News:



  • May 08, 2024, 04:47:23 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Junker Score's  (Read 1677 times)

Offline Gary Anderson

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 729
Junker Score's
« on: December 06, 2009, 08:36:35 PM »
Hi guys,

Well, here the story:

My brother gave me a Score to put together. Personally I think the score is a great looking plane but has to many trim issues, just me. This was the third time I had it out to work on trim. I followed the instructions and everything seemed to be working out. The plane flew level, nice corners, good lap time. etc. etc.. On the second flight the engine left the plane. I don't think you should have to reinforce the main body of the plane. The firewall pulled off of the fuselage. The plane isn't hurt very much but man do ya think that the manufacture should be responsible for their glue joints???? The Tutor was a great plane and they stopped making that one and kepted the "SCORE". I'm sure most of ya disagree with me about the score but this is the third one in our area and they are junk. I coated the insides with epoxy glue to seal and to help hold things together. So if ya got one make darn sure that it will hold together, not fun watching a motor fly ac cross the field. Hey!!! I didn't even break the prop, just have parts to put back together. Have a great day and please check the lousy mounted firewall on the score, Gary
« Last Edit: December 06, 2009, 10:53:50 PM by Gary Anderson »
Gary Anderson

Offline Ed Prohaska

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2009, 11:01:24 PM »
What engine did you have in it? I've seen 5 of these fly locally. All were essentially stock, with a few minor changes. Three were powered with the LA .46 and two were converted to electric. So far I don't know of the firewall failing on any, but one of the "gassers" has seen lots of air time and is getting fuel soaked, so it could happen.

There have been a couple of magazine articles on the Score, where the builders have reworked the front end, in some cases considerably, to stand the forces of heavier and more powerful engines. I've been flying mine with a ST .60 the past season. Obviously the front end has been totally reworked. It added lots of weight, but I still need 2 ounces of nose weight to balance.

I have doubts about the stock firewall's ability to handle anything beyond a .46 (maybe a .51). If I used it, I'd probably peel the covering back 3 or 4 inches and glass the whole front end, then recover it. Of course the more mods you make to these things, the less of an ARF they become.

I've flown all but one of the local Scores. With the LA .46 they come in at 67 ounces, give or take a couple. In mild weather conditions and on 15% nitro, they seem to fly OK. With trimming and practice you can work up to a decent pattern. One of the electrics was upgraded to a much more powerful motor and is a handful (at least for me), but vibration is less and fuel soaking is never a problem.

Mine weights 5 pounds, but with a strong ST .60 it flies much better than you might expect for such a heavy model. Unfortunately, the ST .60 is a gas guzzler and under the new rules I must use .021" dia. lines.

In spite of it's shortcomings I see several pluses for the Score: the price is right, it's take-apart in stock form, it goes together quickly (if you can resist making lots of changes) and is a decent flier. If plans or a construction kit were available, it could be built into a very competitive plane.  Regards, EWP 


   

Offline Bob Reeves

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3415
    • Somethin'Xtra Inc.
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2009, 11:58:27 PM »
I think it was a fluke, maybe your Score was put together on a Friday. I flew a Score for two years in Advanced with a Saito 56 swinging a 13-7 prop. Finally had to quit flying it because it had gained 5 ounces from the covering coming loose and soaking up oil. It now belongs to another club member who has de oiled and refinished it. All I did was upgrade the controls.

Offline Matt Colan

  • N-756355
  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3454
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2009, 05:52:05 PM »
On Grandpa's Score, he replaced the whole front end with a crutch he made, so we never dealt with that, just the excessive weight in the design (refinshed and weighs 72 ounces)

Matt Colan

Offline Gary Anderson

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 729
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2009, 12:41:42 AM »
Hi guys,
Thank you for your input, I noticed most of ya have rebuild the front end. Which is a very smart thing to do. I didn't like the front end set up but I kicked it around and said, well what the heck its just an arf and if your not an expert builder most would follow the instructions. So, I did the stupid thing and followed the instructions. This is the third score I've fooled with, the first thing I learned was to remove all that darn engine offset. Throw away the control system, I had one that the control horn let go and guess what happens when you loose the control horn??? Alway install the proper hinges. The covering is a hand full to play with, don't know what they covered the score with but the product doesn't seen to be very friendly. I called up Tower today, not to complain about what happened to me but to warn them about the product. It made me mad to think I could have been tacking the engine and it could have come off at that time. Probably wouldn't be able to be writting this page if that occurred. They told me to send them the plane and they would replace the parts??? I said no, nothing was broke, it just came apart, bad glue joints, what ever.

I remove the fuselage from the plane and decided to build a different fuselage, old style, with motor mount, like the type set up you shown in the replies. I weighted the wing complete with flaps and covered, it weighs 19 ounces. Stab & elevator weights 4 ounces, tail section weights 1 ounce, the landing gear I'm using with wheels complete weights2 ounces. The engine I'm using weights 16 ounces complete with muffler. I think that leaves me with a few ounce for a fuse and still be okay weight wise. Have a great night, Gary
« Last Edit: December 08, 2009, 01:35:28 AM by Gary Anderson »
Gary Anderson

Offline Bob Reeves

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3415
    • Somethin'Xtra Inc.
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2009, 12:00:38 PM »
You guys that are rebuilding the Score nose and taking out the down and right thrust are making a big mistake. You think you are doing right but all you are really doing is waisting time you could be building something that is yours or flying. The RC mounts are fine and work. As I said above the firewall coming out was a defect with that individual airplane.

You don't even need to take my word for what I'm saying, search for Bob Whitely's article, "Things that always work,". Pretty sure he outlines what he believes in a post or two over on SSW. Whoever designed the Score knew exactly what he was doing even if Top Flights implementation is less than desirable the shortcomings like crappy controls are fairly easy to fix.

