hunt on October 20, 2011, 03:38:49 PM

Well, first off, it's not only Jimmy that needs to give permission... His Spectrum designs were published by Flying Models (I know, I was the Editor there when they were published...) and they own the rights to the design. The proper protocol is to get in touch with the designer (Jimmy in this case) and ask them if they want the design published. If they do, then they would have to contact the magazine that holds the rights to the design (FM in this case) and ask to have the kit rights reassigned to them. Then they could make a deal with a kit manufacturer for royalties or whatever.

Later - Bob Hunt

Bob
Is it just me, or is there something wrong here. Is it possible to publish without assigning away rights? Why wouldn't publishing just give the rights to publish and nothing more? Why would you want to publish, if it meant assigning away the rights to your hard won intellectual property?

Please enlighten me!

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #6 on:** October 21, 2011, 11:43:19 AM »

Quote from: proparc on October 21, 2011, 11:15:08 AM

Is it just me, or is there something wrong here. Is it possible to publish without assigning away rights? Why wouldn't publishing just give the rights to publish and nothing more? Why would you want to publish, if it meant assigning away the rights to your hard won intellectual property?

In the US at least it's possible to publish under just about any arrangement that you can get the publisher to sign up to. Copyright law varies from place to place -- it's not a natural law that's been graven in stone from day one all around the world; in fact it's a fairly recent innovation from the 1600's or something like that (it didn't become an issue until the invention of the printing press). So we've got one set of laws in the US, there's another set of laws in Britain, yet more sets in countries that use Roman-based law (most European countries give an author lasting "moral rights" to the text, no matter what the arrangement with the publisher), and countries like China don't seem to recognize copyright at all.

Some common arrangements (I don't know them all, and there's lots of room for creativity) are for the publisher to retain all rights, with the text being a "work for hire", for the author to retain copyright to the text while the publisher retains copyright to the way it is arranged into a book, for the publisher to retain exclusive rights for some time period after which the rights revert to the author, or for the publisher to retain rights for as long as they're actively selling the material, after which the rights revert to the author.

If you grab some books off your bookshelf, you'll see that some say "copyright <publisher>", and some say "copyright <author>". Some reprints may even say "copyright <some relative of the author>". That reflects the arrangements made between author and publisher.

(I published an RC plane in Flying Models last year, for which I never signed anything and never got paid. I'm not sure what my legal standing is in that case, but I'll bet that in the eyes of the law the manuscript and plans that I sent to them are mine alone, and only the article as laid out and edited by them belong to them -- but I'm not an intellectual property lawyer, so I don't know).

John Miller · « **Reply #7 on:** October 21, 2011, 12:45:51 PM »

(I published an RC plane in Flying Models last year, for which I never signed anything and never got paid. I'm not sure what my legal standing is in that case, but I'll bet that in the eyes of the law the manuscript and plans that I sent to them are mine alone, and only the article as laid out and edited by them belong to them -- but I'm not an intellectual property lawyer, so I don't know).
[/quote]

I believe you may actually still retain all the rights. It was your work they were editing, and without that work, they would have nothing. I'm in the same predicament as you with a couple of articles not paid for. Perhaps I should begin making plans available myself.

Bob Hunt · « **Reply #8 on:** October 22, 2011, 09:00:02 PM »

Here's the skinny...

On the back of the check that FM issued (At least while I was there...) it stated clearly that any and all rights to the design are transferred to Flying Models when the check is endorsed and cashed. That's pretty clear. Magazines will in almost every case reassign the rights for kitting purposes only to the designer when requested. In this case, Jimmy is the one who has to petition FM for the reassignment of the rights to a particular design. He can, when the rights are reassigned, either kit the model himself, or assign the kitting rights to another for whatever deal he chooses to make.

I have no idea what is the legal process if you had a model published by a magazine and did not get paid for it. I would think that you have some legal recourse to institute action against that magazine for breach of contract. Check with a lawyer on that...

Here's why I got involved in this thread: Too many are just assuming that they can pirate the intellectual property of others and make money from it. This has to stop! If we are gentlemen and just people, we cannot condone this action. I have had my designs ripped off, and I know of many more who have also. It makes me angry, and it should make everyone angry to know that someone is stealing from another modeler.

