Author Topic: Something a little different... (Read 8844 times)

minnesotamodeler · « **on:** July 21, 2011, 04:11:14 PM »

Well, I'm always looking for something unique that grabs my imagination. This time I think I've outdone myself. This is designed after a novelty freeflight 1/2A I saw in a magazine, forget which one or when. It allegedly flies pretty well with no wings, just a lifting body. I'll find out...

Realize, in the pix you're seeing only the top half. Power will be a Norvel .061.

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #1 on:** July 21, 2011, 05:32:34 PM »

"Something a little different" means a lot more when you say it than when a lot of other people do.

I can't wait to see it done!

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #2 on:** July 21, 2011, 06:00:37 PM »

I have a clear vision of everything about it except landing gear...still thinking on that.

ray copeland · « **Reply #3 on:** July 21, 2011, 07:11:45 PM »

You go Ray!! Can't wait to see the finished product! You're still my hero.

frank carlisle · « **Reply #4 on:** July 21, 2011, 07:33:53 PM »

Ray this thing is looking very cool. Landing gear would muck it up (IMHO of course). How about a dolly or a hand launch?

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #5 on:** July 22, 2011, 12:38:18 AM »

Hello!
Would that be one of Mr Holland's specials out of Aeromodeller, if it isn't, it should be! Can't wait to see a C/L version.

Regards,

Andrew.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #6 on:** July 22, 2011, 08:04:47 AM »

Quote from: Andrew Tinsley on July 22, 2011, 12:38:18 AM

Hello!
Would that be one of Mr Holland's specials out of Aeromodeller, if it isn't, it should be! Can't wait to see a C/L version.

Regards,

Andrew.

I really can't say...I have a single page from an old mag, unidentified, with a profile, working drawings and the last half of the article, unsigned. I know it's old 'cause it says "Full-size plans from Hobby Helpers, 50 cents." It is called "Martian Space Ship" 1/2A freeflight that apparently began as an attempt to make a "blimp" without the lifting gas, largely unsucccessful, that morphed through several stages into this. Says it was powered by "an ancient Wasp .049." That's all I know. Just thought it would make a unique control-line.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #7 on:** July 22, 2011, 08:06:11 AM »

Quote from: frank carlisle on July 21, 2011, 07:33:53 PM

Ray this thing is looking very cool. Landing gear would muck it up (IMHO of course). How about a dolly or a hand launch?

Actually Frank, that's a very good suggestion...I'll give it some thought. Probably easier to make a dolly than to engineer some tall landing gear! hand launch = no go since I fly alone.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #8 on:** July 22, 2011, 08:39:40 AM »

Isn't that the old Cal Smith design? Looks similar to the old Flash Gordon space ships. Never got the plans myself but I did think about it at the time.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #9 on:** July 22, 2011, 10:16:18 AM »

I am pretty sure Roy Clough designed the original. Skip Ruff scaled it up as a quite successful R/C model. I have seen him fly it. What fun!

BTW, Ray, whatever became of your latest canard? Did it turn out to be a vile canard?

david beazley · « **Reply #10 on:** July 22, 2011, 01:06:37 PM »

It looks alot like a Roy Clough design. In a 1980's issue of Model Builder they had an plan for RC version of the Martian Spaceship. It started life in the '50's as a free flight design. Roy was quite a unique individual, always comming up with different designs. I remember one CL with a rotating wing

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #11 on:** July 22, 2011, 03:23:04 PM »

Quote from: david beazley on July 22, 2011, 01:06:37 PM

It looks alot like a Roy Clough design. In a 1980's issue of Model Builder they had an plan for RC version of the Martian Spaceship. It started life in the '50's as a free flight design. Roy was quite a unique individual, always comming up with different designs. I remember one CL with a rotating wing

THAT'S IT!!! With a few minor differences; the picture I have doesn't use the rudderlets on the stab tips; front top fin is somewhat differently shaped. But that's it, undeniably, with the "stall fences", porthole trim, etc. Cool! "Started life in the 50s as a free-flight design", that fits the minimal info I have. Thanks for posting the pic.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #12 on:** July 22, 2011, 03:29:38 PM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on July 22, 2011, 10:16:18 AM

I am pretty sure Roy Clough designed the original. Skip Ruff scaled it up as a quite successful R/C model. I have seen him fly it. What fun!

BTW, Ray, whatever became of your latest canard? Did it turn out to be a vile canard?

The swept-forward canard is finished and hanging on my wall; never have gotten it out for a test flight, not even one. It does look good though. Fact is, I haven't gotten out at all this whole year so far. This may be the "summer without a flight".

frank carlisle · « **Reply #13 on:** July 22, 2011, 05:20:43 PM »

Ray----check out the gear on the space ship picture. It looks right to me.

david beazley · « **Reply #14 on:** July 22, 2011, 05:59:07 PM »

I have still have the set of plans and the MB magazines. I can scan the article and email it to you if you like.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #15 on:** July 22, 2011, 09:31:17 PM »

Quote from: david beazley on July 22, 2011, 05:59:07 PM

I have still have the set of plans and the MB magazines. I can scan the article and email it to you if you like.

