Author Topic: Paul Walker Flying Art (Read 11693 times)

jose modesto · « **on:** February 24, 2010, 12:38:41 PM »

Paul Walker From 1985 to 2006 Championship flying Art.
Photo #1 1985 BAD NEWS
Photo #2 1985 BAD NEWS
Photo#3 1991 IMPACT
Photo #4 1990 IMPACT the start of the run. Unbeatable.
Has anyone Beaten Paul Walker at the Nat's 1990 to 2006 while flying an Gas Powered IMPACT. Orestes beat him when Paul flew the Electric Impact.
Did David, Bret,Fancher,Orestes,or Baron ever beat him at the Nat's? I missed Attending the Nat's in the Mid 1990's so my records are incomplete.
with his record is Paul the Greatest National champion?

Jose Modesto

jose modesto · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2010, 12:58:16 PM »

Additional Photos

Shultzie · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2010, 03:16:48 PM »

WOW!
ARE THESE RARE PHOTO OF WALKERS ROUTE THROUGH HISTORY...GREAT STUFF..THANKS FOR SHARING!
Jose...
U NEED TO DROP BY PAUL WALKERS AMAZING MANCAVE MUSEUM AND SEE SOME OF THESE MODELS THAT ARE STACKED LIKE SO MUCH CHORDWOOD..ON SUCH A WINNERS-WINTER'S DAY!

Howard Rush · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2010, 01:44:28 AM »

The airplane in the third picture down (with the Walker trophy) is the same one that's in the pictures 5, 6, and 8. I prefer the original paint job.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2010, 11:09:27 AM »

Howard,

Me, too.

jose modesto · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2010, 02:30:34 PM »

This is my favorite of the IMPACT"S
1992 Nat's this model was flown very close to perfect. The Impact flew in varied conditions from cold,rain and wind, with a motor run do die for.First year for the Fancher "Trivial Persuit"
Photo#1 INPACT 1992
Photo#2 Trivial Persuit

Howard Rush · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2010, 03:15:51 PM »

If that is the airplane I think it is, it has the distinction of never having lost a contest, and that includes some team trials, a Nats or two, and a World Championships.

Matt Colan · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2010, 03:56:53 PM »

Quote from: Howard Rush on February 25, 2010, 03:15:51 PM

If that is the airplane I think it is, it has the distinction of never having lost a contest, and that includes some team trials, a Nats or two, and a World Championships.

WOW

That is some record (emphasis on the WOW)!!

jose modesto · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2010, 04:18:21 PM »

Howard the photo was taken at the 1992 word championship
Photo of USA Team
Hun'ts SATURN Werwage Junar
(photo from Kaz Minato site)
Jose Modesto

jose modesto · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2010, 09:36:47 PM »

Walker and "THE BOMBER
1998 Impact
Jose Modesto

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #10 on:** February 27, 2010, 02:53:30 PM »

There's still no news like "Bad News"!

Randy Powell · « **Reply #11 on:** February 27, 2010, 11:43:45 PM »

I always like the pink and chartreuse Impact. Man, did that sucker fly. And showed up well against stormy skies.

Paul Walker · « **Reply #12 on:** March 09, 2010, 12:56:33 PM »

Quote from: Howard Rush on February 25, 2010, 03:15:51 PM

If that is the airplane I think it is, it has the distinction of never having lost a contest, and that includes some team trials, a Nats or two, and a World Championships.

OK, let's get this right.
It won.....
Nats...92,93,94
Team Trials 95
World Champs 92

and assorted other local and regional contests.

Howard is right.....It never came in anywhere other than 1st in any competition it entered!

Paul Walker · « **Reply #13 on:** March 09, 2010, 12:58:57 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on February 27, 2010, 11:43:45 PM

I always like the pink and chartreuse Impact. Man, did that sucker fly. And showed up well against stormy skies.

Yes it DID fly....And still does..

However, the faded yellow was SO bad it turned my stomach every time I flew it. I HAD to change it.

Paul Walker · « **Reply #14 on:** March 09, 2010, 01:07:25 PM »

Quote from: jose modesto on February 25, 2010, 09:36:47 PM

Walker and "THE BOMBER
1998 Impact
Jose Modesto

And yes, the last Mustang shown was clearly the best. It was a Saito 72 powered one, and weighed 62 ounces. The power to weight was simply amazing.
The hardest maneuver to do right was the takeoff. If I relaxed for a fraction of a second, it was in the air. I had to really work to get it to roll even five feet. It was at cruise speed almost instantaneously after release.
It was really good flying plane even in the very last hourglass it did, where it self destructed. I was never able to determine why. That was 2 days before the opening of the 2004 World Champs in Muncie. It was REALLY hard to get out my backup Mustang.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #15 on:** March 11, 2010, 02:53:08 PM »

Paul,

Wasn't that Pink and greenish/yellow Impact done with the day-glo colors and was supposed to be red and yellow?

