Post by: bob whitney on August 24, 2018, 11:14:49 AM
looks like they are going to try and have 1/2 a stunt on thurs .two class's #1 .049 and #2 .061. they are still working on the specifics
Post by: mike londke on August 24, 2018, 03:31:12 PM
Post by: Dan McEntee on August 24, 2018, 05:35:32 PM
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
Post by: kenneth cook on August 24, 2018, 11:11:09 PM
Post by: Dave Hull on August 25, 2018, 01:23:52 AM
Dave
Post by: L0U CRANE on August 25, 2018, 03:19:35 PM
A "slack" balloon tank like the one that came with the AJ "near-RTF" 1/2A of the 1950's, but with a big difference.
A fuel balloon goes inside a muffler pressure balloon. Both are wrapped to seal on the same plug, which has two tubes through it. The outer balloon is 'piped' to the muffler pressure. The inner balloon connects ONLY to the needle valve. Result - mild, but constant pressure feeding the engine. NOT sensitive to height, to g-loads or to fuel remaining.
The front of the (profile) model has an empty box built-in for the balloons. Looks almost like cheek cowls... Easy access to fill or replace. Balloon 'rubber' deteriorates in sunlight, and from hi-nitro fuels that 1/2A engines like. Larry describes how to recognize a tank near failure: feels - gummy, etc. The tanks are simple to make. You should bring a few spares when you fly. That's the old insurance trick. Whatever you insure never fails, unless you let the coverage lapse...
Removing a level of finicky problems could be great for 'metric 1/2A' events AND sport flying.
Post by: L0U CRANE on August 25, 2018, 03:26:58 PM
Post by: bob whitney on August 25, 2018, 08:40:40 PM
Post by: Dave Hull on August 25, 2018, 09:30:30 PM
Unless you have a LOT of 1/2A entries, running them together is the way to go. At our fall 1/2A "non-contest," we had something like 127 planes in the pits. The number might have been higher, but people kept taking them out of the pits to fly and we'd have to start counting all over again.
Lou,
I flew today with Larry, and he was fiddling with a metal hard tank on his 1cc stunter. (A SkyStreak maybe?) I needled it in a bit before takeoff and it was just about there, but it ran a little thin up high and late in the pattern. And definitely faster inverted. So he was tuning the tank today.... He was pleased with the progress and said that this combo ran a bit better than it had up to that point....
Dave "McSlow"
Post by: Larry Renger on August 27, 2018, 09:32:33 AM
A Medallion wold work on shorter lines or a Tee Dee on pressure.
Currently I fly .008*40’ lines, but a foot shorter would be better.
Post by: Paul Smith on August 27, 2018, 03:38:22 PM
Unless there are a lot of entries and you need to split it up, I'm not sure I see a good reason to separate .049's from .061's. Would be fun to see them going head to head on the same circle. Only separate out the scoring? For stunt, I'm not sure I see a big advantage of the .061 except that you can fly a bit bigger plane. They don't always fly better though. Maybe the lack of trimming or the lack of development? Flying "1cc" out here the issue is often that the tank/venturi setup on the .061's is not worked out well. The run keeps speeding up until the flight is just a blur. This doesn't seem to be an issue with the Medallion .049's that are flying locally. I haven't seen anyone campaigning a straight TeeDee for some time now. I used to have one in a decent profile plane. I'm going to have to build another one of those. It flew way better than I did...but I don't remember how tractable the engine was. I don't remember having problems--but it was a long time ago.
Dave
A bigger engine is always an advantage, especially on the low end. An 061 event would be just an 061 event.
Post by: Larry Renger on August 28, 2018, 08:35:29 AM
A bigger engine is always an advantage, especially on the low end. An 061 event would be just an 061 event.
An 049 model can fly just as good a patten as an 061. Sadly, the only 049s available are old ones except for the Brodak. The Mk 1 Brodak can be made to run well with the Galbreath head. I have no experience with the Mk 2.
Post by: Dave Hull on August 28, 2018, 07:59:19 PM
I'm still using .008x41ish on my Baby Clown with Medallion. Hard tank. Renger/RSM handle at 1-3/4" spacing. Flies better than I do. Gonna have to fix that some day. Picture is before I added canopy and rudder trim and before it was in a truck crash. Truck was totaled--the plane soldiers on....
Dave
Post by: John Paris on August 29, 2018, 08:02:16 PM
It may be sacrilegious but need to ask, will this be open to the 1/2a size electrics? May pull in additional flyers since there are obvious benefits to electrics from an ease of operation standpoint. However I appreciate the challenge that the little engines present and would be happy to give it a shot with glow power. I would guess that the preference would be for beam mount engines with big enough tanks to get through some pattern. Any thoughts about the engines with tanks?
Thank you,
John
Post by: Larry Renger on August 29, 2018, 10:43:48 PM
Post by: Paul Smith on August 30, 2018, 07:26:18 AM
Bob,
It may be sacrilegious but need to ask, will this be open to the 1/2a size electrics? May pull in additional flyers since there are obvious benefits to electrics from an ease of operation standpoint. However I appreciate the challenge that the little engines present and would be happy to give it a shot with glow power. I would guess that the preference would be for beam mount engines with big enough tanks to get through some pattern. Any thoughts about the engines with tanks?
Thank you,
John
Sure, why not. Maybe just limit the total weight to 2-1/2 pounds like "15 Carrier".
There is no such thing as an electric 15 or an electric 1/2A.
Why not just pioneer an electric stunt event?
Post by: Paul Smith on August 30, 2018, 07:30:08 AM
We set a 15 Watt-hour battery as the equivalent of a 1cc engine running for 6 minutes. Use it as you will with a low voltage, high capacity or high voltage low capacity system. We found a 1300 mAH 3 s battery worked well with a 150W 1100 kv motor and 7x5 prop. This powered a 1/2A Pathfinder really well.
An engine that can turn a 7x5 prop is a 15, not a 1/2A.
Electrics circumvent all the problems of getting a small engine to work well and are therefore NOT ever equivalent to competition with true engines, despite the lame rationalizations put forward by a few would-be intruders.
Post by: bob whitney on August 30, 2018, 12:26:02 PM
having built an .09 size ringmaster I hope they would make electric s sep class
Post by: john e. holliday on August 30, 2018, 05:55:55 PM
Post by: John Paris on August 30, 2018, 08:27:38 PM
John, they are still working out the problem of small tanks on the reed jobs
having built an .09 size ringmaster I hope they would make electric s sep class
Bob,
Sounds fair on the small electric option. I will work on a beam mounted option for next year.
Regards,
John
Post by: Paul Smith on August 30, 2018, 10:04:42 PM
John, they are still working out the problem of small tanks on the reed jobs
having built an .09 size ringmaster I hope they would make electric s sep class
That was solved 60 years ago by drilling a hole in the tank and hooking up a Perfect wedge tank. Or just using one of the "product" engines currently being produced.
What's the source of the rumor of these events?
Post by: Larry Renger on August 31, 2018, 09:42:02 AM
Yes the electrics turn a 7*5, but at 9000 rpm, way slower than a glow engine.
