Author Topic: Beech Staggerwing - last minute crash-build !!-DONE in five days ! (Read 3410 times)

Paul Smith · « **on:** July 14, 2007, 01:40:58 PM »

Day 0.8

Using original kit plan via Currell.....

Robert McHam · « **Reply #1 on:** July 14, 2007, 07:22:42 PM »

Very nice!

Robert

Douglas Babb · « **Reply #2 on:** July 16, 2007, 06:16:51 PM »

More pictures, have you decided on a color scheme.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #3 on:** July 16, 2007, 08:56:46 PM »

Yep,

Lakeland Blue for the fuselage and natural balsa for the wing & stab. We can't be pouring on the paint if want the little critter to fly. It's in the final assembly fixture now.

Contest Saturday. Be there aloha.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #4 on:** July 17, 2007, 03:20:48 PM »

Tuesday night and the contest is Saturday, almost "ahead of the time line" by hollow log standards......

Ready for clear coat. This is brush-painted with throw-away acid brushes. It's hard to estimate how much "craftsmanship" to pour into an untested (at least by me) design.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #5 on:** July 19, 2007, 01:38:52 PM »

In classic "log hollow log" style, it's all together today with just enough to time cure the paint & glue before an "official test flight" at the Michigan Musciano in Kalamazoo, Saturday.

6 ounces, including tip weight.

It's getting harder and harder to find a good design that Red Baron hasn't kitted yet.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2007, 03:40:34 PM »

Very nice. Interesting bellcrank mount.

You didn't want to go with the inverted mount? It'll run fine inverted. You just have to rotate the tank so it stays upright. Then the cylinder does't block the pilot's view.

--Ray

Paul Smith · « **Reply #7 on:** July 20, 2007, 04:42:19 AM »

That's a good point. Let me give you a few reasons, or maybe just rationalizations:

1. Ease of starting. Many of the old Cox RTF (plastic nastys) had inverted engines, per your thinking, and later retrofitted to upright (for my reason). One prime example was the Little Stinker, of which I had an original with the inverted PeeWee. It taught me a lesson that has lasted a lifetime. Later Little Stinkers had upside right engines.

2. Engine experts on this forum and others have testified that these engines put out the most HP with the cylinder up. Sounds illogical, but I accept their word.

3. I have a strong suspicion that I might fly the "model with the gear retracted" as we say. Hardly cricket on a Great War bipe, but appropriate for an aircraft that could, in reality, pull up it's feet.

-------------------------------------Bellcrank Mount ------------------

I always try to put the bellcrank and leadouts on or near the vertical CL of the model, and also square with the control horn. If that requires an extra pice of 1/16" plywood, so be it.

Also, I religiously support both ends of the BC axle, even on tiny models.

-------cowling --------------

ps:
It's symetrical and round. With a little paint work I could easily rotate it 180 degrees for the next contest, if the jury bombs me for the upright engine.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2007, 03:07:15 PM »

Good points all...well, except for the varying power output at different cylinder positions...if it were so, with an upright mount there would be a noticeable decrease in power any time you went inverted; doesn't happen. Once the engines are running, I don't think they care a fig how they are oriented, except relative to the tank (if exterior). Starting them, well, yes, they do tend to flood inverted--I often find myself flipping an inverted-mount plane upside down to start the engine. It is easier.

And for no-gear flying obviously inverted engine is a no-no.

But you're still in your unfortunate pilot's line of vision. He'll go cross-eyed trying to look around both sides of the cylinder at once!

You understand I wasn't criticizing the BC mount (not criticizing anything actually); just making an observation that it's a little unorthodox at this level of modeling. It should hold up to a lot of abuse, and that's always good.

You've made it a beautiful little plane.

--Ray

Wayne Collier · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2007, 09:11:21 PM »

Wouldn't worry too much about that upright cylinder blocking the view. Lindberg (spelling?) got across the ocean and he didn't even have a front window. Had to hang his head out the side to see forward.

Clancy Arnold · « **Reply #10 on:** July 21, 2007, 09:50:40 AM »

Actually, Lucky Lindy had a periscope that he could slide out the side of the plane to see forward. Must have been a very restricted view.

Clancy

Paul Smith · « **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2007, 07:33:12 PM »

Sorry, no flight report. I didn't fly the Staggerwing.

I had a busy day at the Michigan Musciano in Kalamazoo. One of our local flyers, Currell Pattie, had a problem the kept him home and I proxy-flew all his stuff as well as my own. There was neither the time nor the need to test out new stuff.

-------------------

I was very successful in Stunt and I owe it all to my centerline bellcrank mount. The guys with offcenter (under the wing) BC's took a beating on Lazy Eights and Outside Loops.

ps: I didn't use the Product Engine today, just an illustration of the BC position. Also, in response to the advice of speed pros, I got rid of the sidewinger engines.

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #12 on:** July 22, 2007, 06:15:40 AM »

I still don't understand the sidewinder thing...I mount my engines every whichaway and have never noticed any difference in performance. But who am I to argue with speed guys? They know their engines...maybe my stuff's too crude to show any difference.

Nice production mount. I usually just throw away the venturi tube and mount the engine on a flat firewall. Leaves the NV kinda vulnerable though. I like your solution.