Mike is doing the right thing by doing due diligence in getting proper permission to kit Jimmy's designs and I applaud him for it.

Bob Hunt

Randy Powell · « **Reply #9 on:** October 23, 2011, 12:40:39 PM »

What Bob said. I've been approached by folks to kit some stuff I've done. I'm kinda odd in that I don't really care. I've told folks do whatever you want, but that's me. I think that those that own the design should have the right to do what they want with it. If a magazine has the rights, then they get to say. If it's the designer, then he does.

I also applaud Mike for getting it right.

Mike Griffin · « **Reply #10 on:** October 26, 2011, 02:43:02 PM »

Quote from: Bob Hunt on October 22, 2011, 09:00:02 PM

Here's the skinny...

On the back of the check that FM issued (At least while I was there...) it stated clearly that any and all rights to the design are transferred to Flying Models when the check is endorsed and cashed. That's pretty clear. Magazines will in almost every case reassign the rights for kitting purposes only to the designer when requested. In this case, Jimmy is the one who has to petition FM for the reassignment of the rights to a particular design. He can, when the rights are reassigned, either kit the model himself, or assign the kitting rights to another for whatever deal he chooses to make.

I have no idea what is the legal process if you had a model published by a magazine and did not get paid for it. I would think that you have some legal recourse to institute action against that magazine for breach of contract. Check with a lawyer on that...

Here's why I got involved in this thread: Too many are just assuming that they can pirate the intellectual property of others and make money from it. This has to stop! If we are gentlemen and just people, we cannot condone this action. I have had my designs ripped off, and I know of many more who have also. It makes me angry, and it should make everyone angry to know that someone is stealing from another modeler.

Mike is doing the right thing by doing due diligence in getting proper permission to kit Jimmy's designs and I applaud him for it.

Bob Hunt

Hi Bob

I just read this thread and I am not sure if it was me you were referring to in your post about getting Jimmy's permission but I am not kitting any of Jimmy's designs. You may have meant to refer to Walter Umland as I know Walter has been trying to get in touch with Jimmy to get permission to kit his designs. The design I am wanting to kit is the Box Car Chief and I have written to Frank at Flying Models to see if he minded if I kitted it because Mike Keville submitted an article on it back in the early 90's.

Just wanted to clear that up in case it was me you were referring to since you did not say Mike who..

Thanks

Mike Griffin

Bob Hunt · « **Reply #11 on:** October 26, 2011, 08:06:07 PM »

Oops! Soory about that... Kudos to Walter then for doing it right...

Bob

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #12 on:** October 27, 2011, 01:06:01 PM »

Quote from: Bob Hunt on October 20, 2011, 03:38:49 PM

Well, first off, it's not only Jimmy that needs to give permission... His Spectrum designs were published by Flying Models (I know, I was the Editor there when they were published...) and they own the rights to the design. The proper protocol is to get in touch with the designer (Jimmy in this case) and ask them if they want the design published. If they do, then they would have to contact the magazine that holds the rights to the design (FM in this case) and ask to have the kit rights reassigned to them. Then they could make a deal with a kit manufacturer for royalties or whatever.

Later - Bob Hunt

My own experience with freelance writing is that in general, the author is giving up all publication rights to the submitted material. That's been 99% of the freelance writing contracts I've signed for magazines and other publications over the past ten years - in exchange for the completed manuscript, I'm paid a specific fee, and ownership rights of the manuscript and its contents - including any original or creative concepts I might've developed - are transferred to the publisher. Once I've been paid, I no longer have any ownership rights to the material I've written.

For anyone who thinks that's not right or fair, all I can say is 1) that's a general publishing standard, and 2) no one ever put a gun to my head and made me sign these sorts of contracts - I knew what I was getting into.

Without seeing the freelance writing contract for Flying Models, I'd hazard a guess that it's the same sort of deal, but it's possible that it's not. Some contracts also revert the publication rights back to the original author after a set number of years, so it's possible that's the case as well.