Thanks for the offer, but I'm sorta doing my own thing with the concept. I changed the construction majorly! But the look will be the same.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #16 on:** July 25, 2011, 03:16:57 PM »

Progress pix...as you can see, I didn't go with the drop-off dolly suggestion. Interesting wheels, huh??

--Ray

frank carlisle · « **Reply #17 on:** July 25, 2011, 03:41:15 PM »

The choice of wheels is excellent. It looks like something Jules Vern would come up with. I'm guessing it will fly too.

I do wish you'd fly that canard. If it performs well I want a kit or two.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #18 on:** July 25, 2011, 09:49:13 PM »

Quote from: frank carlisle on July 25, 2011, 03:41:15 PM

The choice of wheels is excellent. It looks like something Jules Vern would come up with. I'm guessing it will fly too.

I do wish you'd fly that canard. If it performs well I want a kit or two.

Well, I'll surely get out sometime before the summer's over. Been too hot lately, we set some new records here.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #19 on:** July 26, 2011, 09:52:39 AM »

Hmm, outpost of the Arctic Circle you say. "Too hot" is 45 degrees?

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #20 on:** July 26, 2011, 06:39:00 PM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on July 26, 2011, 09:52:39 AM

Hmm, outpost of the Arctic Circle you say. "Too hot" is 45 degrees?

Hehe, try 115 heat index and 82 dewpoint...both new Twin Cities records. it just ain't fair, to have this and the extreme winters too.

Think about the spread over the year: minus 22 to plus 102, 80 degrees. Top that!

--Ray

Larry Renger · « **Reply #21 on:** July 27, 2011, 12:22:33 PM »

80 degees? I make that 124 degree difference. I guess your snowman finally got unburied?

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #22 on:** July 27, 2011, 12:40:04 PM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on July 27, 2011, 12:22:33 PM

80 degees? I make that 124 degree difference. I guess your snowman finally got unburied?

Huh...you're right of course. My brain must be burned up.

Yah, the snowman survived, waiting for another winter.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #23 on:** August 06, 2011, 06:48:06 AM »

Progress pix, just so you'll know I'm still at it. Took a little time off to get a cataract fixed.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #24 on:** August 06, 2011, 08:53:48 PM »

Beautiful workmanship, Ray!

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #25 on:** August 07, 2011, 06:12:20 AM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on August 06, 2011, 08:53:48 PM

Beautiful workmanship, Ray!

Thank you. There's actually a lot more work in this thing than I anticipated starting out. It's big, but very intricate. This one I won't be kitting!

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #26 on:** August 15, 2011, 11:13:43 AM »

Bringing this up to date, the beast is about ready to cover. The aft rudder is only pinned on; to be installed after all work on the underside is done, to facilitate laying it on its back.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #27 on:** August 16, 2011, 09:29:14 AM »

That should gets peoples attention while flying or even sitting on the ground.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #28 on:** August 16, 2011, 05:21:43 PM »

Yup, this is probably one that I'll fly once or twice to prove it will, then hang it on my wall and leave it. I don't imagine it'll do much more than just go round n'round. Not a lot of excitement in that, just novelty.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #29 on:** August 22, 2011, 11:21:51 PM »

Progress pix, starting the covering. Magnificent rudder, huh...

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #30 on:** August 23, 2011, 12:06:22 AM »

Steampunk control line. Wowie.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #31 on:** August 23, 2011, 04:05:55 PM »

Yup, steampunk, a fascinating concept to me. Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, the "Back to the Future" episode set in the Old West with a steam-powered Time Machine, etc.

Should be a pretty good crowd-pleaser.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #32 on:** August 24, 2011, 10:04:45 AM »

Also that turkey of a movie: Wild Wild West. The TV show was bad enough, but the movie.....

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #33 on:** August 24, 2011, 01:26:38 PM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on August 24, 2011, 10:04:45 AM

Also that turkey of a movie: Wild Wild West. The TV show was bad enough, but the movie.....

Yah, what a disappointment...

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #34 on:** August 24, 2011, 02:22:44 PM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on August 24, 2011, 10:04:45 AM

Also that turkey of a movie: Wild Wild West. The TV show was bad enough, but the movie.....

I liked the TV show. Of course, I was 12 at the time.

The movie was bad. I hate it when they pick a really cool concept and then totally screw it up.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #35 on:** August 24, 2011, 03:56:20 PM »

Quote from: Tim Wescott on August 24, 2011, 02:22:44 PM

I liked the TV show. Of course, I was 12 at the time.

The movie was bad. I hate it when they pick a really cool concept and then totally screw it up.