Paul Walker · « **Reply #16 on:** March 11, 2010, 05:20:41 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on March 11, 2010, 02:53:08 PM

Paul,

Wasn't that Pink and greenish/yellow Impact done with the day-glo colors and was supposed to be red and yellow?

It originally was pink and yellow.....Bright yellow.....Until it faded....Into that ugly char yuch truse color...

Randy Powell · « **Reply #17 on:** March 13, 2010, 12:12:15 PM »

Since we are looking at Paul's creations, here's a blast from the past (found in a shoe box of pictures)

Paul Walker · « **Reply #18 on:** March 15, 2010, 12:52:32 PM »

This is the plane that preceded the "Bad News", sort of....
I flew this plane at the 1981 Nats. It did OK. 1st top 10 finish!
I then built a new and lighter plane for the '82 Nats. Same design, but it weighed 52 ounces!

I managed to loose it a few weeks prior to the Nats. A frayed cable in the handle caused it to go in on asphalt. Now much left, except the wing spar (and that's another story).
Just prior to leaving, our moderator (Don Shultz) insisted on inking on the man on the wing watching his plane break a line and PENETRATE the ground. The caption said "Bad News"!!!

That name stuck, and the next year the Bad News was created. It took some of the lines of the FE, however, I switched back to a swept back 1/4 chord to get a straight hinge line. The first year out with the Bad News I came in 2nd. And, it was off to the races from there....All from a crashed FE (not the one pictures) just before the Nats.

Thanks again for the great art work Don!

Paul

Matt Colan · « **Reply #19 on:** March 15, 2010, 01:39:17 PM »

Paul, how did you make the B-17 fly, and what drove you to build something so big?!?

Shultzie · « **Reply #20 on:** March 15, 2010, 03:36:33 PM »

Quote from: Paul Walker on March 15, 2010, 12:52:32 PM

This is the plane that preceded the "Bad News", sort of....
I flew this plane at the 1981 Nats. It did OK. 1st top 10 finish!
I then built a new and lighter plane for the '82 Nats. Same design, but it weighed 52 ounces!

I managed to loose it a few weeks prior to the Nats. A frayed cable in the handle caused it to go in on asphalt. Now much left, except the wing spar (and that's another story).
Just prior to leaving, our moderator (Don Shultz) insisted on inking on the man on the wing watching his plane break a line and PENETRATE the ground. The caption said "Bad News"!!!
That name stuck, and the next year the Bad News was created. It took some of the lines of the FE, however, I switched back to a swept back 1/4 chord to get a straight hinge line. The first year out with the Bad News I came in 2nd. And, it was off to the races from there....All from a crashed FE (not the one pictures) just before the Nats.

Thanks again for the great art work Don!

Paul

Paul!!!

What a BAD thing to do, right after my brotha'in balsa...picked up all those teenie..confetti-like pieces that looked kindva'like an aftermat' of a PILLOW FIGHT!...off the parking lot.
I remember seeing little pieces for weeks after that horrific stuffed master Sky CLPA art work of yours.EVEN BADDER'NDAT!!!

Thinking back...what a terrible way to treat a good friend n brotha'----

What kind of DEVIL

INSIDE would make me.... suddenly, without fore thought...reach over and grab that marking pen out of Jim Parson shirt pocket and then proceed to DOODLE SUCH AN EVIL IMAGE.......with scrawled graff-n-graaaaaafeedeee' BADNEWS that had just moments before been one of the most beautiful stunt models I had ever seen... suddenly turn itself into shards, bits n pieces.

Again...even after all these years....Please accept my DEEPEST CONDOLENCES?

Yes, that BAD NEWS the following year was an awesome lookin and flyin CLPA model!

WERE WE ENVUS...HELL YES!!!

Paul Walker · « **Reply #21 on:** March 16, 2010, 12:59:31 PM »

Quote from: Matt Colan on March 15, 2010, 01:39:17 PM

Paul, how did you make the B-17 fly, and what drove you to build something so big?!?

Big.....That was driven by the choice of 4 .15's to drive it. I didn't want anything smaller in a motor, and at the time .61 was the limit. So 4 15's worked. Then it was a matter of determining how much engine, muffler, prop tank etc equipment would be on board, and worked backwards into a size that would give me what i thought was an acceptable wing loading. I also could not exceed the maximum weight limit.