Regardless, for anyone looking to kit one of Jimmy's planes - or, for that matter, any design published in Flying Models or Model Aviation - I think it'd be a good idea (not to mention polite courtesy!) to contact both the original designer/author and the magazine who published the design.

builditright · « **Reply #13 on:** October 27, 2011, 11:54:39 PM »

Quote from: Mike Ferguson on October 27, 2011, 01:06:01 PM

for anyone looking to kit one of Jimmy's planes - or, for that matter, any design published in Flying Models or Model Aviation - I think it'd be a good idea (not to mention polite courtesy!) to contact both the original designer/author and the magazine who published the design.

which is what I want to do (contact Jimmy)
and which I have done (Contacted F.M.)

which leads us back to my reply posted above... about trying to find and contact Jim Casale

Bill Little · « **Reply #14 on:** October 29, 2011, 05:38:43 PM »

Quote from: builditright on October 27, 2011, 11:54:39 PM

which is what I want to do (contact Jimmy)
and which I have done (Contacted F.M.)

which leads us back to my reply posted above... about trying to find and contact Jim Casale

Hi Walter,

Good luck with your efforts. I wouldn't think it would be very difficult to find Jimmy, but I don't have any contact info.

Bill

peabody · « **Reply #15 on:** October 30, 2011, 07:46:49 PM »

Jimmy is fairly elusive....last I saw him, he was at Winfred's and had zero interest in getting back to flying....
I think he's painting houses for a living?

Have fun!

Bill Little · « **Reply #16 on:** November 01, 2011, 10:52:53 AM »

Quote from: peabody on October 30, 2011, 07:46:49 PM

Jimmy is fairly elusive....last I saw him, he was at Winfred's and had zero interest in getting back to flying....
I think he's painting houses for a living?

Have fun!

Hi Rich,

I wasn't aware that Jimmy had given up making music.

Big Bear

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #17 on:** November 07, 2011, 07:29:48 AM »

Quote from: Bill Little on November 01, 2011, 10:52:53 AM

Hi Rich,

I wasn't aware that Jimmy had given up making music.

Big Bear

He hasn't. Still makes music, paints houses, does handyman work, etc. ...

And yes, has zero interest in flying.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #18 on:** November 07, 2011, 12:47:29 PM »

Didn't Jimmy hurt his hand or something? I seem to remember part of the reason he quit flying was a damaged hand (or something).

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #19 on:** November 07, 2011, 01:37:09 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on November 07, 2011, 12:47:29 PM

Didn't Jimmy hurt his hand or something? I seem to remember part of the reason he quit flying was a damaged hand (or something).

Yep - the year before he left the hobby, he got his fingers caught in a carbon fiber three-blade. And yes, it did quite a number on his hand ... and when you're a professional musician - who plays saxophone and flute, among other instruments - that certainly wasn't a good thing.

He was back to flying at the Nats the next year, so it certainly wasn't the only reason he stopped flying. But I think it was a contributing reason.

Anyone looking for a "smoking gun" as to why he left the hobby - well, there wasn't one. The incident with the carbon prop was probably one. But there were a slew of other reasons as well.

The 1991 Nats (which was the last one he flew in) was like a country western song for him. He lost his job with the band he was in (which was partly due to the fact he wanted to take time off in the summer - their "busy season") to fly at the Nats. He got dumped by his girlfriend at the time. His wallet got stolen at the Nats as well. And while flying at the Nats, he discovered that the plane he'd been flying - which he'd rebuilt from a crash - had a pretty significant warp in the wing.

There was also the matter of the tuned pipe, which had just come onto the scene as a dominant force. It wasn't like it is now - there were a few people with excellent pipe set-ups (Paul Walker, Ted Fancher, Billy Werwage, and Bob Hunt), but a lot of people were struggling with them. It wasn't the plug-and-play set-ups that you see now. Jimmy felt that if he was going to be competitive, he needed a pipe set-up as good as those. And finding that set-up was going to take an investment of time and money that - given everything else happening around then - he didn't want to make.

About the only reason that I've heard that's patently wrong is the notion of "well, the judges at the Nats are biased towards the West Coast fliers". Not. True. In fact, Jimmy took his win at the 1989 Nats in Washington as a validation that the idea of "Nats bias" was a myth.