I'll tell you what you shouldn't do, though...go and buy the original TV episodes on a DVD like I did. I too loved the series as a kid. Leave them in fond memories! They are so awful I couldn't even sit through the whole thing. An even bigger disappointment than the movie...

Larry Renger · « **Reply #36 on:** August 24, 2011, 07:24:27 PM »

How about a series "Wild, Wild Sheep Squadron" featuring guys in Corsairs shooting it out with the bad guys in Zeros, all with 6-shooters and Winchester '98s? Guarding the sheep ranchers against those evil beef guys!

True story: My father-in-law is an Army Colonel. He was living with some other guys at SHAPE (I think) and they took turns cooking. He wanted to do lamb ribs, but one of the other officers was a Texan. The reply was "I ain't gonna eat no damn woolie!"

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #37 on:** August 30, 2011, 02:37:54 PM »

Here it is all done, well almost...still need to put the portholes down the sides and tie the leadouts. but it's basically ready to fly.

I plan to try to get it in the air this weekend, hopefully with a video camera at the ready. Should be interesting. If it flies I WANT PROOF!

Larry Renger · « **Reply #38 on:** August 30, 2011, 06:53:39 PM »

A marvelous effort, no matter how it flies. And there is no reason it shouldn't!

One trick I do with a really new, wierd design is to hook up a simple tether line and swing it around on about 10' of string. If it is badly out of trim it will buck or even tumble. if it tracks true, you know you are in the ballpark.

I also swing it inverted and look for different altitude between upright and inverted. This will give you a clue about trim problems.

I suspect that you would want it to balance around 10% of the main body from the nose. Better it should never get off the ground than be crazy in the air. Short tank first flight?

Aww shucks, here I am running off at the mouth again. You probably had all that covered.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #39 on:** August 30, 2011, 07:40:38 PM »

The fragment of plans I have actually shows a balance point about where the leading edge of my crossbrace is, more like 30% of total length. Seems a little far back but the original apparently flew well with that CG. I have set mine there as well.

Short tank, I reckon!

At least I'm sure it will taxi well...it rolls down my very slightly graded driveway with ease. Looks pretty cool just rolling along...

Power, incidentally, is a Norvel .061.

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #40 on:** August 30, 2011, 08:45:29 PM »

The effective area of that lifting body is going to be somewhere in between the projected area of the body, and of those itty bitty strakes. But the effective area of that honkin' big tail is going to be just what it is.

So that 30% point may not be all that far off.

I'd still do the twirl-on-a-string test.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #41 on:** August 31, 2011, 02:10:24 AM »

10-foot twirl test Wednesday.

Maiden voyage Saturday, or Monday if weather isn't right.

Reports to follow. Hopefully video? if there's anything worth watching.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #42 on:** August 31, 2011, 10:22:12 AM »

The plans you have are for a free-flight, no? C/L models usually balance farther forward than the equivalent ff model. The feedback mechanism of the upright handle requires greater stability for smooth flight.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #43 on:** August 31, 2011, 11:17:20 AM »

Plans are for a freeflight, yes...maybe I'll wrap a bunch of lead solder around the nose wheel strut.

However, 10-foot twirl test was conducted this AM; passed with flying colors. Hung out there very stably (?), slightly nose up as I would expect.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #44 on:** August 31, 2011, 10:00:19 PM »

Sounds good! Low power, short tank for first flight? Maybe prop on backwards? Better it should just sludge around the circle, and then you can crank it up a bit at a time. Dynamic instability is very much a function of speed!

We are all rooting for you to succeed with this!

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #45 on:** September 01, 2011, 12:47:13 AM »

Quote from: Larry Renger on August 31, 2011, 10:00:19 PM

We are all rooting for you to succeed with this!

And plans when it's done!

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #46 on:** September 01, 2011, 08:51:22 AM »

I do appreciate the support, guys...I was sorta half expecting ridicule instead!

Larry, I test-ran the engine yesterday and there's sure no power concerns, the .061 with a 6x2 really cranks up and pulls. backward prop will probably be the initial arrangement, to control some of that power. short tank certainly.

Tim, I have working drawings I went from, mostly former layouts, no true plans. but if it's successful I'll try to draw up more complete layouts.

I'm pretty sure I'll not be kitting this one though!

Larry Renger · « **Reply #47 on:** September 01, 2011, 08:54:51 AM »

Best of luck, and keep your wits about you!

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #48 on:** September 01, 2011, 02:08:23 PM »

Here's pix with the portholes. They do add something to the look!

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #49 on:** September 01, 2011, 02:20:35 PM »

Quote from: minnesotamodeler on September 01, 2011, 08:51:22 AM

I'm pretty sure I'll not be kitting this one though!

I think if you're good enough to build it from a kit you're not going to hesitate to build it from scratch -- and it's not exactly smack in the center of the kit-building market, now is it?