Post by: Paul Smith on August 31, 2018, 12:53:23 PM
Why another stunt event?? S?P
By my count The Brodak offered 7 Stunt events, 4 Scale, 4 Carrier, 3 Speed, 2 Racing, 1 Combat and 2 novelty events. Of these, many offered two, three, or four ability classes. Racing events & junkyard wars offered extra plaques for team members. Some of these events are offered on an either/or basis so you can't enter them all. This addition brings it to 9 stunt events.
That's A LOT of prizes and at $10 an event, I estimate that Mr. Brodak is operating well below cost. So let's give 1/2A a try as offered and don't haggle for new rules before the first pass.
Post by: Paul Smith on September 04, 2018, 01:46:00 PM
Something called 1/2A Stunt is in the works, but the details have yet to be decided.
My suggestion, for what's it worth, is AMA CLPA with 1/2A engines. Simple enough.
Post by: Target on September 07, 2018, 07:00:24 PM
An 049 model can fly just as good a patten as an 061. Sadly, the only 049s available are old ones except for the Brodak. The Mk 1 Brodak can be made to run well with the Galbreath head. I have no experience with the Mk 2.NV offers a .8cc Big Mig. I believe that is an .049 and it comes in a venturi version.
EDIT- While checking for a link on their website i noticed they are NOT listing the .8 or .049 any longer. Guess i was mistaken, but up until recently they use to offer it.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on September 10, 2018, 03:41:57 PM
Regarding "Why another Stunt Class? For the FUN of doing something different. Brodaks is the C/L fun capitol of the world,this type of event fits in perfectly.
I would not worry about lack of entries on this one. I'm confident that the guys will come out of the woodwork for this! Cheers,PhillySkip
Post by: Paul Smith on September 11, 2018, 06:21:56 AM
The .051 was made as a cheater engine to allow 1/2A Free Flights to be entered in Class A.
Thus it was made to be an A engine and it IS an A engine.
I also have some interest in the event and will be happy to enter providing it's just what the name says: Stunt with 1/2A engines.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on September 11, 2018, 12:06:37 PM
Post by: Larry Renger on September 11, 2018, 04:25:23 PM
Build a Stork with a Tee Dee 049 for power, and the rest is up to the pilot!
The engine I fly is modified with special venturi and head. None of which are still available new.
I don’t think there is a stock small engine currently in production for the event other than the Norvel Big MiG. If there is, let us all know!
Post by: James Holford on September 11, 2018, 06:24:18 PM
May be interesting... altho it may not do well since no flaps and sheet wing
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Post by: Trostle on September 11, 2018, 11:17:35 PM
The Rule Book says under .050 and that should be the rule.
I also have some interest in the event and will be happy to enter providing it's just what the name says: Stunt with 1/2A engines.
Of course, the rule book for the 1/2A speed events and the 1/2A FF event limits the engines to .0504 cu in displacement.
That should not dictate that a "1/2A Stunt" event should necessarily be limited to that same displacement. The Tucson 1/2A multi engine profile scale event allowed engines up to 1cc (.061 cu in) displacement, though the rules were modified somewhat to not have the profile requirement similar to the AMA 1/2A scale rules. One neat thing about the Norvel and engines currently from the East is that they have quite effective mufflers. The Cox engines do not easily lend themselves to use mufflers. (These Norvels and engines from the East also have effective throttles, - not so with most Cox engines, though not a factor for use in any 1/2A stunt event.)
Besides all of this, the CURRENT AMA rules for 1/2A Scale state "individual engine displaced volume shall not exceed .061 cubic inch or 1cc." (2017-2018 rule book, Paragraph 5.5.) There should be no argument that the term "1/2A" should only be limited to .0504 displacement for any "1/2A" stunt event. The rules makers for any 1/2A stunt event can assign whatever displacement limit they choose.
Keith
Post by: Dave Hull on September 12, 2018, 01:05:43 AM
Those who want to go beyond a Sportsman approach won't need any advice on how to pick the parts needed to keep an engine running thru a whole pattern.
Good luck with your new event. It should be a lot of fun.
Dave
Post by: Target on September 12, 2018, 05:55:35 AM
I don’t think there is a stock small engine currently in production for the event other than the Norvel Big MiG. If there is, let us all know!
LR- your favored ap wasp seems to be available at this time. Don't know how long though!
https://hobbyking.com/en_us/ap-061a.html
R,
Target
Post by: Joe Ed Pederson on September 12, 2018, 06:23:52 AM
LR- your favored ap wasp seems to be available at this time. Don't know how long though!
https://hobbyking.com/en_us/ap-061a.html
R,
Target
I went to the Hobby King website above and noticed the engine is shipped from "Global." I've ordered stuff shipped from "Global" from Hobby King and the shipping charges are outrageous (will probably be more than the cost of the engine) and if you want to recieve it in less than two months, you'll really pay through the nose for shipping charges.
Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO
Post by: Paul Smith on September 12, 2018, 09:30:47 AM
In a performance event like Stunt 24% more swept volume is a HUGE difference.
Enough to make TRUE 1/2 A owners step away.
Clearly the owner of the field and of the contest can set any limit he wants in a special event.
I heard that they might have two events, 1/2 A and 1 cc. That would be a good government-style compromise.
Post by: Paul Smith on September 12, 2018, 09:32:10 AM
I went to the Hobby King website above and noticed the engine is shipped from "Global." I've ordered stuff shipped from "Global" from Hobby King and the shipping charges are outrageous (will probably be more than the cost of the engine) and if you want to recieve it in less than two months, you'll really pay through the nose for shipping charges.
Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO
I noticed several ads for products at "good" prices. Then I found that the prices were based on shipping from Hong Kong, which killed the deals.
Post by: James Holford on September 12, 2018, 10:40:13 AM
I went to the Hobby King website above and noticed the engine is shipped from "Global." I've ordered stuff shipped from "Global" from Hobby King and the shipping charges are outrageous (will probably be more than the cost of the engine) and if you want to recieve it in less than two months, you'll really pay through the nose for shipping charges.Heck i couldnt even find the add to cart feature just to see how much it would be shipped to my house. Altho I already have one of these lil Wasps .061. I wonder if theres a venturi for it or do I have to lock the carb open.
Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Post by: Trostle on September 12, 2018, 12:00:15 PM
Two wrongs do not make a right.
It was a mistake to allow 1 cc engines in the American version of 1/2A Scale. But it didn't amount to much given the minimal effect of power in the current 1/2 A Scale event. They only score takeoff, level flight, landing and the always-nebulous "realism".
Clearly the owner of the field and of the contest can set any limit he wants in a special event.
Well, you do not paint a very accurate picture. The Tucson 1/2A multi engine scale contest has two categories: Limited and Unlimited.
The Limited category is for engines without a throttle. Obviously, in flight options are somewhat limited.
The Unlimited category is for engines with throttles. Opens up a number of options as in the regular CL Scale events.
There is also a sub-catagory within the Limited event tried out the last two year the event was held called the Slab Award. Unthrottled engines. Construction except for materials used for engine firewalls/bulkheads could be with nothing more than 1/4" sheet balsa.
And one more thing, planes could be shipped to be proxy flown. This was done several times over the years and the models were successfully competed. There are a number of well qualified pilots in the Tucson/Phoenix area to help with this.
