Author Topic: My vote for the two best ARF/RTF ever. (Read 7482 times)

Joe Messinger · « **Reply #1 on:** February 19, 2008, 03:06:25 PM »

Not having flown -every- ARF available, I'm not sure I can offer a really qualified answer to the best ARf question. I can say of the ones I have flown I would put Randy's Vector at the top of the list. Cardinals and Brodak P-40s are very good fliers also.

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #2 on:** February 19, 2008, 08:24:03 PM »

I can't tell if I'm being setup here, but what is a "Teosawki"?

Alan Buck · « **Reply #3 on:** February 19, 2008, 08:30:11 PM »

the end of stunt as we know it . a good plane for wind flying Alan

gary tultz · « **Reply #4 on:** February 20, 2008, 08:54:36 AM »

I really like my Cardinal, especially with the flap/ elevator set in the 2-3 mode. (unconventional for this design.)

Bob Zambelli · « **Reply #5 on:** February 20, 2008, 09:30:11 AM »

I'm with Gary on this one - I consider it the best all-around plane EVER.

Somebody going to ask why?

Bob Z.

frederickmgoff · « **Reply #6 on:** February 20, 2008, 09:44:42 AM »

"Teosawki" ! Bring us out of the dark! I see the model in many magazine articles. Where are the plans, or ARF?

Bill Little · « **Reply #7 on:** February 20, 2008, 11:17:00 AM »

Hi Ty,

Clayton Smith from the Winston-Salem area in NC makes the TEOSAWKI. Kinda a regional thing, but it is what Ty says. Uglier than homemade sin...... but yes it DOES fly extremely well if you like point and shoot planes. It goes EXACTLY where you point it and has a blinding corner if needed. Most around here use the LA 46 for power.

It is basically a RTF, though. In the sense that all you add are engine/tank. From a sheer flying standpoint it out flies the Cardinal and all other ARFs. That is an opinion I guess, but I have flown several of each, seen several of each flown by all levels of pilots, and I feel I can safely say that. It is NOT however a *mass produced* model, so it is apples to oranges.

gary tultz · « **Reply #8 on:** February 20, 2008, 03:49:36 PM »

Ty, I also finally had my first successful flights with the Firebaby(and next with the little known and great flying COX TD-3) I was so thrilled , I wanted to learn to BUILD much better planes that I knew were in existence.I credit those ARFs with leading me to building and competing through the 50s and 60s and again today. My theory and I'm stickn to it,

Rain

Dave Nyce · « **Reply #9 on:** February 20, 2008, 05:59:20 PM »

Does Clayton Smith have a website?

Dave

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #10 on:** February 21, 2008, 12:11:20 PM »

How about a photo of this ugly bird!

Dave Nyce · « **Reply #11 on:** February 21, 2008, 05:07:01 PM »

Attached is a photo that I found of the TEOSAWKI.

Dave

Clayton Smith · « **Reply #12 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:07:15 PM »

Kent Tysor flying TEOSAWKI Huntersville NC October 2007. And a shot of "Team TEOSAWKI" at Brodak.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=q-u_My0zr64

Bill Little · « **Reply #13 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:02:24 PM »

Now, Clayton, Tommy's doesn't count! LOL!!!!!!!

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #14 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:15:39 PM »

Well actually it is kinda cute---in an ugly sort of way! Looks like a cross between a flapless Nobler and a Ukey!

Alan Hahn · « **Reply #15 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:18:07 PM »

Why does a One-Design PA contest come to mind here?

Dennis Moritz · « **Reply #16 on:** February 22, 2008, 07:21:54 AM »

Vector 40. P40. Of the planes I've seen.

Bill Little · « **Reply #17 on:** February 22, 2008, 09:37:10 AM »

Forgot, on the TEOSAWKI, the outboard wing is about 3/4" longer than the inboard......

Joejust · « **Reply #18 on:** February 22, 2008, 04:40:34 PM »

The UKEY series of ARF's. Perhaps the most flown ARF of them all with 1000 of them sold.

Joe

David Miller · « **Reply #19 on:** February 22, 2008, 05:11:10 PM »

I agree with Joe about UKEY. Especially for beginners or retreads getting back into CL. Tutor II ARF then Cardinel for more advanced.

