Blank

[Rusty]

Blank

[Will Davis]

The one that  brings back memories of flying for the fun of the hobby, for me, it is a matador,  clear dope with blue wing tips ,   Fox 36, and lots of nitro,

[Mike Ferguson]

Anyone that's flown by Larry Scarinzi.

[Motorman]

The Sneaker was a top contender. I've built many and they never disappoint.

MM

[jim welch]

Guillotine  a flapped combat fun machine...Nemesis best allaroud later combat model...jim

[Andre Ming]

Trying to determine which one was "best" (as in performance) will be a very subjective issue, and one that there will never be a consensus concerning.

So, I'm not even going to ATTEMPT to go that direction.

Instead, let me ask you this: Which one is "best" for you? 

Any memories associated with one or more?  Any "wow... I want one of these!" from your younger years that you never did get?  Did you see someone fly a combat plane sometime in the past and thought that "one of these days" you'd like to build and fly one like it?  Did you have youth years combat "hero"?  (Early-on my combat "hero" was Riley Wooten, and later my old friend Bill James also.)

I suspect that which combat plane is "best" for you, may be something that only you'll be able to figure out.

Now, if you're asking which combat planes are "best" in terms of easy to scratch build, easy to fly, etc, well... I'm sure we can pitch some ideas your way with that in mind.

Good luck in your quest and whatever you do, have fun!

[builditright]

Let me jump in here and mention to please look at my list in the vendors section.

[Tony Drago]

Consolidated--Bandit or Giant Killer

[Air Ministry .]

The SPLINTER isnt to bad , by Bill Netzband . For a FAI ( .15 ) or 3.5cc like OS 20 19 & Enya 19 on 20 % nitro - SMAE Combat . One won the N.Z.
Nats around 1970 , with a OS 19 . The Wings 36 in. x 6 in.  plus tips ! so its 42 span .





Theres a version with the moulded leading edge with 1/16 sheet T.E. , ribs , cab strips & front sheeting from way back too ( Ive got it on paper ).
peacemakerish tips . Anyone in the U.S. seen this version .

Feels like the lines have an elevator , and ot recomended for decking , though .

The Demons not a bad open ship , for clowning around with a O S 30 or the like ,



The Early Bird ( not the Mini ) with a ETA 29 goes o.k. too . The wings 1 1/8 ' thick .



a thickish wing one will be less prone to ' slide off ' into the deck .

[Bill Morell]

Let me jump in here and mention to please look at my list in the vendors section.

Why does one do that when your web site says you are closed?

[Randy Cuberly]

Can someone please define "Vintage" per it's usage here?  I started flying combat in 1951 with Ringmasters.  That led to modified Ringmasters and on to a flapped Profile called the (I can't remember the name).  With a light case Johnson they flew fast and very well.  They were very popular around the Kansas City area!  They used a molded leading edge as early as 1957.   A guy named Joe Ellsworth probably built a hundred of them...I built about half that many!   A few years later the Quicker came on the scene and that pretty much defined the basic planform for Combat for a long time, then the same group of people came up with a Quicker with a side mounted engine and a Stabilator for control.  That defined the basic planform for a lot of years.  Then the Foamies took over...and so on.

Where does Vintage start and stop in that scheme?  Prior to 1960?  Prior to 1970?  Prior to 1980?

What engines are considered Vintage?

Randy Cuberly

[Brent Williams]

Gordan Delaney's Challenger combat ships are worthy contenders.
http://stunthanger.com/smf/index.php?topic=16802.0

[Mike Keville]

Pretty much anything designed by Riley Wooten.

Can't speak for what's "best", since I was never much of a Combat flyer, but while we all flew Voodoos, the most fun I ever had was with his Demon and a hot Fox.  Great design, and ultra-easy build.

[Russell Shaffer]

A T-Square can withstand many crashes and still fly.  You just have to replace the bolted in motor mounts each time.  Mine had a McCoy redhead, not very fast but I was only 10 or so.