Keith
Post by: Paul Smith on September 12, 2018, 12:51:24 PM
If you can get through AMA's new web site, see paragraphs 3.3.6.2 and 3.3.6.4.
I was in error about the AMA engine size. The Rule Book just says 1/2 A, so the regular .0504 cubic inch limit DOES apply.
The Rule Book says "only the mandatory maneuvers", which boils down to the four I mentioned and excludes all the options.
I'm glad I was motivated to look this up. I will not make the mistake of using an .061 and expose myself to exclusion.
Post by: Trostle on September 12, 2018, 02:19:10 PM
I was referring AMA Rule Book 1/2 A Scale, not a local event.
If you can get through AMA's new web site, see paragraphs 3.3.6.2 and 3.3.6.4.
I was in error about the AMA engine size. The Rule Book just says 1/2 A, so the regular .0504 cubic inch limit DOES apply.
The Rule Book says "only the mandatory maneuvers", which boils down to the four I mentioned and excludes all the options.
I'm glad I was motivated to look this up. I will not make the mistake of using an .061 and expose myself to exclusion.
What mistake would you be exposing yourself by using an .061?
I am so glad that you looked something up, but what did you find regarding the definition of 1/2A engines as it relates to the 1/2A Scale event? I looked something up also and found in the AMA Control Line Scale rules, Paragraph 5.5: "1/2A Engines/Motors. individual engine displacement volume shall not exceed .061 cubic inch or 1cc. Motor power must be in the range of 1/2A engines."
Seems very clear that the AMA rules for 1/2A CL scale allow engines with up to .061 cubic or 1cc displacement.
Keith
Post by: Larry Renger on September 13, 2018, 08:03:57 PM
I have personally won 1st place with a Black Widow plane with one refueling with one second to spare on the standard 8 minute clock. It can be done. By the way, it was a forward swept flying wing with a Golden Bee for power. * :D
Plan to fly what you have and have fun! If there is good participation, refine the rules next year. After15 years of trying to promote small engine stunt here on the left coast (too far left, but let’s not get into that), getting ANYONE to compete is the real challenge. Heck, we even have a rather handsome perpetual trophy on the line here. It took me ten years to get my name on it, and I built the darn thing.
* Gloat time!!! I beat John Wright who was flying my Skyfire design as built by Bart Klapinsky. How could it get better than that? Probably the pinnacle of my stunt career! I did have Brett Buck as my pit crew, so give credit where it is due! #^
Post by: Paul Smith on September 15, 2018, 08:43:36 AM
The only relevent options are those of people who might actually FLY the event if the rules go their way.
I've entered The Brodak 15 times and frequently win the "most events entered" award.
Hopefully, those who are planning this event will make a sound business decision. A decision not based on pleasing those who will never enter under any conditions.
Post by: Target on September 15, 2018, 11:53:51 AM
1. It's good to discuss these issues when an event is in the planning phase.
2. The only relevent options are those of people who might actually FLY the event if the rules go their way.
3. I've entered The Brodak 15 times and frequently win the "most events entered" award.
4. Hopefully, those who are planning this event will make a sound business decision. A decision not based on pleasing those who will never enter under any conditions.
Hi, Paul-
1. Absolutely. You're 100% right about that. But, hindsight is 20-20, so if it doesn't work out well this time, polling the attendees to find out what would have worked better is the discussion for pre-planning next year, right? If it DOES work out well this upcoming year, then probably it should be left well enough alone for the next year after.
2. Even better than that, is getting the MOST attendance. If two or three guys are "strictly 1/2A" and won't attend that event if it is open to 1cc, but many more will attend if it is not just 1/2A, and includes 1cc, then don't you agree that it should be handled to get the most attendance? I'll bet you agree to that, but maybe you don't. Maybe splitting the contest WOULD work best? I guess one way to find out is try it and see. If not enough separate entries, maybe merging is the best solution?
3. That is awesome. Sounds like you will hopefully have even one more event to attend, 1/2A or 1cc, whichever it is, or maybe both? Maybe you will have two events that you could also attend.
4. While I may never get to Brodak's, since I'm a left coaster (now), you never know what will happen upon retirement. I'm pretty sick of SoCal's BS/Traffic/Crazy cost of living/CA tree huggers in office, etc. I could see myself moving east a ways, or north, who knows.
Maybe I will make it there one day if the tradition continues. I would like to fly a bunch of .061's that I have kits for and engines for. That (1cc) seems to be working out in tree hugger land, SoCal so far. I hope it continues.
However, your point is well taken. I'm not flying there this time, so it should cater to the guys that will, first and foremost.
Kind Regards,
Target
I hope to see some cool 1/2A and 1cc pics from the next contest there.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on September 19, 2018, 08:57:26 AM
Post by: jfv on September 19, 2018, 04:03:10 PM
Post by: Larry Renger on September 19, 2018, 11:49:06 PM
I scored a 485 with a Tee Dee .020 powered 1/2 A Snapper in the wind once. Quitcherbitchen and just see who who will reallY enter the contest and see what they want. I fly both sizes and both are a challenge to get perfect.
The old maxim on small model stunt was “He who gets a good engine runs wins”. It is still pretty much true. Randy Heydon had a .010 stunter, the Litl Bit that could turn a decent pattern. This is a case where size really isn’t an issue, craftsmanship and skill will carry the day. Show up with an untested model and you WILL lose.
If you want to be a winner, build well ahead of time and fly a lot. Solve the problems before the contest, and you could win with a Brodak ARF Baby Clown. It will do a flawless pattern if you are good enough.
Post by: Larry Renger on September 29, 2018, 04:29:42 PM
The only success we have had is to open it up to 1cc and have one separate event a year at the Toys for Tots in December. Even then, the participation is pitiful. Breaks my heart, I tell you. The planes fly great, and it could be a good event, but getting flyers seems hopeless. Obviously, I have been a small model fan all my life and would love to see this event succeed.
Whatever you guys do, make it as all inclusive as you can!
Short list of competitive available kits:
Brodak Baby Clown (Kit, ARC and ARF)
Brodak Baby Flite Streak (Nostalgia at it's best! Find an Atwood Shriek for power, or not.)
Brodak Baby Lightning Streak
Brodak Stork (in my experience, impossible to build so badly it won't fly great)
SIG 1/2A Skyray (Sheet wing design, but you would never know. You can refuel to fly through the whole pattern, been there, done that, won!)
RSM Sky Sport (yes,it is my design, but Bart Klapinsky did a 498 with it on his first flight with it!)
RSM Pinto (Actually, Dee Rice Baby Oriental)
RSM Tercel (slightly scaled up version of the multiple Nationals winner by Keith Trostle)
Eric also has a couple of more kits that could be competitive, but my memory fails me at the moment.
Also available from RSM on special order:
Sky Streak forward swept flying wing (my design, but dang, it looks cool in the air and turns sharp and smooth. See my Ikon)
Baby Magician (Really a great design! My 1/2 A adaptation of Jim Silhavey's superb model (as originally designed, not as kitted, I have the letter to prove it!). With a hopped up .061 on pressure feed Antone Kepart flies it like a big one on 50' lines. With a stock engine on shorter lines it is still a winner.)