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #20 on:** February 22, 2008, 09:29:39 PM »

Hi Guys,

I guess the best RTF (Profile) plane would have to be the TEOSAWKI. What other profile plane has ever taken 1st - 5th place in PAMPA Expert at a sanctioned contest. Granted, the wind that day was so bad that none of the "Big Boys" would play with their toys, but that didn't stop the great TEOSAWKI. See results below from the 2007 Huntersville Contest. It flies even better in still air.

Wayne Foster

The contest is over and was a good news bad news situation but those who competed seemed to have fun. The good news happened on Saturday with a nice overcast day. The bad news was Sunday morning with rain, cool and gusty winds which prompted a vote, which canceled the planned PAMPA events.

William Davis offered his TEOSAWKI to anyone who wanted to fly in PAMPA Expert. Five brave, crazy?, people decided to give it a try. They called it (ISOC) International Stunt Of Champions. Those of us who stayed dry and watched from the shelter called it TEOSAWKI Crazy Expert Stunt. Gusty winds had more of an effect than the rain. The TEOSAWKI performed flawlessly and survived a pancake meeting with the ground on the 4th flight with only the prop being damaged.

Carolina Classic
Huntersville, NC June 2 , 3
Results (Only Crazy PAMPA Expert Shown)

TEOSOWKI "Crazy" PAMPA Expert
Everyone Flew William Davis'Airpane

Watt Moore...........Judge
Pat Robinson.........Judge
Ed Ruane.............Judge

1 Kent Tysor........TEOSAWKI...............OS-LA 46......468.3
2 Derek Barry.......TEOSAWKI...............OS-LA 46......454.0
3 Steve Fitton......TEOSAWKI...............OS-LA 46......448.6
4 William Davis.....TEOSAWKI...............OS-LA 46......442.6
5 Tom Luper.........TEOSAWKI...............OS-LA 46......431.0

gary tultz · « **Reply #21 on:** February 22, 2008, 09:59:05 PM »

Going to advertise an ISOC event at our new field this year, Akron Circle Burners, Akron Ohio. (I'm donating my ARF Card. Need a new one anyway.) Rainman aka Gary T.

Patrick Rowan · « **Reply #22 on:** February 22, 2008, 10:52:32 PM »

All right Gary!

A week end stunt contest should go over good as well.

gary tultz · « **Reply #23 on:** February 23, 2008, 09:31:27 AM »

It's in the works Pat. The "One Plane" event will be part of a normal two day meet that most clubs have.It will be only for the "Expert class"

fliers. (better survival odds for my ARF) Going to offer it after the last round of CLPA on Sunday.One flight only,pick up the handle cold, no practice. There will also be at least One All speed meet,possibly two at the Site this year. Rainman aka Gary Tultz

Little known fact. Three of our club members are on the U.S. F2A speed team that will compete in France this year.

Dave Nyce · « **Reply #24 on:** February 23, 2008, 11:31:13 AM »

I emailed Clayton Smith, and he sells the TEOSAWKI, but has a six month waiting list.

Dave

Bill Little · « **Reply #25 on:** February 23, 2008, 06:44:43 PM »

Quote from: david nyce on February 23, 2008, 11:31:13 AM

I emailed Clayton Smith, and he sells the TEOSAWKI, but has a six month waiting list.

Dave

Hmmmm............ Clayton's been building. The waiting list is shorter!

Dennis Moritz · « **Reply #26 on:** February 26, 2008, 05:08:24 AM »

I haven't seen many of the Teo whatevers. Sounds like a fun plane to rip around with and use in an emergency. Or windy conditions. Also definitely a hoot. The Philly Flyers are always pro a hoot. But... nevertheless... If we're talking about the best of the ARFs... Vector 40s and P40s are proven winners in the Northeast. P40 ARFs have won Expert profile at Brodak for (at least) three straight years. Vector 40 ARFs seem to equal the performance of most serious 40 sized stunters, at least the serious stunters I've seen at contests at Brodak and elsewhere in NJ, PA and NY.