[Ron Cribbs]

Have you considered the Super Satan?

[frank williams]

SweetSweep

[Randy Cuberly]

SweetSweep

One of my all time favorites!   and it goes back to true "Vintage Times".  Originals had modified K&B Greenheads.  I had several with Light case Johnson's around 1960 or so...flew great but difficult to build with a lot of pieces.  A lot of time spent for a 30 second combat flight!!!

Walter kitted it several years ago I still have one of the kits and gave the other one to Jeff Hanauer!

Most of the vintage combat plans are available from Barry Baxter.

Randy Cuberly

[RC Storick]

I had good luck with the Winder

[Lyle Spiegel]

I'm building Jim Mears Raunchy. Can't decide if i will use Fox36X BB  or Johnson CS. Will also build  Sneeker and then maybe Quicker.

[Frank Imbriaco]

Whatever one gives you the best memories

[Will Hinton]

For me it was Riley's Whatzit.  I had a lot of fun and success with mine in the Memphis area.  I realize his next designs were superior flyers and more competitive, but that old Whatzit design started me off in "true" combat.  Probably should build one just to have fun with it.  (I even put a Whatzit tail on a T Square once.)

[Bob Hunt]

One of my all time favorites!   and it goes back to true "Vintage Times".  Originals had modified K&B Greenheads.  I had several with Light case Johnson's around 1960 or so...flew great but difficult to build with a lot of pieces.  A lot of time spent for a 30 second combat flight!!!

Walter kitted it several years ago I still have one of the kits and gave the other one to Jeff Hanauer!

Most of the vintage combat plans are available from Barry Baxter.

Randy Cuberly

Hi Randy:

Yeah, the Sweet Sweep could be a bear to build in mass quantities (apologies to Jane  and Dan...) the "old" way, but it's a snap to build in the Lost-Foam system. I'm building one now for the GSCB Vintage Combat gathering in September at the GSCB field in Lincoln Park, New Jersey.

Attached are a few photos that I've also posted on the Combat forum here.

Later - Bob Hunt

[Randy Powell]

I built a lot of Winders as a kid. A lot.

[Tony Drago]

Hi Randy:

Yeah, the Sweet Sweep could be a bear to build in mass quantities (apologies to Jane  and Dan...) the "old" way, but it's a snap to build in the Lost-Foam system. I'm building one now for the GSCB Vintage Combat gathering in September at the GSCB field in Lincoln Park, New Jersey.

Attached are a few photos that I've also posted on the Combat forum here.

Later - Bob Hunt

  Like...Very nice. A Neat and clean build.

[jim welch]

Winder................

[Dave_Trible]

I guess you would have to choose an era of time but my favorite will always be the Guillotine.  However before that I flew Vampires which I liked for toughness.  I always admired but never built the Sneaker- however I got two kits from Marvin Denny just before he passed and look forward to building them when I get the time.  I have a couple Fox .35Xs for them.  Another might be the Big Iron by Carl Berryman I think.

Dave

[john e. holliday]

Well the Big Iron helped me get my first place trophy and my opponents pit crew.   Metal tank was good consistent run for 5+ minutes.  But if like combat planes, go look at Barry Baxter's site and listing of plans.   Had room I would have one of each built.   Did I say the Giant Killer was one plane I disliked but it would hold its own once it got up to speed.

[Randy Cuberly]

Wow Bob,
The perfect way to build a Sweet Sweep.  Where were you in 1959...I built about 8 of those things on a flat table and my lap...Not much fun.  a couple of them didn't have any warps.  Most of the ones I saw back then had thin aluminum tabs on the outboard wing to correct for warps.  Hard to build one straight on your lap! 

Think I gotta have one of those Jigs.  I have several Good K&B Greenheads to make some truly vintage!  Gotta get out the grinder!

Careful...don't cut yourself on that venturi!   

This is beginning to sound like a lot of fun!