Profile Baby Oriental
1/2 A Still Stuka
60 years of magazine designs and older kits like the 1/2 A Snapper, Baby Barnstormer, Wee Duper Zilch, Mini Zilch, Top Flite 1/2A Mustang etc. series! Shucks, the whole small Brodak fleet can be made to go through a pattern, and most of them, like the Swe'Pea could also be flown in 1/2 A scale. There are so many models that can do a pattern, you should have several just to have them. Cheap and don't take up much room.
And (the designer modestly admits) Eric has the best 1/2A handle available.
I think there are some more models of competitive quality out there, so let you guys add to the list!
Also, we sill need information on what competitive engines are realistically available. I would go with the Norvel, Tee Dee, Medallion, and ASP, but if you are willing to do the refuel thing The Golden Bee, Black Widow, and (lots of luck finding one) Venom will pull a model quite nicely. If you are a glutton for punishment, the PAW diesels will do the job really well.
Sadly, my experience with the Fox .049 was a disaster (multiple crashes despite much experimentation). The Brodak Mk 1 can be made to run well (do a search for details). Cubs can be made to crank the r's with minor modifications (see the Engine Set up Thread). Holland Hornets will certainly put out the power, but I have no stunt experience with them, probably need pressure feed. The Atwood Shriek will pull through the maneuvers just fine in my experience. Atwood Wasps are pretty anemic, but also reliable. Tee Dees need a lot of practice and experimentation go get working right, but crank out the power (The car head heat sink and pressure feed seem to be the trick).
Let's hear it about what you have found to work!
Post by: Mark Mc on September 29, 2018, 08:50:20 PM
Mark
Post by: Paul Smith on September 30, 2018, 09:11:50 AM
Post by: kenneth cook on September 30, 2018, 09:39:05 AM
While i have no experience with the kit built version ( At least the Baby Clown) , the kit offers beam mount construction which would allow for a Medallion . The Medallion would be a very suitable powerplant for the Baby Clown. Of the newer redesigned beam mount versions I have seen from Brodak, I would change the doublers and extend them back onto the leading edge. I wasn't very fond of how they both stopped short and at the same place on the fuse. I recently watched someone snap the front end off just due to starting the engine. Last but not least, the covering on the ARF fails very quickly exposing the surfaces to oil contamination. Packing tape is in order to prevent the covering from sheeting off therefore a ARC would allow for good covering and durability. To date, I have had 3 of them and I never addressed the covering on 2 of them. After removing the covering when it got that bad, nothing would stick to the balsa so off to the trash can they went. I managed to save one which is the one I fly now.
Post by: Larry Renger on September 30, 2018, 04:34:59 PM
Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder
SIG 1/2 A Skyray (sheet wing, but works just fine anyway)
Oldies worth consideration if you can find one:
Wee Duper Zilch (PAW 1/2 CC motor would be killer here!)
1/2 A Snapper. (Tee Dee .020 or Atwood/Holland Wasp)
Mini Omega Stunter
Skyfire (foam wing version) Black Widow and plan to refuel)
Cox Me-109
Cox Chipmunk
Cox Spook
Cox other foam wing job who’s name I can’t remember (Mike Pratt design, and a darn good job, too)
Post by: John Paris on September 30, 2018, 07:55:39 PM
More kits that can work well:
Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder
SIG 1/2 A Skyray (sheet wing, but works just fine anyway)
Oldies worth consideration if you can find one:
Wee Duper Zilch (PAW 1/2 CC motor would be killer here!)
1/2 A Snapper. (Tee Dee .020 or Atwood/Holland Wasp)
Mini Omega Stunter
Skyfire (foam wing version) Black Widow and plan to refuel)
Cox Me-109
Cox Chipmunk
Cox Spook
Cox other foam wing job who’s name I can’t remember (Mike Pratt design, and a darn good job, too)
Larry,
Hyper Viper sound about right? It is a good flying airplane if there is some pull up front.
John
Post by: Larry Renger on October 01, 2018, 06:13:26 AM
Post by: Skip Chernoff on October 02, 2018, 05:22:11 AM
Post by: Paul Smith on October 02, 2018, 06:44:22 AM
Based on Stunt Hanger interest, there should be at least 20 entries.
I have something in hand, but may need something else depending on how the rules come out.
It's a Clown with a TeeDee .049. It will do BOTH the modern and the OTS pattern on less than a ounce of fuel.
Post by: Larry Renger on October 16, 2018, 07:50:02 AM
Post by: Dave Hull on October 16, 2018, 10:54:30 AM
The other significant difference between the kit and the ARF, unless they have changed this as well, is that the kit had a sparless wing. I found it to be plenty strong unless made of stunt mushwood, so the spars would just be excess botheration.
Dave
Post by: Skip Chernoff on November 06, 2018, 08:06:47 AM
Post by: Target on November 06, 2018, 02:40:54 PM
Post by: Paul Smith on November 07, 2018, 06:51:22 AM
As with other events, the rules will be handed down when the time is right and the cutoff will put somebody on top.
If they say .049 or .061 vs a certain weight of electric it will be an all-electric event. But it will be their event, not ours.
Post by: Larry Renger on November 07, 2018, 08:18:40 AM
For electrics, specify a maximum Watt-hour capacity. 11.5 Watt-hours might be about right. That would allow a 1000 mAh 3s or 1500 mAh 2s. That limits the size of possible planes to 1/2A size. About right for a Baby Clown or Baby Flite Streak.
Actually, Andy Borgogna found that he needed a 1375mAh 3s for the Baby Pathfinder. That would be 15.5 Watt-hours. If you want to fly models of that size, go to 15.5 Watt-hour limit.
With a capacity limit, the motor and prop combination are up to the modeler.
I also want to know why specify a maximum line length. Doesn’t seem to be a sensible requirement.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on November 07, 2018, 08:59:59 AM
Line length came up,but not really a sticking point. Fly what you want.
Regarding the electrics you guys know better than I .Larry, thanks for the info.
My thing is this.....whoever is going to cast the rules (whatever they are) needs to publish them so "we" can get building!......Cheers,Skip
Post by: Paul Smith on November 07, 2018, 10:23:58 AM
The key to specifying electrics is the total work output allowed. A gas motor puts out x amount of power for the given flight time. That is the measure of total work in horsepower-hours, or for electrics Watt-hours.
For electrics, specify a maximum Watt-hour capacity. 11.5 Watt-hours might be about right. That would allow a 1000 mAh 3s or 1500 mAh 2s. That limits the size of possible planes to 1/2A size. About right for a Baby Clown or Baby Flite Streak.
Actually, Andy Borgogna found that he needed a 1375mAh 3s for the Baby Pathfinder. That would be 15.5 Watt-hours. If you want to fly models of that size, go to 15.5 Watt-hour limit.
With a capacity limit, the motor and prop combination are up to the modeler.
I also want to know why specify a maximum line length. Doesn’t seem to be a sensible requirement.
That's the problem.
In events that mix real engines and motors there have been NO limitations on the motors, but extremely hard line limitations on the engines.
The total weight of the model is NOT a limitation of motor power.
Things such as swept volume, fuel formula, banning pressure systems and tuned pipes hinder to power of engines.