At first I was concerned about what would happen if just one engine were left running. That never proved to be a problem. I would "easily" fly on a single engine. It might have felt like a real B-17 on one engine though! Just enough to keep it in the air, and nothing more. I can tell you that loosing the 3 inboard engines in an overhead eight is fatal though. That happened to the first one, and reduced it to splinters. A new wing was built and added to the rebuilt fuselage. It still exists today.

The second one flew better and is the one most probably remember. That's the one I took to the WC's, and is the one pictured above. I thought it might be interesting to get both of them in the air at one time for "fun". I would need a real crew of helpers to get that done. Maybe a retirement project, and an opportunity for a video!

I built them when I did because I knew my time for doing this may not be too long. It pulls fairly hard for 7 minutes. Bask them, I could only do 3 flights a day reliably. Otherwise muscle problems arose. That's what happened on the semi-finals day of the Nats it flew in. I flew it too much and I got cramps in mu fore arm during the hourglass. I missed the finals by just a few points, and those were clearly given up in the last 3 maneuvers.

I did it just because I always wanted to. I had achieved all of my competition goals by that time, and this is one thing I always wanted to do.....So I did it.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #22 on:** March 24, 2010, 11:42:58 AM »

Yea, Paul now has a longer right arm than left.

I will note that the first time I saw the B-17 fly at the old Boeing West Parking Lot, I was standing directly downwind right on the edge of the circle. Watching the thing come straight at me and pull a tight corner into inverted flight was definitely one of those WOW moments.

Paul, I remember the original Bad News. The first one. Do you have any pictures of it?

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #23 on:** March 24, 2010, 10:32:42 PM »

Paul,

How about a B-29 now with 4 FP .20's! The only problem is you would have to graft on a new arm every time you flew it!

Jim Pollock

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #24 on:** March 25, 2010, 05:53:48 PM »

Has there been any pictures or an artical on the build of the B-17 published .

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #25 on:** March 25, 2010, 10:21:16 PM »

Matt,

There have been articles about certain aspects of the build but nothing definitive with plans and such.
I still think a B29 would be great! But, I guess Paul would have to power it with .09's to keep it from pulling his arm out of it's socket......

Jim Pollock

Scott B. Riese · « **Reply #26 on:** March 25, 2010, 11:36:38 PM »

OK..B-36....

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #27 on:** March 25, 2010, 11:39:06 PM »

RIGHT. I figured a Lancaster , with its 10 ; 1 Aspect Ratio wing would want to be 100 in. + span for four .20s ,

So a B-29 (or B-24 ) at 78 in span , would be right with four .10s .

I still maintain it was the B-17 that caused certain neuotic cretins in the FAI to ' create ' the 10 G pull test and 78 in (2 Metre)
span limit .

Cowards !

Flying in wind a week or two back , the line tension down wind was more than the pull test .

Howard Rush · « **Reply #28 on:** March 26, 2010, 01:43:09 AM »

PJ Rowland built a Lancaster. It was impressive.

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #29 on:** March 26, 2010, 05:14:51 PM »

Ive seen pictures of that Lancaster, it was pretty cool
didnt he have to rework the tips to make it meet the maximum wingspan rule or something, seem to remember reading about that somewhere,, hmmm

john e. holliday · « **Reply #30 on:** March 26, 2010, 08:50:34 PM »

According to Barton site, the Lancaster had a wingspan of 84 inches. Weight was 110 ounces empty(no fuel). Wing area 1150 sq. in. I think during flying he gain some weight which put him over. Don't take my word for it tho.

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #31 on:** March 26, 2010, 11:09:42 PM »

Perhaps that is what my paint fumed brain is trying to recall,,, hmmm

Bradley Walker · « **Reply #32 on:** April 01, 2010, 08:51:13 AM »

Paul's planes are indeed ART.

Absolutely incredible in person, even blows away the pictures.

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #33 on:** April 03, 2010, 03:47:35 PM »

Scott,

The B-36 is not a Boeing Airplane!

Jim Pollock , Anyone for a Boeing F-35? When I worked on the Comanche project we had to scheduled the Radar Range when they didn't have it using it on the F-35.

Jim Pollock

Ron Duly · « **Reply #34 on:** April 10, 2010, 10:27:19 PM »

Boeing F-35? Guess Lockheed had nothing to do with it? Boing-Boing's design (X-32) won the world's ugliest plane contest. Lockheed's F-35 design looked right, flew right and won - right?

Paul Walker · « **Reply #35 on:** April 12, 2010, 01:13:32 PM »

Quote from: Ron Duly on April 10, 2010, 10:27:19 PM

Boeing F-35? Guess Lockheed had nothing to do with it? Boing-Boing's design (X-32) won the world's ugliest plane contest. Lockheed's F-35 design looked right, flew right and won - right?

Looked right?

??