Offline Gary Anderson

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 729
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2009, 01:03:37 PM »
Hi Bob,

Thank you for your reply. I found bye making the R/C type mount adjustable, I could change the degree of offset. With the total engine offset my plane would pull like a truck at level flight and loose tension in the maneuvers. I removed all the engine offset, zero offset, and my plane has the same line tension in all the maneuvers. I reset the engine to half the offset that is build into the plane and found that it was starting to act the same as full offset. Yes!!! I believe you to be correct about mine being the only plane that has pulled the firewall off of the plane. I believe it was bad glue joints. I did coat the tank area and the front of the firewall with epoxy glue to seal and help the hot gun glue it looks like they use. I used the bellcrank that is in the plane, which is a 3" bellcrank and they work well. I set this one for full control. I used the stock control and if done correctly will work great. The plane was showing great promise, nice lap time, great response, flew level, no hunting, Hey!!! she only weighted 62 ounces complete. As you see bye my picture I installed fuselage landing gear, the wing landing gear works but I only fly off of grass and the fuselage landing gear seems to last longer, with me. My brother flew her and thought it was getting close to be trimmed out. Most believe this plane is to heavy, I feel she's in the ball park. My next step was to try somemore  flap area, just to see how she would react to it. The flap area is enough, just wanted to try. You're correct Bob, the only thing I would change is the engine offset. All you have to do is shave a little off one of the R/C mounts or install a leveling nut behind the out board side. Thank You, Gary
« Last Edit: December 08, 2009, 06:52:03 PM by Gary Anderson »
Gary Anderson

Offline Bill Heher

  • Fix-it
  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 941
  • I may not always BOM- but I do the re-builds!
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2009, 09:46:12 PM »
At the Chehalis WA Air Fair this past summer I saw a fairly new Score lose the firewall. I can't remember who was fling it, but on landing it bounced a couple times and the motor / firewall just fell out the front, and dangled by the fuel lines. It was not running, and the bounces were not that severe, the glue joints just failed, nice clean seperation with no real damage to the wood.

If I had one I would at minimum put some triangle stock on the inside corners and peg the firewall and fuse side to them with small dowells or tooth picks. 
Bill Heher
Central Florida and across the USA!
If it's broke Fix-it
If it ain't broke- let me see it for a minute AMA 264898- since 1988!

Offline Andrew Borgogna

  • Andy
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1188
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2009, 10:46:12 AM »
I tried to fly mine on an ST 51 per the kit recommendations.  I gave up, it just did not have enough power for days when the wind was even mild.  So I installed a O/S LA .65 which I modified by removing the R/C carb and replacing it with the big venturi from my EVO .36.  Equipped with ta 12x5 (still experimenting with props) it flies very nice.  Well let me say I can now improve my skills which is why I got it in the first place.  I didn't modify the front end except to widen the mounts to accept the .65.  I did have to add a couple of ounces of lead to the tail for balance, but my all up weight is around 58ozs. and it pulls through the wing over with no problem.

I had quite a bit of experience with the R/C type engine mounts during my years with R/C and they seem to work great.  Never had one fail on me, I will keep an eye on this one and hope for the best.
Andy Borgogna
Andrew B. Borgogna

Offline Gary Anderson

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 729
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #9 on: December 12, 2009, 12:28:18 AM »
Hi Andy,

The R/C type mounts are great, that isn't the problem. The problem is the structure that the R/C mount is attached to. Please for your safety, reattach something to hold the firewall in place. After thinking about what could have happen, I feel I needed to inform everyone that has this plane. The one I had the firewall glue joints failed. I could have been tacking the engine when this happened and probably wouldn't be able to write about what occurred. I can't stress it enough, PLEASE re-engineer the firewall. Gary
Gary Anderson

Offline john e. holliday

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22776
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #10 on: December 12, 2009, 09:39:38 AM »
The first Score I seen was after it had been put back together.  Seems the link on the pushrod was stripping the threads.  Once the pilot realized there was a problem he leveled off.  When the engine quit and he set it down, grass field,  the nose fell off right at the leading edge of the wing.  I got to fly it after it was fixed.  Great flying plane and I almost bought one.  By the way the controls were upgraded to a better system.
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Offline Mike Scholtes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1192
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #11 on: December 12, 2009, 11:03:15 AM »
I have had a Score since they first came out. I did beef up the firewall during initial construction by adding triangular bracing inside the tank area to tie the firewall to the ply fuse sides at that critical joint. I sanded away as much of the hot glue as possible to get a good gluing surface. I am using the stock motor mounts. Of course replaced all controls (bellcrank, leadouts, pushrods) to an all ball joint system. I flew it at first with a modified ST51 that was adequate power. For the last year it has had an Enya 61CXS Pro, which is more than plenty of power. Mejzlik 12.5 x 5.2 3-blade prop. No problems of anything coming apart. I did add a metal plate to tie the front of the wing saddle to the fuse at the rear of the tank compartment, which stiffens the whole thing substantially. I don't like the wiggle that is present if just relying on wooden dowels in the LE. Torsion loads are now carried by the bottom as well as top of fuse. Easy to do.

Offline Joe Yau

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 749
    • My CLPA Channel
Re: Junker Score's
« Reply #12 on: December 12, 2009, 08:07:18 PM »
I was wondering about that when I was putting mine together..  I have a Saito .56 with a Eather 12.5 x 6.5 3-blade on it.   It flys great, and turn a nice corner.  so far I had about 30-40 flights, and seems o.k. But I will definitely check before my next flight. 


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here