Thus far there have been no such limits applied to motors.
There might be a case that huge engines, like 10 cc and above can compete with motors.
But there is NO fairness whatsoever to justify mixing motors and 15's or 1/2A's.
If you want to create a "small motor" event, have right at it. But leave 1/2A's and 15's alone.
Post by: Chris Fretz on November 16, 2018, 10:07:09 AM
It's not sounding like ill get to use my big mig .061. Why would you make .061 for experts only?
How much fuel does a .049 use for the full pattern? How about a .061?
Probably a dumb question but would you be able to use that Carl Goldberg string for lines? If not what kind of lines would you use?
Chris
Post by: Dave Hull on November 16, 2018, 05:09:53 PM
The fuel requirement is going to depend a lot on the engine and setup. Running a stock Medallion .049 I use about 0.8 oz. of 25% fuel.
Others have run the TeeDee .049 and said they needed more like 1-1/4 oz. Not sure but I suspect it might have been 35%.
The larger tank for Cox reed engines is 8cc or about 0.027 oz. I think you can do a pattern in two tanks on a reed engine. I haven't tried it myself but I have pitted for those who have. It works as long as the contest rules allow it.
As far as lines, you are kidding about the original Dacron lines, right? Unless you want a ton of drag (such as for a trainer plane), use either .008" stranded steel cable or 30 lb test Spectra fishing line. The .008 lines perform well, but will not stand any abuse. The Spectra withstands most abuse and works well.
As far as the plane, do you care which is most popular? Pick one you like or design/modify one to suit you. If they allow 1cc engines, and if I was going to build a kit, I'd look at the Baby Pathfinder. Easy enough to build and lots of performance. If it is going to be an .049 event, I would go for a Medallion and a kit Baby Clown or Baby Flight Streak if you are in a hurry. If you have some time to build, then there are a lot of other good choices.
Divot Mcslow
PS--The Baby Clown will likely be the most common entry if the event is popular. There are a ton of them out there......
Post by: Larry Renger on November 16, 2018, 09:54:24 PM
Post by: Dave Hull on November 16, 2018, 10:42:54 PM
You've flown both: which do you think flies better, the Baby or the Baby Super?
Divot
Post by: Larry Renger on November 17, 2018, 06:27:28 AM
Post by: Chris Fretz on November 17, 2018, 10:32:39 AM
Formerly,
As far as lines, you are kidding about the original Dacron lines, right? Unless you want a ton of drag (such as for a trainer plane),
As far as the plane, do you care which is most popular?
No I actually wasn't kidden about Dracron lines. I don't fly much 1/2a just for amusement. Of the lines I have tried the Dracron were the only ones that had little drag that would let the airplane stunt. Whatever the other ones were I couldn't get the plane to stunt. But thanks for the info, I will give the Spectra line a try.
What is the normal line length?
I'm using like 29ft ONLY cause that's all I could fit in the backyard.
I do care what the most popular plane might be just for curiosity sake.
The only 1/2a I have that stunts ok has a .061 on it, so I'll have to see what I can do to get a .049 to preform.
Chris(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181117/f1d987a726dc68aa9a93bced6d257ded.jpg)
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Post by: Dave Hull on November 17, 2018, 04:06:23 PM
You have what may be an exception to all the rules: if your circle is limited to 29' lines, and you are using an .061, you may actually need the extra drag of the lines? But you probably have to compensate with some extra tip weight or offsets. If you drop back to an .049 you probably want to try the Spectra. If you go to longer lines you definitely want to try the Spectra, or the steel cables which I believe would provide maximum performance. What prop are you running on your setup?
I have a Lil Satan on 26' Spectra (30 lb test) lines that has a Black Widow .049 running a Master Airscrew 6x3. It turns rapid lap times. But it hangs out there pretty good, too. It could use longer lines, but I have not experimented at all yet. (The 26' lines were called out on the plans.)
I fly a Baby Clown with Medallion on .008x42' stranded cable. Engine near peak, it will do all the stunts that I can do--and certainly more. Decent line tension until the wind comes up. The setup will actually do a 4-2 run, but then it doesn't have the authority to do all the maneuvers, and the problem is compounded in the wind.
I fly a SIG Baby Skyray for a trainer on .008x42' stranded steel. Cox Baby Bee with a Cox 6x3 flexible prop. It has a big steel fender washer for tip weight. It makes a great initial flight trainer since the lap times are pretty slow, and will fly in a good breeze without coming in. I find that you are not going to get a brand new trainee to back up to maintain line tension. This combination solves that problem.
Some of the local guys fly .061 stunt planes on about 42'. They scream them out for airspeed and line tension and it lets them do full patterns--at a pretty high speed. Faster than my reflexes, anyway.
So somewhere in the middle of all these there should be a good combination for you.
Best of luck,
Divot McSlow
PS--What I am waiting for are the results of Larry Renger's Foam-fold wing stunt plane setup. The reason is that he has an external tank on a product engine in a stunter. Getting the engine to draw consistently thru the full tank and hold a good setting..... Anyway, I have a Guillows P-40 kitbash that awaits engine and tank installation. So far I have a stock Killer Bee backplate and a custom metal tank running small plastic tubing. I worry about the tubing being too restrictive. I think Larry drilled his venturi for more power. I know he had some fueling issues related to plumbing. This type of setup opens up the possibility of a decent reed valve stunt plane that will do the whole pattern using cheap and available parts. What's not to like?
Post by: Skip Chernoff on December 19, 2018, 06:53:23 PM
Post by: Chris Fretz on December 20, 2018, 07:45:22 AM
Yo guys....any word from the powers that be on the rules for this event? I want to start building!If you build it they will come!
Post by: James Holford on December 20, 2018, 07:53:23 AM
If you build it they will come!Jim Morrison visited you in a dream? With a half naked Indian?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Post by: Chris Fretz on December 20, 2018, 09:07:03 AM
Jim Morrison visited you in a dream? With a half naked Indian?Ummmm no.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
But if Skip builds it they will come tell him it's illegal to use ;D
Post by: James Holford on December 20, 2018, 09:13:31 AM
Ummmm no.Haha
But if Skip builds it they will come tell him it's illegal to use ;D
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Post by: Larry Renger on December 20, 2018, 09:54:03 AM
Of course, the AJ model WAS the Firebaby! Larry's design was, I think, the Sky Dancer.
Nope, Sky Sport. The Skydancer was a 2 channel Rocket boosted glider. Skyrider a 020 powered soaring glider, Skystreak a forward swept flying wing 1/2 A stunter, Skyslash a forward engine boost glider, Skyfire a foam wing 1/2 A stunter, Skyblaster a 2 channel canard rocket boosted glider.
Needless to say, I have a hard timekeeping them straight. Possibly missed one or two. :D
Post by: 944_Jim on December 20, 2018, 05:01:17 PM
Currently I fly .008*40’ lines, but a foot shorter would be better.