Bill Little · « **Reply #27 on:** February 26, 2008, 12:25:02 PM »

Quote from: Dennis Moritz on February 26, 2008, 05:08:24 AM

I haven't seen many of the Teo whatevers. Sounds like a fun plane to rip around with and use in an emergency. Or windy conditions. Also definitely a hoot. The Philly Flyers are always pro a hoot. But... nevertheless... If we're talking about the best of the ARFs... Vector 40s and P40s are proven winners in the Northeast. P40 ARFs have won Expert profile at Brodak for (at least) three straight years. Vector 40 ARFs seem to equal the performance of most serious 40 sized stunters, at least the serious stunters I've seen at contests at Brodak and elsewhere in NJ, PA and NY.

The Vector ARF is a full blown Stunt Vector (SV) plane. Only smaller in size than the reduced size Satona, Shrike, etc., but the same *basic* plane as the SV-11 and the other SV series planes from Randy. Powered properly, it would serve anyone (outside of CA and the NW) for everything up through local Expert. Advanced for sure.............

MikeyPratt · « **Reply #28 on:** February 29, 2008, 11:13:51 AM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on February 19, 2008, 01:31:02 PM

Ah, now this will start a long disertation or just a lot of BS. First, the AJ Firebaby, my first CL plane. Then there is the infamous TEOSAWKI, probably the best profile all around stunter ever. UGLY, but boy can it fly. Comments??

Hi Ty,
I’ve built more ARF’s than I want to admit form all aspects of the hobby. They are all pretty good in their own right. To say which is the best opens a big can of worms for sure, just like the Chevy & Ford thing….lol

It is true that most need some amount of rework to make them last longer, but they are for the most part pretty good all and all. They will get better as time goes by and for what they currently cost; it is hard to find a better deal for the money. Having said that, there is plenty of room for improvement in all of them and I’m sure the manufacturers have an eye on this. ARF’s are not the end all product but do have a place in the hobby. While it is true that many aspects of this hobby rely almost totally on ARF models, I really doubt it will become the norm in competitive PA (at least I hope not).

With the new generation of kits with laser cutting it is much easier to assemble a good flying model that would last a long time if not subjected to crashing and abuse. But the amount of time that is needed to build a model is hard to come by at times. But the modelers that want to build their own always seem find a way to do it.
In my opinion (no flaming please), we are still using the same old methods we have forever and need to look outside the box at different ways to produce quality ARF models. This would require a huge investment from the current manufacturers so it is doubtful it will happen anytime soon. The cottage industry has done a pretty good job of reaching out and trying different ways to produce models and should be complemented on their efforts for doing so.

Later,

Mikey

Bill Little · « **Reply #29 on:** February 29, 2008, 01:25:17 PM »

Hi Mike,

What are some ideas on a better way to produce these ARFs? I have no clue as to how I would go about trying to produce an ARF!

Crist Rigotti · « **Reply #30 on:** March 01, 2008, 08:08:51 AM »

Just compare a R/C ARF and a standard stunt model. It'll be obvious.

Bill Little · « **Reply #31 on:** March 01, 2008, 09:32:30 AM »

Quote from: Crist Rigotti on March 01, 2008, 08:08:51 AM

Just compare a R/C ARF and a standard stunt model. It'll be obvious.

LOL!

Hi Crist,

Now there lies the problem! LOL!! I have not seen an R/C model up close in over 20 years, and I don't remember the ARFs back then very well at all. The only one I had that might qualify as an ARF was an all foam Spitfire I got in a trade.

I took Mike's comment as the actual *production methods used*, and I know that HE knows infinitely MORE about production procedures than I do. So I was hoping that Mikey would elaborate on THAT.

Bill <><

MikeyPratt · « **Reply #32 on:** March 05, 2008, 10:35:22 AM »

Quote from: Bill Little on March 01, 2008, 09:32:30 AM

LOL!

Hi Crist,

Now there lies the problem! LOL!! I have not seen an R/C model up close in over 20 years, and I don't remember the ARFs back then very well at all. The only one I had that might qualify as an ARF was an all foam Spitfire I got in a trade.

I took Mike's comment as the actual *production methods used*, and I know that HE knows infinitely MORE about production procedures than I do. So I was hoping that Mikey would elaborate on THAT.