In reading Les McDonald's articles for Stunt News lately, I saw a lot of parallels between Les and Jimmy - namely, that they were there to win, and doing so became an all-consuming force in their lives, that didn't always have the best of consequences. It's why I don't think you'll ever see Jimmy at the handle ever again. I don't see him just building a Caprice to compete for fun at VSC or a local contest, or building a Thunder Gazer to see if he could be in the Top 10 at the Nats. If he got back into the hobby, he'd be back in it to try and win the whole thing again ... and I don't think he'd want to commit to that level of all-consuming intensity again.

proparc · « **Reply #20 on:** November 07, 2011, 01:55:24 PM »

Quote from: Mike Ferguson on November 07, 2011, 01:37:09 PM

His wallet got stolen at the Nats as well.

At the Nats!!! It couldn't have been a fellow stunt flyer, thats for sure.

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #21 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:31:52 PM »

Quote from: proparc on November 07, 2011, 01:55:24 PM

At the Nats!!! It couldn't have been a fellow stunt flyer, thats for sure.

Well, whether it was or not, it's kind of a moot point now.

It was just one of many, many factors that week that led Jimmy to question "exactly why am I doing this again"? And the bottom line was that the hobby wasn't really all that much fun for him at that point in time. So to invest as much of his time and energy and finances into something that wasn't really fun ... ultimately, that's why he walked away from everything.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #22 on:** November 07, 2011, 04:38:35 PM »

>>If he got back into the hobby, he'd be back in it to try and win the whole thing again ... and I don't think he'd want to commit to that level of all-consuming intensity again.<<

I can understand that. It's probably why I have fun at this but will never be the all consuming competitor. I ran track in college and it was all consuming. I thought about it every minute of every day and I was very good. But I got hurt and that ended my career. I just can't get up the sort of obsessional behavior it takes to be the best at this. I want to fly the best I can, but I'm not really willing to go all out. Not again. When you do that, the fun can drain right out of it.

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #23 on:** November 07, 2011, 04:52:53 PM »

FWIW (and not sure how relevant this is), but there are one or two of Jim Casale's planes around here in the NW. I know several who have flown them, and none had anything good to say about the way they flew. $:-\$ Steve

Les McDonald · « **Reply #24 on:** November 08, 2011, 08:06:17 AM »

((((In reading Les McDonald's articles for Stunt News lately, I saw a lot of parallels between Les and Jimmy - namely, that they were there to win, and doing so became an all-consuming force in their lives, that didn't always have the best of consequences. It's why I don't think you'll ever see Jimmy at the handle ever again. I don't see him just building a Caprice to compete for fun at VSC or a local contest, or building a Thunder Gazer to see if he could be in the Top 10 at the Nats. If he got back into the hobby, he'd be back in it to try and win the whole thing again ... and I don't think he'd want to commit to that level of all-consuming intensity again.))))
[/quote]

Thanks Mike for explaining that for some of us it was not always sunshine, lollipops and rainbows!

Les

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #25 on:** November 08, 2011, 12:38:17 PM »

Quote from: Les McDonald on November 08, 2011, 08:06:17 AM

Thanks Mike for explaining that for some of us it was not always sunshine, lollipops and rainbows!

Les

Thank you, Les, for writing that series of articles.

I definitely appreciate how candid you were about your experiences - telling parts of your story, I imagine, couldn't have been easy.

Derek Barry · « **Reply #26 on:** November 15, 2011, 05:37:36 AM »

Here is a Spectrum that Dad built for Bob Shaw. I never got to fly this one....

Derek

Larry Cunningham · « **Reply #27 on:** December 03, 2011, 06:52:22 PM »

I remember watching Jimmy Casale at the Tri-Cities Nats. He had a blinding corner on the pullout from the reverse wingover. Plus I think he might have been sweet on Svetlana Filipova, the beautiful Russian competitor (who wasn't?).
Jimmy's ship (Columbia, right?) was finished beautifully and he was an awesome competitor.