Randy Cuberly

[bob whitney]

 when combat started down here the hot ship ws ths Super Clown less flaps and shortend one rib on each side, and then the Half fast took over. then a couple of  Renagades ,after that it was all Wooten stuff

 Rusty, i am in

[Howard Rush]

I think this thread illustrates that in the old days, lots of people flew control line, but folks didn't travel much to contests.  There were isolated pockets of combat activity, and it was kinda fun to invade them.  The last I came across was Seattle in 1973.  Seattle is a long way from anywhere else in the contiguous US, and folks here thought the Fox Feathers was the hot item. 

[Howard Rush]

What do you guys think of this one?

http://www.outerzone.co.uk/plan_files_04/4666/Super_Voodoo_39in_CL.pdf

I don't remember seeing this one.  John Jo won Senior combat at the 1964 Nats with a non-Super Voodoo, beating Richard Stubblefield in the finals.  We had fun there.  Rusty Brown attempted to be a bad influence on John.

Single tail booms became fashionable about 1980 or so.  I think they may not have worked as well with the structure of these old planes as two booms.

[jim welch]

Rusty....super voo doo ii  they fly great and any engine works including a hopped up evo..i got 4 and they are my flying test stand for green head k&b,36xs, veco combat special and anything new....tough too .....ask me how i know....jim

[jim welch]

Another one...backwards fox 35x....jim

[Andre Ming]

Howard:

Richard Stubblefield was flying combat in 1964?  Didn't know that.

Mono-booms:

The earliest I "THINK" I remember seeing mono-booms was Jerry Haupt's "Wedge" and Bernie Vernau's "Motivator II"... both of early 1970s vintage.  At least, that's my story and I'm a' stickin' with it.  

[riley wooten]

I don't remember seeing this one.  John Jo won Senior combat at the 1964 Nats with a non-Super Voodoo, beating Richard Stubblefield in the finals.  We had fun there.  Rusty Brown attempted to be a bad influence on John.

Single tail booms became fashionable about 1980 or so.  I think they may not have worked as well with the structure of these old planes as two booms.

Howard,  I wrote you a long reply but somehow it did not go through..  The year I was ED in Lake Charles Phil (JCT) won open.  John Jo beat Brasher (sp) with the SV when no one gave him a chance (and it was no fluke)........Thought sure you would remember that.
In 75 I took new kit prototype to LC.  It was single boom, foam wing of 395 sq. in. covered with 00 silkspan.. Probably not first single boom, but know they were around by then....
RW

[frank williams]

I flew against Richard Stubblefield in 1959 or 60 at an Austin TX contest.  SweetSweeps.  
Richard and his brothers destroyed 8 SweetSweeps one weekend at a contest in the early 60's.   His dad wasn't happy.

[riley wooten]

Howard:

Richard Stubblefield was flying combat in 1964?  Didn't know that.

Mono-booms:

The earliest I "THINK" I remember seeing mono-booms was Jerry Haupt's "Wedge" and Bernie Vernau's "Motivator II"... both of early 1970s vintage.  At least, that's my story and I'm a' stickin' with it.  

I remember him as a 12 year old junior well before that................BTW his dad built most of the planes, and what a great guy, loved to spend time with him...
RW

[Air Ministry .]

Βρήκα τα σχέδια του Liquidator και του Splinter (το κόκκινο αριστερα). Στείλε μου π.μ. με την ταχυδρομική σου διεύθυνση να σου τα στείλω

  http://www.aeromodelling.gr/ForumS/index.php?topic=9516.0;all

[Andre Ming]

I remember him as a 12 year old junior well before that................BTW his dad built most of the planes, and what a great guy, loved to spend time with him...
RW

Wow... there is so much combat history/experiences at this site it is mind blowing.

Keep it comin' guys!

Riley: Sure wish you could slip away to NJ next month and attend the Garden State Circle Burners "Vintage Combat Festival"!   

[Dennis Leonhardi]

I have a Voodoo from the 70s and want to build another, different vintage combat plane. 

Which one is the best? 