--Ray

frank carlisle · « **Reply #13 on:** July 22, 2007, 07:10:23 AM »

Paul, as much as I hate to be nice to you I must say that your planes and your flying were really top notch Saturday.
You demonstrated great sportsmanship and your presence was greatly appreciated by all.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #14 on:** July 22, 2007, 09:24:00 AM »

Frank and his Autogyro made the Beauty contest (Craftsmanship) an interesting event this time.

In order to qualify, you must use the model for an official flight in one of the three flying events, Speed, Stunt, or Racing. Typically, a lot of models are entered in Craftmanship, but few actually fly. This year was no exception.

Due to the high no-fly rate, they judged all the planes on 0-to-100 point scale, with Frank getting 98. The scores were kept on a clipboard pending flight and only transfered to the big scoreboard after flight was achieved.

Late in the day, Rich Kacmarsky was holding 1st Place in Beauty with a 95 and Greg Bossio was 2nd. I had enough points with the Beechcraft get between Rich & Greg, but to qualify, I would have needed to enter the biplane in Racing.

There was a bit of drama waiting for Frank to try fly the Autogyro is Speed, mostly for Rich, who was the leader in Craftsmanship, but it flew, not once, but three times, and actually not the slowest.

frank carlisle · « **Reply #15 on:** July 22, 2007, 09:51:21 AM »

Rich literally gave me first place. I was having troubles getting the auto-gyro to fire up and just when I was about to throw in the towel Rich came to my rescue. He pitted for me and fussed with the engine till it was running. To win all he would have had to do is melt into the shadows and leave me to my own devices.
Here again is a great reason why modeling and the people in it make for such a rich and rewarding experience. I plan on taking this event to heart and if anyone ever needs a hand and I can help I will do it no matter how it affects the outcome.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #16 on:** July 23, 2007, 02:36:12 PM »

Quote from: minnesotamodeler on July 19, 2007, 03:40:34 PM

You didn't want to go with the inverted mount? It'll run fine inverted. You just have to rotate the tank so it stays upright. Then the cylinder does't block the pilot's view.
--Ray

I guess you were right about the inverted engine.
I got bombed in the beauty contest.
Maybe an invert would have gotten me up to 3rd place.

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #17 on:** July 23, 2007, 03:38:53 PM »

For those of you wanting to finish Staggerwing models in paint schemes connected to stunt and C/L,

Here are a few pics of C/Liner's in Beechcrafts;

First is Beech D-17S N60149 owned and flown by Jerry McMillin. He taught me to fly in this airplane and trained me up to solo with it, equipped with a throw over yolk and brakes on the left side only! What a Sky God he is!

Second is Beech G-17S N80317 flown in the 1970 National Championship Air Races at Reno, NV by Jerry McMillin. It was owned by Bryant Morris. The Sig 1/2A Beechcraft model has the markings for this airplane!

Third is my brother-in-law Dave Passannante, a long time c/l flyer, in his 1935 Beech B-17R N14413. It is the second oldest flying and fourth oldest know to exist.

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #18 on:** July 23, 2007, 03:40:37 PM »

NC14413

minnesotamodeler · « **Reply #19 on:** July 23, 2007, 05:31:18 PM »

Quote from: ama21835 on July 23, 2007, 02:36:12 PM

I guess you were right about the inverted engine.
I got bombed in the beauty contest.
Maybe an invert would have gotten me up to 3rd place.

Musta been some mighty impressive looking planes there...yours is a beauty, upright mount or not.

--Ray

Paul Smith · « **Reply #20 on:** July 24, 2007, 06:05:38 AM »

Weeeellll,,,

There were four models in front of mine. They were all fully painted and had the grain well-filled.

I used the weight-saving technique of just putting clear dope and some panel lines on the wing & stab. This year I compromised and painted the body, which moved me up a couple places vs my all-clear approach in 2006.

After lessons 101 & 102, I think I've finally gotten the message: If you want to win, paint the whole airplane (flawlessly).

To that end, I have entered a rehab program taught by Howard rush.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #21 on:** July 24, 2007, 07:16:35 AM »

Quote from: frank carlisle on July 22, 2007, 09:51:21 AM

Rich literally gave me first place. I was having troubles getting the auto-gyro to fire up and just when I was about to throw in the towel Rich came to my rescue. He pitted for me and fussed with the engine till it was running. To win all he would have had to do is melt into the shadows and leave me to my own devices.
Here again is a great reason why modeling and the people in it make for such a rich and rewarding experience. I plan on taking this event to heart and if anyone ever needs a hand and I can help I will do it no matter how it affects the outcome.

Isn't this what modeling is really about? I lost count on how many times I have been helped during a contest by a person that should have beaten me. Have fun, DOC Holliday

frank carlisle · « **Reply #22 on:** July 24, 2007, 07:22:07 AM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on July 24, 2007, 07:16:35 AM

Isn't this what modeling is really about? I lost count on how many times I have been helped during a contest by a person that should have beaten me. Have fun, DOC Holliday

Yeah Doc. That's what it's all about.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #23 on:** July 26, 2007, 12:59:35 PM »

We got the Staggerwing fliying today.

It goes good. Did the whole hollowlog pattern, plus the bonus stunts.

Looking for another contest.

nobler · « **Reply #24 on:** February 04, 2009, 11:13:03 AM »

Paul's Staggerwing flies quite well. It shows that even a draggy design, in 18" span form, can fly very capably. Currell