<<I also first saw Paul Walker fly at that event, and he stood head and shoulders above everyone else (IMO).>>

L.

"Many a man has fallen in love with a girl in a light so dim he would not have chosen a
suit by it." -Maurice Chevalier

peabody · « **Reply #28 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:38:02 PM »

Mike's dad did quite a bit of coaching for Jimmy.....
Listening to him talk with Windy and others, I kinda got the opinion that he didn't trim his planes so much. He just learned to fly with the shortcomings...

Bill Little · « **Reply #29 on:** December 04, 2011, 12:01:03 PM »

Well, Thanks, guys! Got as lot more information than I expected.

I can totally understand "burn out" when it comes to competition in anything. When I finally "quit" playing ball, I was devastated. Nothing about ability, but injuries that I had played through ended my playing days. A year after failing an NFL physical I had a try out for the Greensboro farm club of the Yankees. They needed a catcher and had spoke to me when I was still in HS. I was NFL bound (or so I thought) and told them so. Now I had a bonified chance to get into the minor leagues. MY thought by then was "do I want to go back and go through everything I would have to do?" Being married and having a job was answer enough. I no longer wanted to do what was necessary. Same thing a year later wen I had a chance to go to camp with the Toronto CFL team........

I did, however, get a job as a Head Professional at a local course which was the most FUN I ever had at a job! (the original 300 lb Gorilla on the course!

)

Big Bear

Bill Little · « **Reply #30 on:** December 04, 2011, 04:07:47 PM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on December 04, 2011, 02:29:50 PM

Good news. In talking with Walter Umland a few days ago, he said he had contacted Jimmy Casale and Jim has given him permission to kit any of his planes. Walter has also talked with Frank Fanelli and he gave Walter permission to do the kits of published Casale planes. Mr. Fanelli also stated FM only had the rights to publish the models and sell the plans. His problem was with those selling the plans that FM also sells, not kit makers.
So, whcih one will he do first? I assmume the N30 legal versions.

Great news! The one Nos. 30 legal Spectrum is a definite I hope while the 1983 Nats winner should be close since it is just 13 months away from being legal. This is about the time it will take to get it into production and then someone build/finish a kit. The 1983 NATS winner is one I will need to start saving for now!

Big Bear

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #31 on:** December 05, 2011, 08:51:06 AM »

Quote from: peabody on December 03, 2011, 07:38:02 PM

Listening to him talk with Windy and others, I kinda got the opinion that he didn't trim his planes so much. He just learned to fly with the shortcomings...

No, he was constantly trimming them. He just trimmed in a way that most people wouldn't like. The planes were always nose heavy, had big tails, and required a lot of arm/wrist movement to make them go - Jimmy also used the old CSC handle with long arms to fly, which goes against just about every current explanation of what makes a handle good. (The theory was "nose weight makes the plane 'groove' ".) If you read Bob Hunt's "Saturn" article, it's the way a lot of the NY/NJ crew used to trim in the 70s/80s. That's why Billy Werwage found one of Bob's planes "unflyable" in the "Saturn" article, and (I think) why Paul Walker hated flying one of Jimmy's planes so much.

They were trimmed ... for Jimmy's particular tastes in flying. I'm not surprised if someone else has one of his planes and doesn't like how it flies; they weren't trimmed in the way that Ted Fancher would trim a Trivial Pursuit, for example.

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #32 on:** January 23, 2012, 03:31:02 AM »

I'd concur with all of that.
I'd also might suggest that the tuned pipe problem was that he had two guys that were very good at making them work on the same world team in which he was a member and didn't always do what they suggested.
He was a natural pilot and had a real style, and he was a lot of fun to watch.
Chris...

John Kelly · « **Reply #33 on:** January 23, 2012, 07:30:16 AM »

...sorry for the Quality of the pic ( Lack Of )

Mike Ferguson · « **Reply #34 on:** January 23, 2012, 12:01:44 PM »

Quote from: Chris McMillin on January 23, 2012, 03:31:02 AM

I'd also might suggest that the tuned pipe problem was that he had two guys that were very good at making them work on the same world team in which he was a member and didn't always do what they suggested.