Mr. Larry,
I'm confused...or really quite chicken (probably the latter). On my Scientific Profile P-40, with JH venturi AP .061, I'm afraid to loop it. Maybe my CG is too far forward, but I feel like any 90deg turns take up a lot of sky. I wouldn't say the plane basically pancakes coming out of wing overs, maybe "mushes out" would be accurate. I hoped making longer lines would give me more vertical to play with. So I read with interest that you want to SHORTEN your lines. Please explain why shorter could be better. For the sake of discussion we can leave out "diagnosing cancer by telephone" with regard to the P-40 CG.
Thanks in advance,
Post by: bob whitney on December 20, 2018, 06:09:14 PM
Yo guys....any word from the powers that be on the rules for this event? I want to start building!
talked to Will Davis one of the CD's at Brodaks . the rules will be very simple and almost finished
Basically engines up to .061 any air frame that will ROG . still working on what to do about the reedy's tank wise
any line length ,don't know line size yet. will be on Thursday after ringmaster on the paved circle. RAD
they are also talking about one lap between manuvers
Post by: Paul Smith on December 20, 2018, 08:27:55 PM
Post by: Larry Renger on December 20, 2018, 08:41:03 PM
Mr. Larry,
I'm confused...or really quite chicken (probably the latter). On my Scientific Profile P-40, with JH venturi AP .061, I'm afraid to loop it. Maybe my CG is too far forward, but I feel like any 90deg turns take up a lot of sky. I wouldn't say the plane basically pancakes coming out of wing overs, maybe "mushes out" would be accurate. I hoped making longer lines would give me more vertical to play with. So I read with interest that you want to SHORTEN your lines. Please explain why shorter could be better. For the sake of discussion we can leave out "diagnosing cancer by telephone" with regard to the P-40 CG.
Thanks in advance,
The line length depends on the actual airplane. If you are shy on power, you can retain more control on shorter lines. Also light planes don’t pull as hard in overheads. There is no hard and fast rule as far as I know. Try different lines and see what works for your particular plane.
As far as cg is concerned, if the plane drops out of the sky when the engine quits, it is nose heavy. If it floats and is hard to control smoothly, it is tailheavy. It should be smooth and controllable. Under power another test is to lock your handle against your chest. The model should track true. If it starts to oscillate up and down, it is either tailheavy or the control sensitivity is too high. The effects interact, and it is a project to get both of them right at the same time. LOTS of flying and testing, sadly, no magic bullet.
The goal is to track true, turn well, and land smoothly. That is the reason there is so little variation in the proportions of top level model designs. It is really hard to get national level performance without man years of flying and testing. That has been done by hundreds of top flyers over the last 70 years, and the proportions are pretty well locked in stone. Most of the “design” is now cosmetic.
On the other hand, there are a few who bit the bullet and came up with wild designs that work. Bill Netzband with the Fierce Arrow, Bob Barron with the Bearcat (Barecat?) and my own Sky Streak forward swept flying wing. RSM can provide kits of all three.
Post by: Larry Renger on December 20, 2018, 08:45:31 PM
Reedies (Black Widow & Golden Bee) are a moot point vs .061's. Even if they make three pit stops they won't stand up against modern .061".
Not true, I won with a Black Widow powered model with one pit stop. Flying a forward swept flying wing. Against John Wright flying a Skyfire (my design) as built by Bart Klapinski. It just doesn’t get any better than that! ;D ~^ VD~
Post by: Skip Chernoff on December 21, 2018, 06:19:57 AM
Post by: jfv on December 21, 2018, 08:34:29 AM
Post by: bob whitney on December 21, 2018, 08:56:36 AM
I didn't think to ask but as a glo and electric flyer and flying an 09 size ringmaster I would say that the glo's would be at a dis advantage so if asked I would say no, if someone wants electric they can start their own event RAD
Post by: john e. holliday on December 21, 2018, 09:27:34 AM
Post by: James Holford on December 21, 2018, 09:28:51 AM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Post by: Paul Smith on December 21, 2018, 02:13:05 PM
Bob thanks for the update on what's going on regarding the event. You had no mention of electric stuff .Will it be an all "gas model" event? Skip
The term "1/2 A" means a piston engine under .050 cubic inches of swept volume. Anything else is an abuse of the language and a fraud.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on December 21, 2018, 07:15:41 PM
Questions to think about:
Flaps or no flaps?
Bellcrank size?
Wing area?
Profile or full body?
Finished weight?
Airfoil type?
I'm presently flying a Pinto with .051 but it flies so fast and it hard to precisely control for smooth stunts. So what do you think?
Post by: bob whitney on December 21, 2018, 09:05:16 PM
I am starting one of his new RSM 10% Tercel kits .it has 246 sq in wing which is 1 1/2 in thick. I cant believe that an .061 is going to pull his thing
like u it is going to be a trick to get enough power without the speed. i believe the prop is going to be the Key
Post by: Chris Fretz on December 22, 2018, 06:49:29 AM
Yo "formerly known as" ......you've got me cheating before we even have the rules firmly in place. I love it! I'm going to scratch build something of my own design. I'm thinking that I'd rather not have a bullet on my hands. Something that will fly more slowly like a full sized stunter. I'm going to use a ,061.VD~ ;D VD~
Questions to think about:
Flaps or no flaps?
Bellcrank size?
Wing area?
Profile or full body?
Finished weight?
Airfoil type?
I'm presently flying a Pinto with .051 but it flies so fast and it hard to precisely control for smooth stunts. So what do you think?
Post by: Skip Chernoff on December 22, 2018, 08:15:22 AM
And as for you "Formerly Known As" you'll be restricted to 25' dacron lines!!!
Post by: bob whitney on December 22, 2018, 08:45:40 AM
Post by: Chris Fretz on December 22, 2018, 04:56:46 PM
I'm thinking that this 1/2A thing is going to be a blast. Paul, we are all going to have fun regardless of engine size......YOU included....haha. I can't wait to see all of the terrific planes and set ups the guys come up with. I'm going to get all of the Philly crew souped up on this ,believe it!......Vroom Vroom. Skipn~ I'll make it work somehow :P
And as for you "Formerly Known As" you'll be restricted to 25' dacron lines!!!
Post by: Keith Renecle on December 23, 2018, 12:01:42 AM
Keith R
Post by: Trostle on December 23, 2018, 02:54:18 PM
The term "1/2 A" means a piston engine under .050 cubic inches of swept volume. Anything else is an abuse of the language and a fraud.
Well, past events have limited "1/2A" events to be powered with something, normally less than 0.0504 cu in. Now, there is a whole world out there producing 1cc engines (0.061 cu in). Yes, the rules for speed and free flight still have "1/2A" events limited to 0.0505 cu in. But lo and behold, there is an official AMA 1/2A scale event that allows engines up to 0.061 cu in. There have been several "1/2A" scale events and "1/2A" stunt events around the country that have allowed engines up to 0.061 cu in and it seems there will be more. The argument that anything that allows more than ".0504 cubic inches of swept volume" as a "fraud" is archaic and behind the times.
A well built, properly designed/sized model, properly trimmed out, with a reasonable weight powered by a well prepared .049 cu in engine will probably just as competitive compared to a similarly properly designed/sized model, properly trimmed out, with a reasonable weight powered by a well prepared .061 cu in engine.
Keith
Post by: Trostle on December 23, 2018, 02:56:36 PM
Keith's original Tercel has more than one win when 1/2A was flown at the nats .it was flown on long lines .just under 52 ft I believe.