Bill <><

Hi Bill,
Well to look at the current crop of R/C models is just one way to look at it. Remember, ARF companies have a large work force on a relatively low pay scale so labor is a pretty cheap commodity. But what I was saying is there are many other ways to produce models that can be just as good although it requires a large capital investment.

For example.
More fiberglass or C/F parts: The process of molding glass parts has come a long way and they are now pretty light requiring a minimum to finish and assemble. The norm for larger glass parts is that they are reinforced with the strategic placement of carbon fiber strips, formers, and firewalls. I have a huge 78” R/C pattern plane that was produced this way and it is surprising just how light the fuselage is for its size. The total weight of this model is 10 pounds in flight trim. If this type of manufacturing was put into high production, I’m sure the speed of the process could be increased and the cost would come down to the point it was affordable. I see more R/C models taking this same route and hopefully, we will benefit from this down the road.

Injection molded foam parts: These are making huge gains in most of the shipping & packaging markets (mostly computers) with EPS and EPP foams that could easily be adapted for use in models. The big drawback would be the cost of the molds. Some foam molds tip the scale at 30K or better depending on the size of the part. I’ve envisioned a molded EPS wing that is assembled from four parts. The two upper panels and two lower panels are assembled to make a completed wing complete with wing tips. The completed wing is attached to the fuselage a number of different ways but making it removable would be the best in my opinion.

Would this type of model be lighter that a typical balsa model? The short answer is no but as manufacturing processes improve then the weight would come down. The power of the modern engines is such that this is not much of an argument at this point. Just look at some of the Depron park flyers that are being produced at this time. They are very light and strong for what they are and fly extremely well as light weight electric models. So as manufacturing process evolve using these type of products other processes will be discovered along with other materials.

Later,
Mikey

Willis Swindell · « **Reply #33 on:** March 10, 2008, 07:46:33 PM »

I vote for the Firebaby.
Willis

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #34 on:** March 10, 2008, 08:01:18 PM »

I bet there were more Firebabies sold than all the other CL ARF's put together. I know I did my part. Must have had at least 3 of them, maybe more. I think I vote for the Firebaby also.

dave siegler · « **Reply #35 on:** March 12, 2008, 02:05:26 PM »

Easy

Russian F2d. Fast, tough, cheap, very very well made. Fly is right into the ground. Only $50 flys very very well.

The most fun you can have for $50 in control line.
The ultimate ARF control line.

Oh did you stay stunter?

Joe Yau · « **Reply #36 on:** March 18, 2008, 10:06:16 AM »

Quote from: dave siegler on March 12, 2008, 02:05:26 PM

Easy

Russian F2d. Fast, tough, cheap, very very well made. Fly is right into the ground. Only $50 flys very very well.

The most fun you can have for $50 in control line.
The ultimate ARF control line.

Oh did you stay stunter?

I have to agree with Dave.. My first F2D combat ship RTF model is pretty much what it is. other then some minor mods to the engine mount and trim the CG. It was up in the air.. and its pretty much in the ballpark the first flight!

gary tultz · « **Reply #37 on:** March 24, 2008, 09:55:01 PM »

How hard would it be to convert a Euvenko (sp) F2D wing into aTOSASWKI type stunter?

I think they are $45 delivered and are super tough.

Ray · « **Reply #38 on:** March 25, 2008, 09:34:21 AM »

Offhand, I would imagine it would be the simplest of conversions.

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #39 on:** March 25, 2008, 06:10:24 PM »

Hi Guys,

I guess you could take an F2D plane and turn it into a TEOSAWKI. All you would have to do is change the wing area, wing span, airfoil, controls, add a new nose, tail, rudder, landing gear, and fuel system. After you have made these few simple changes, please call it something besides a TEOSAWKI. Or maybe you could see if you can get Clayton Smith to build you one. After all, it is his design.

Remember, all that wiggles is not Jello.

gary tultz · « **Reply #40 on:** March 25, 2008, 10:11:58 PM »

And I said TYPE. Not the exact plane. TYPE.

gary tultz · « **Reply #41 on:** March 26, 2008, 02:46:39 PM »

Oh Ty, I'm never offended by anything on a model plane site.Does any one know if we can reply "with quote" like on SSW? I can't seem to find it.