Oh, I wouldn't disagree with that at all. He had his own ideas about how a piped system should work, and they weren't exactly what you'd call optimal. He was trying to run the pipe a lot like a ST.60, and in a lot of regards, I think he would've been better off sticking with the ST.60 instead, at least in the early Nineties.

Quote from: Chris McMillin on January 23, 2012, 03:31:02 AM

He was a natural pilot and had a real style, and he was a lot of fun to watch.
Chris...

No doubt.

builditright · « **Reply #35 on:** March 02, 2012, 05:36:39 PM »

Hi guys,

back in Nov. of 2011 I was given a headsup and was pointed in the direction where I might be able to find Jim Casale.
That tip was successful and Jimmy & I had a long chat resulting in him allowing me to kit any of his designs I want, so the plans for the NOS 30 legal 79 Spectrum has been started and we're almost done with the first of Jimmies designs we plan to kit.

please send all emails to: spectrum79@builtrightflyright.com

builditright · « **Reply #36 on:** May 29, 2012, 10:49:34 AM »

The Spectrum plans are all done, so all I need to do now is
get a sample cut and get someone to build the prototype but
I would like to have some orders for it before I invest more
time and money into it.

peabody · « **Reply #37 on:** August 08, 2012, 04:40:40 PM »

There were / are several Spectrums flying in the NJ area....most purchased from Jim...

Airacobra · « **Reply #38 on:** August 21, 2012, 09:26:10 AM »

Who out there ever saw Jim's last published Spectrum fly? The one with the jet styling with intakes.

Bill Little · « **Reply #39 on:** August 21, 2012, 10:30:42 AM »

Quote from: Airacobra on August 21, 2012, 09:26:10 AM

Who out there ever saw Jim's last published Spectrum fly? The one with the jet styling with intakes.

Hi Keith,

Is that one the Spectron Columbia?

BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM

Airacobra · « **Reply #40 on:** August 21, 2012, 12:34:05 PM »

Yes, that's it Bill. I was just wondering if there was video of him flying that plane. I was sitting here thinking back and I remember a flight that Bob Baron put in with his ST 60 powered Patternmaster. I can still see him going through each maneuver and how crisp each corner was of the pattern. It got me thinking and I was curious to see if there was any video of Jim flying his ST 60 Powered Spectron/Columbia.

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #41 on:** August 21, 2012, 01:29:49 PM »

That is the plane Jimmy flew at the WC in Kiev. Ken Budenseik taped all the finals flights and had a 3 tape set for sale. I still have 2 of the 3 tapes somewhere. I had flown with Jimmy some in Reno at "84" at the Nats and flew with him at both the "86" and "88" WC's. Jim's planes were outstanding considering how many he built every year. When I say outstanding I'm talking about the building and finish. Watching his planes fly showed the skill Jim had for flying. I know Jim was in a constant state of trimming because I'm not sure he knew that his planes were not really outstanding flyers. I remember some other expert flyers who actually flew his plane and commented that to them they were just short of unflyable. He probably thought the same of theirs. I do know that Jim had to fly almost constantly to be able to fly them well. Probably one of the reasons he didn't fare too well at the WC where practice flying is practically non-existant. Practice flying with him in Reno, Jim flew 4 flights to every one of mine. Hey he was a past Nats champ. I remember when we arrived at the hotel in Reno there were 4 cases of fuel with Jim's name on them waiting behind the reception desk. At the end of the week he was on his last gallon.
Jim was a good friend and him leaving the hobby left a hole in the list of characters that frequent our event.

Airacobra · « **Reply #42 on:** August 21, 2012, 06:55:55 PM »

Alan, that is some interesting information on Jim and his planes. I wonder what others thought about his planes and what made them just short of unflyable. Interesting stuff that's for sure.

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #43 on:** November 10, 2012, 10:36:48 PM »

At least one or two of Casale's planes ended up here in the NW, and went through various hands. IIRC, Dave Gardner had one, and sold it to either Lee Uberbacher or Scott Crichton, and I believe others have flown it/them. Nobody liked to fly it/them. I saw one of them once, and I'm pretty sure it had a price tag on it.

Steve