The original Tercel won the Nats 1/2A stunt event three times including the one time Bart Klapinski flew it.
Keith
Post by: Jim Mynes on December 23, 2018, 04:17:20 PM
I didn't think to ask but as a glo and electric flyer and flying an 09 size ringmaster I would say that the glo's would be at a dis advantage so if asked I would say no, if someone wants electric they can start their own event RAD
I think you’re scared.
Post by: john e. holliday on December 24, 2018, 09:23:22 AM
Post by: Ken Culbertson on December 24, 2018, 10:12:24 AM
Ah the "good ol Days" when line length was 1/2 the distance between the trees in the back yard! That is why that "Fancy" Cox handle had a spool so you could fly in your buddy's back yard too!
I'm using like 29ft ONLY cause that's all I could fit in the backyard.
https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/123241780091_/Vintage-Cox-Control-Line-Handle-For-Control-Line.jpg
Ken
Post by: Trostle on December 24, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
But is 1/2A going with the definition/size of our countries on the other side of the pond, .061 cu? D>K
Well, if there still were .049's produced here in the states, it would make sense to try to adhere to keeping the 1/2A events limited to .049 cu in (or .0504 as allowed in the AMA rules). Alas, such is not the case. Yes, there are new .049's available for purchase here (Brodak) but any .049 that is now produced comes from another country and most are based on the 1cc (.061 cu in) engines from those manufacturers. The supply of Cox engines will eventually be depleted. Obtaining any Cox of any size now in good condition is getting more and difficult. So, we see the 1cc (.061 cu in) engines being accepted, at least in 1/2A CL Scale (an official event) and CL Stunt (unofficial events) around the country.
One good thing about these small engines from other countries is that most are available with a surprisingly good operating throttle for Scale use.
Yes, throttles have been available for the Cox engines, but those are scarce and their operation does not compare to engines like the Norvel or Wasp engines.
Keith
Keith
Post by: Dennis Toth on December 24, 2018, 04:52:30 PM
Best, DennisT
Post by: pmackenzie on December 24, 2018, 06:55:15 PM
Why don't they just use the OTS pattern for 1/2A. A little simpler and could even allow some of the older simpler flat wing designs to complete.
Best, DennisT
Perhaps because the OTS pattern sort of sucks. S?P
Pat MacKenzie
Post by: john e. holliday on December 25, 2018, 08:13:40 PM
Ah the "good ol Days" when line length was 1/2 the distance between the trees in the back yard! That is why that "Fancy" Cox handle had a spool so you could fly in your buddy's back yard too!
https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/123241780091_/Vintage-Cox-Control-Line-Handle-For-Control-Line.jpg
Ken
my brother and I had both sizes of the Cox handles. They worked great for back then as what did we know back then. Don't where they are any more. D>K
Post by: mike londke on December 26, 2018, 08:58:01 PM
Post by: Dennis Toth on January 03, 2019, 05:50:46 PM
I disagree about the Old Time Stunt pattern. This pattern is not as easy to fly well and score high. Although you don't have the same number of hard corners, in many OTS contests there are K factors for the eights which makes shape, intersections and size very important.
Another positive for using the OTS pattern for 1/2A is that there are numerous Brodak 1/2A kits that would do the OTS pattern but would not have the turning ability for the PA pattern. Just say'n.
Best, DennisT
Post by: Chris Fretz on January 03, 2019, 06:06:00 PM
Chris,When I went to look back when you posted this the prop was not on the airplane. I forgot I broke it last time I flew it. I stumbled onto the prop the other day though it was a Windsor 6x4
You have what may be an exception to all the rules: if your circle is limited to 29' lines, and you are using an .061, you may actually need the extra drag of the lines? But you probably have to compensate with some extra tip weight or offsets. If you drop back to an .049 you probably want to try the Spectra. If you go to longer lines you definitely want to try the Spectra, or the steel cables which I believe would provide maximum performance. What prop are you running on your setup?
Chris Fretz
Post by: Dave Hull on January 03, 2019, 07:01:22 PM
Divot
Post by: Chris Fretz on January 03, 2019, 07:18:46 PM
A 6x4 prop on a BibMig .061 on a 1/2A-sized plane using 26" lines? You're gonna call that deal the "pilot hustle." Should be fun if you can keep up with it....Lol not so much! Doing the full Patten would be a chore if I had got the tank height right at the time. Pretty much why the prop broke!
Divot
Here is 26sec if your looking to waist some time!
https://youtu.be/i7rGGhpgLY8
Post by: 944_Jim on January 03, 2019, 07:39:28 PM
Your video makes.me feel like a chicken. I've been slinging my 1960 Scientific P-40 (AP .061, Jan Haluzko venturi, 5x3 Cox 3 blade prop, 21" symmetric wings) on 38' lines. I'm just getting comfortable with wing-overs, and felt MAYBE I needed longer lines. Now I wonder why I can't seem to go inverted, nor loop.
Bock, bockbockbock, BOCK!
Next time I fly that bird, it crashes or loops. No other options now!
Post by: Dave Hull on January 04, 2019, 12:54:29 AM
Is that just end-of-tank issues or does it surge/starve thru the whole flight?
Looks like it is pretty darn maneuverable even with that "big" engine. Nice! I've always been a fan of anything Goldberg designed.
Divot
Post by: Chris Fretz on January 04, 2019, 03:48:41 AM
Chris,It wants to die the moment you go inverted. I never messed with it after that day, I just wanted to fly something after winter last year. Then the big planes came out and that was that.
Is that just end-of-tank issues or does it surge/starve thru the whole flight?
Looks like it is pretty darn maneuverable even with that "big" engine. Nice! I've always been a fan of anything Goldberg designed.
Divot
Post by: Dave Hull on January 04, 2019, 12:27:16 PM
You should find a little time and fix that tank setup. Looks like it would be a fun plane if it ran steady. Plenty good to step out in the backyard and knock off some cobwebs....
Divot
Post by: Chris Fretz on January 04, 2019, 01:27:40 PM
Chris
Post by: Paul Smith on January 06, 2019, 08:26:39 AM
Perhaps because the OTS pattern sort of sucks. S?P
Pat MacKenzie
How about the OTS pattern with pre-1952 designs?
Post by: Dennis Toth on January 07, 2019, 04:13:52 PM
There are several pre 52 1/2A designs that will do the OTS pattern but only a handful (the Roger Dodger, Pee Wee Zilch, 1/2A All American?, Snapper, High Pressure Pete maybe a few more). I like the OTS pattern for 1/2A because there are a lot of simple ships that could do this without the complications of doing a full blown flapped shipped. If you do have a flapped ship it can also compete there really isn't a big advantage (or disadvantage) with the flaps for this pattern, just fun.
Maybe one change would be to modify take-off and landing to allow hand launch, more of less giving points for a successful launch and a smooth approach to landing. Just a thought.
Best, DennisT
Post by: Larry Renger on January 07, 2019, 05:49:18 PM
What do you guys use to finish these 1/2a's? If being as light as possible is what you want do you guys use lite silkspan on the fuse and tail? Or will that yield a heavy model?