Thanks

I can hardly wait to see all the responses on this one, Rusty.  Here's the question for you: What do YOU want/expect in a combat model?

I'm reminded of the old story about the US Air Force testing the first MiG-15 turned over to them by a North Korean defector ... Chuck Yeager flew it in several simulated dogfights against another USAF pilot flying an F-86 Sabre.  When the other pilot complained "of course Yeager is winning these dogfights, he's flying the MiG", they switched planes.  And Yeager continued "winning".

Back in the mid to late '50s, Bill Netzeband wrote that one of his designs was "the ultimate combat ship".  Much as I had a lot of respect for Bill, I named my next design the "Nadir" (meaning "low point").  Personally, I'm inclined to believe if there ever is an ultimate combat design, we might as well quit trying to improve them and all fly the same thing.

My Nadir - at about 500 square inches and 18 ounces with a combat .35 - flew well enough to win a major AAA meet in our area in 1959.  Fourteen or 15 years later, I was competing with "my style" of airplane - small, very fast, and absolutely stall-proof (in other words, big turns).  I cleaned up my engines every spring, and competed pretty seriously.  But that spring I was also coaching a wrestling club with national tournaments running into June, and hadn't had time to complete cleaning the old engines and breaking in new ones.

So I pulled out an old Nadir, mounted a new engine with a relatively small prop, ran it almost 4-cycling, and took 1st at that same AAA contest site - by scoring a kill in every round.  It's how you use what you have.

Now that I've written a book, here's a short answer: If "vintage" includes the early '60s, a Sneeker is hard to beat.  Most flyers will probably choose a pacifier or pen bladder; I'll take a 4 ounce metal tank every time, because I want completely predictable engine runs, and to be in the air the full 5 minutes if necessary.  I'll cover it with silk and lots of clear dope - or Super Coverite - because I expect it to last.

And ... well, you can clearly see I'm detailing what I (Me, Dennis) want in a combat ship.  What do YOU want, and how do YOU intend to fly it?

Dennis
 

[Dennis Leonhardi]

I remember him as a 12 year old junior well before that................BTW his dad built most of the planes, and what a great guy, loved to spend time with him...
RW

Yup.  And Jim Mears, in his published "Raunchy" design/article, stated that planes were given to Stubblefield for the Nats at which he won Senior Combat flying that design.

Sadly, a direct violation of the rules of the day - when Combat too included the BOM.

So much for "the good old days" ...

Dennis

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Rusty, I gotta urge you to try the Sneeker.  I believe the tapered wing results in much better handling on a very windy day.

Riley's Demon has pretty much the same wing area and is quick to build (with a "diamond" airfoil), but 'll take a tapered wing for any windy day.

I could be wrong - and often am - but you don't see many competitive stunt designs with "barn door" (rectangular) wing planforms, right?


Dennis

[Howard Rush]

And Jim Mears, in his published "Raunchy" design/article, stated that planes were given to Stubblefield for the Nats at which he won Senior Combat flying that design.

I thought that was Sherwood Buckstaff in 1962.

[EddyR]

A plane not mentioned much is the Twister & Super Twister. Twin boom elliptical wing. It was small but it was my choice for a long time. In high wind it seemed better than my straight wing models.
 Yes we did really use the large Reactor's in combat back in the  1950's. The plane under my left arm is a Reactor. I do not remember the other combat model.

[bob whitney]

 

my first combat ship was  a Daddy built Circus King  K&B green head 35   1954, i have a replica that i fly now

[riley wooten]

I thought that was Sherwood Buckstaff in 1962.

Howard, you are right, Buckstaff spent the summer of 62 in Lubbock and went to the Nats with us. Carl and I pitted for him.... As I remember he built his own planes while there.
RW

[Dennis Leonhardi]

I thought that was Sherwood Buckstaff in 1962.

Howard and Riley, my apologies - you are right in that Buckstaff was named.