Dennis Moritz · « **Reply #42 on:** March 26, 2008, 04:22:34 PM »

I vote for Dan Banjok and Jack Weston. They were almost ready to fly last weekend.

Ray · « **Reply #43 on:** March 26, 2008, 05:50:58 PM »

Quote from: gary tultz on March 26, 2008, 02:46:39 PM

Oh Ty, I'm never offended by anything on a model plane site.Does any one know if we can reply "with quote" like on SSW? I can't seem to find it.

If it had been a snake, and this was the kind of bulletin board we used thumb tacks with in my college dorm, it would've bitten you. Right at the top right of the message you want to reply to is the word Quote.

gary tultz · « **Reply #44 on:** March 26, 2008, 09:56:48 PM »

Quote from: Ray on March 26, 2008, 05:50:58 PM

If it had been a snake, and this was the kind of bulletin board we used thumb tacks with in my college dorm, it would've bitten you. Right at the top right of the message you want to reply to is the word Quote. OUCH Thanks Ray
[/ quote]

gary tultz · « **Reply #45 on:** March 26, 2008, 10:01:08 PM »

Well, I'm illiterate .

I'll get it eventually.

Larry Renger · « **Reply #46 on:** March 28, 2008, 10:42:59 PM »

I will modestly (yeah, right!) put forth the C*x Me-109 for stunt, and the PT-19 (anyone know who designed it, I don't) as the ultimate trainer.

Yeah, yeah, I know plastic breaks, but the Knights of the Round Circle has trained literally hundreds of kids on the PT-19, and they are tough, keep flying with a tremendous amount of damage, and are instantly repairable with new parts (or were ...

) Rubber bands are cheap.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #47 on:** March 29, 2008, 09:00:19 AM »

I agree about the Cox PT-19, but, I wonder howmany AJ Aircraft Firebabies were sold? DOC Holliday

Bill Little · « **Reply #48 on:** April 03, 2008, 11:04:23 PM »

Quote from: gary tultz on March 26, 2008, 10:01:08 PM

Well, I'm illiterate . I'll get it eventually.

Hi Gary,

You just have to make sure you start *your* reply AFTER the [/quote] tag in the message you are quoting. Confused??

Bill <><

Rudy Taube · « **Reply #49 on:** April 05, 2008, 02:43:45 PM »

Hi Doc,

You asked:

"I agree about the Cox PT-19, but, I wonder howmany AJ Aircraft Firebabies were sold? DOC Holliday"

Here is a quote from the AJ web site:

"......The American Junior Aircraft Company turned out 232 million models during it's existence. A large step from that basement factory of a few years earlier....."

I know all these were not Firebabies, but many were and it gives us an idea how popular models were at the time. Mr. Walker was waaaaay ahead of his time by seeing the value of ARFs. :-)

This is a great site about our CL beginnings:

http://www.americanjuniorclassics.com/index.html

After reading the articles on this site you begin to see that Mr. Walker saw ARFs as the future of CL, and model aviation in general. I find it ironic that ARFs are bashed so vehemently by those very CL modelers who talk about the Walker trophy in such (well deserved) reverent terms. After you read Mr. Walkers words on this site you begin to think that he would be very disappointed to find out that ARFs are not allowed to compete for the important trophy that bears his name. I, for one, find this not only ironic, but a little sad too.

Like many retreads in CL today, my very 1st model was an ARF Firebaby my dad bought for me when I was around 7. If it were not for Mr. Walker providing my Dad and I with an ARF plane, I would have never got started in model flying. This little ARF started a life long love of aviation, and led me to a military and civilian career as a pilot. Anyone interested in the history of our little hobby may enjoy reading the information on the above site. The number of models sold, Firebabies, HL Gliders, etc. at the time are amazing. They were the computer games of our time, gone, but not forgotten! :-)

Regards

Author Topic: My vote for the two best ARF/RTF ever. (Read 7482 times)

Alan Hahn

Alan Hahn

Alan Hahn

Alan Hahn

Joejust

Willis Swindell