Chris
Japanese tissue works fine, but now Park Flyer film is probably lighter and more fuel proof. My preference is light Polyspan with park flyer film laminated over it. See the thread in “Paint and finishing” section.
Post by: Paul Smith on January 07, 2019, 06:47:52 PM
Paul,
There are several pre 52 1/2A designs that will do the OTS pattern but only a handful (the Roger Dodger, Pee Wee Zilch, 1/2A All American?, Snapper, High Pressure Pete maybe a few more). I like the OTS pattern for 1/2A because there are a lot of simple ships that could do this without the complications of doing a full blown flapped shipped. If you do have a flapped ship it can also compete there really isn't a big advantage (or disadvantage) with the flaps for this pattern, just fun.
Maybe one change would be to modify take-off and landing to allow hand launch, more of less giving points for a successful launch and a smooth approach to landing. Just a thought.
Best, DennisT
Actually, pre-1952 airframes designed for the 15-29 size would do the AMA pattern just fine with modern .049's.
Que serra serra. Whatever will be will be.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 08, 2019, 03:59:29 PM
Post by: Paul Smith on January 08, 2019, 04:23:42 PM
One comment:
In the "small tank" option (for Black Widows, etc) the one lap between stunts, on short lines, will be a challenge for the judges.
Their problem, not mine.
Post by: mike londke on January 08, 2019, 04:39:40 PM
Attn. all of you 1/2A mugs the rules for Brodaks are now posted in Open Forum. Start building! PhillySkipThis is going to be fun!!
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 14, 2019, 06:31:25 PM
I also used the spray adhesive method of cutting the patterns from the plans and adhering them to the wood provided. It worked ok, but the adhesive in the Scotch 77 stuck a little too good and resisted pealing off when I was finished.
Also, the other day I fired up my new Norvel .061 Big Mig. Glad I followed the directions provided and removed the back plate and head to soak engine in gasoline. I found bits of aluminum floating in the gas at the bottom of the container. I mixed up some 15% fuel 1/2 Castor 1/2 Klotz Synthetic . She fired up and I ran about 2oz thru her. It was too cold to stay outside any longer. I'll keep you posted on the Pathfinder build and stuff about the engine.....Cheers,Skip
Post by: Dan McEntee on January 14, 2019, 09:42:55 PM
3M77 is more of a permanent contact adhesive. 3M also makes some stuff called Spray Mount Adhesive that is basically post-it-note adhesive, and will peel off easily and leave almost no residue. Good old fashioned rubber cement works well also for applying a pattern and will peel off, and it it is reluctant some acetone will help turn things loose.
If you got the Big Mig to fire up right away, they must be making them a bit looser at the new company. The instructions for the original versions called for removing the head, add a few drops of fuel, and pull the engine through with the spring starter a certain number of times and then repeat until the engine frees up and free wheels off the spring starter. For the engines we used at KidVenture, Art Johnson found that instead of using the spring starter, as small 1/2A electric starter speeded things up quite a bit. Put in a few drops of fuel and hit it with the starter for abou 10 to 15 seconds, flush with fuel and repeat as needed. We put countless hours on some of those engines and I think in normal use a person might not wear one out. I have the 1/2A Pathfinder here in the stack for one of these days also and will watch for you impressions of it.
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
Post by: Paul Smith on January 15, 2019, 06:06:21 AM
If I did it again I would dispense with the half ribs and just sheet the leading edge back to the spar: less work, more strength and a better airfoil.
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 18, 2019, 12:51:19 PM
Dan, regarding the engine, Ken Cook our local 1/2A guru ran me thru the "pre running" of the Big Mig. I followed his directions closely and the engine was just fine. I do have an old "Astro Flight" 1/2A geared starter which is just the ticket for the small engines. I did spin her up with the starter with the head and back plate removed to run her in a bit. I also let her soak in castor overnight. I'm wondering how long she's going to run on the 1.5 oz tank I have. We're in the throws of winter here and have not had a chance to really break it in.
Paul I may take your advice and sheet the leading edge with some nice 1/32 balsa I've got sitting in my wood box.. So how did your Pathfinder fly?........cheers,PhillySkip
Post by: Mark Mc on January 18, 2019, 03:11:06 PM
Glad I followed the directions provided and removed the back plate and head to soak engine in gasoline. I found bits of aluminum floating in the gas at the bottom of the container. I mixed up some 15% fuel 1/2 Castor 1/2 Klotz Synthetic . She fired up and I ran about 2oz thru her. It was too cold to stay outside any longer. I'll keep you posted on the Pathfinder build and stuff about the engine.....Cheers,Skip
I don't remember reading this instruction. Can anyone amplify?
Mark
Post by: Target on January 18, 2019, 06:56:14 PM
I'll be interested in your findings. My 1/2A kits and .061 NVs are whispering to me.
Good luck,
Target
Post by: Larry Renger on January 18, 2019, 07:29:07 PM
The Baby Pathfinder design is outstanding as is. Don’t screw around trying to improve it. You will only make it less of a star than it is. No it is not my design. D>K
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 19, 2019, 06:18:29 AM
Regarding the Pathfinder I've got all of the 1/2 ribs in there so I'll build it per plans.
Does anyone have any experience with the Robart 1/2A Super Pumper with these small jobs?
Target....go for it!
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 21, 2019, 07:14:01 PM
Post by: Tim Wescott on January 21, 2019, 07:18:42 PM
I did get a chance for one flight on the Big Mig 061 in my Pinto. The engine ran very well but would go rich (but not quit) on inverted. Fuel tank is too low. Anyway on 42' lines the plane was too fast and drilling me into the ground.I couldn't wait for it to run out of fuel. I'm certain that on the Pathfinder I'll need to start with lines of about 50' to slow this thing down. Any thoughts? BTW I was flying with a 5.5 x4 black prop. Didn't have anything else to play with....Skip
APC sells a 6x2 which I have run on a hot Cox product engine. It was nice to get a stunt-like run. It might be worth trying on your Big Mig. You might also try a 6x3; I'd assume off the bat it would be too much for a Big Mig 049, but may do for a 061. I'd be tempted to try to de-pitch a 7x3 if I were crazy.
Post by: bob whitney on January 21, 2019, 10:19:14 PM
Post by: kenneth cook on January 22, 2019, 03:14:47 AM
Post by: Skip Chernoff on January 22, 2019, 12:42:18 PM
Post by: kenneth cook on January 29, 2019, 03:15:33 PM
Post by: bob whitney on January 30, 2019, 09:13:24 AM
Post by: Larry Renger on January 30, 2019, 02:40:36 PM
Post by: kenneth cook on January 30, 2019, 03:05:30 PM
Post by: bob whitney on January 30, 2019, 04:44:00 PM
Post by: Larry Renger on February 11, 2019, 08:49:25 AM
Post by: goozgog on February 11, 2019, 02:29:02 PM
I want to know if Spectra line will be allowed.
I'm considering entering this event if I can
get a decent engine run together.
My usual mistake is getting distracted from
serious stunt by anything fun.
<=
Post by: Skip Chernoff on February 11, 2019, 05:33:27 PM
Post by: goozgog on February 11, 2019, 06:59:56 PM
https://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/brodak-fly-in-2019/