They both looked like crap. The last plane to have any LOOK was the YF23. That's the one that looked great, yet lost the competition because of a minor design flaw. Too bad it didn't make it into production.

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #36 on:** April 13, 2010, 09:51:03 PM »

Paul,

I know it was faster than the F-22, was the minor design flaw the fact it didn't have steerable jet exhausts?

Jim Pollock

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #37 on:** April 19, 2010, 09:36:38 PM »

Gee,

NO answer, I know it's not time to be driving out to the Nats yet, soooo, maybe I struck a nerve somewhere?

Jim Pollock,

Paul Walker · « **Reply #38 on:** April 22, 2010, 12:58:42 PM »

Quote from: Jim Pollock on April 19, 2010, 09:36:38 PM

Gee,

NO answer, I know it's not time to be driving out to the Nats yet, soooo, maybe I struck a nerve somewhere?

Jim Pollock,

No, and no. There were issues with one of its "performance" parameters. Kind of defeated the purpose of what it was designed to do.

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #39 on:** April 22, 2010, 08:33:39 PM »

Oh,

Yeah, those issues about performance get to be mind boggling sometimes. Not good if it defeats the reason it was designed in the first place.........

Jim Pollock

Randy Powell · « **Reply #40 on:** April 23, 2010, 02:23:02 PM »

And I'll say that Paul's latest plane is pretty impressive.

The This and That (or Impact if you insist). Very neat plane in the air. Weighs under 62oz and it has to have 25oz of that in drive train. A feat of building if ever there was one.

Congrats on that new plane, Paul. It is very cool.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #41 on:** April 24, 2010, 08:23:15 AM »

I would imagine with electric you can sacrifice strength in some areas. Would love to see it in person.

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #42 on:** April 24, 2010, 09:19:33 PM »

John
I dont think you can sacrifice any strength , the airframe still feels the same loads as a glow one excepting vibration. So I think what you can eliminate is some of the mass that is used to dampen vibration, things like maple motor mounts, and crutch. you can use lighter bulkheads in the nose. Basically just eliminating the structure that is there to control vibration,, of course then you need to pray you don't nick a prop tip and have an out of balance run,,

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #43 on:** April 25, 2010, 02:29:10 AM »

So thats NOT a modified Nobler , then. Paul . ?

Shultzie · « **Reply #44 on:** April 25, 2010, 10:12:36 AM »

Quote from: Matthew Spencer on April 25, 2010, 02:29:10 AM

So thats NOT a modified Nobler , then. Paul . ?

WHAT??? ISN'T EVERYTHING WE SEE TODAY...JUST A MODIFIED NOBLER? Just razzzzzin?

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #45 on:** April 26, 2010, 10:40:57 AM »

Shultzie,

Actually, in spite of you Boeing history, every airliner is a modified DC-3!

Paul Walker · « **Reply #46 on:** April 26, 2010, 01:05:44 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on April 23, 2010, 02:23:02 PM

And I'll say that Paul's latest plane is pretty impressive.

The This and That (or Impact if you insist). Very neat plane in the air. Weighs under 62oz and it has to have 25oz of that in drive train. A feat of building if ever there was one.

Congrats on that new plane, Paul. It is very cool.

I spent some time with it this past weekend. At the Portland contest, it had all of 16 flights on it.

I made some trim changes, and every change improved its flying characteristics. New design translates to many, many flights to get the trim set in an optimal position. It feels 20 points better now than it did last weekend. Better tracking, tighter corners, with better "stop" on the corner. Flew through the crappy Arlington still air MUCH better than any electric I have flown to date. I am anxious to work more with it. Now, if I could just get the spare time.

Next year at this time my private flying field will be ready. I can hardly wait!

Randy Powell · « **Reply #47 on:** April 26, 2010, 02:09:28 PM »

>>Next year at this time my private flying field will be ready. I can hardly wait!<<

Yea, but you'll be in Deer Park! Sigh...

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #48 on:** April 26, 2010, 06:47:11 PM »

Yes! He will be in Deer Park,, thats really close,, well reletivly close, to another guy I know who has flown some electric, and wants to progress his flying skill,, hmm maybe"?

Shultzie · « **Reply #49 on:** April 26, 2010, 08:37:02 PM »

Quote from: Mark Scarborough on April 26, 2010, 06:47:11 PM

Yes! He will be in Deer Park,, thats really close,, well reletivly close, to another guy I know who has flown some electric, and wants to progress his flying skill,, hmm maybe"?

Yes! With his neigbor Joe Dill...and knowing Joe's amazing talent for building and flying....and with a flying circle right outside their ajoining properties...LOOK OUT! Joe will take to Electrics like a Yellar rubba-ducky does ta' wata!