It doesn't change that the integrity of the event at the Nats level meant little.  I exchanged letters with John Worth, then Executive Director of the AMA, about this and similar situations at the Nats - including the farce that protests in Combat were at the Nats level.  The long story short is that AMA Headquarters had little interest in the integrity of the National Championships in the hobby/sport it supposedly "governs".

Dennis

[riley wooten]

Howard and Riley, my apologies - you are right in that Buckstaff was named.

It doesn't change that the integrity of the event at the Nats level meant little.  I exchanged letters with John Worth, then Executive Director of the AMA, about this and similar situations at the Nats - including the farce that protests in Combat were at the Nats level.  The long story short is that AMA Headquarters had little interest in the integrity of the National Championships in the hobby/sport it supposedly "governs".

Dennis

John Worth told me in person many moons ago that he would not even have a National Championships if he thought AMA could survive  without it...!!
I don't see how you can think the integrity of combat was any different that other events at the Nats..  Actually, I thought the Nats overall were better run than most local and region contest...................
RW

[Dennis Leonhardi]

John Worth told me in person many moons ago that he would not even have a National Championships if he thought AMA could survive  without it...!!
I don't see how you can think the integrity of combat was any different that other events at the Nats..  Actually, I thought the Nats overall were better run than most local and region contest...................
RW

Riley, I've often told people the reason I learned to fly was to fly combat.  I had a passion for it - and, no offense, wasn't much concerned about the integrity of other events at the Nats.  I've written many times, in fact, that stunt was something of a joke in my opinion, at least with regard to the lower half of the "top 20".

Case in point: At a Glenview Nats in the '70s, Jack Sheeks put up a flight with his "Playboy" or something similar and was gathering things up afterwards when he was informed he'd placed in the top 20 (I believe 20th, and the records are probably still available).  His reaction was to state loudly enough for several of us to hear "It had to be name recognition, because it certainly wasn't my flying".

And he was dead right.  I've been a CD for many major contests, judged stunt often, and have flown the event for fun a couple of times and finished fairly well in Advanced.  The flights he put up that year were probably some of the worst I've seen by anyone who could complete the pattern.

What really hurt that year was a friend and fellow club member, Pete Simonson, had worked very hard and put up some great flights, only to end up 21st or 22nd.

Over the years, I've had a couple of younger - well, protégés if you will - that flew pretty darned well.  I would love to have provided them - especially Ted Berman - with planes for the Nats.

But is "winning" at all costs really winning?


Dennis

[riley wooten]

Riley, I've often told people the reason I learned to fly was to fly combat.  I had a passion for it - and, no offense, wasn't much concerned about the integrity of other events at the Nats.  I've written many times, in fact, that stunt was something of a joke in my opinion, at least with regard to the lower half of the "top 20".

Case in point: At a Glenview Nats in the '70s, Jack Sheeks put up a flight with his "Playboy" or something similar and was gathering things up afterwards when he was informed he'd placed in the top 20 (I believe 20th, and the records are probably still available).  His reaction was to state loudly enough for several of us to hear "It had to be name recognition, because it certainly wasn't my flying".

And he was dead right.  I've been a CD for many major contests, judged stunt often, and have flown the event for fun a couple of times and finished fairly well in Advanced.  The flights he put up that year were probably some of the worst I've seen by anyone who could complete the pattern.

What really hurt that year was a friend and fellow club member, Pete Simonson, had worked very hard and put up some great flights, only to end up 21st or 22nd.

Over the years, I've had a couple of younger - well, protégés if you will - that flew pretty darned well.  I would love to have provided them - especially Ted Berman - with planes for the Nats.

But is "winning" at all costs really winning?


Dennis

I agree with what you say and it was one of the reasons I quit flying stunt at Nats after 58 and 59 (I did wind up in the top 6 ea. time)  58 is a story in itself....  In combat there was no question, usually (cut it all off-no questions).

You still do not address your comment about combat integrity!!!!! I know our group  was always above board (can't say same for others)...  If anyone cannot win honestly they should not be there..............
RW