Author Topic: BUILDING THE STILETTO 660 LASER CUT BY WALTER (Read 23138 times)

Rafael Gonzalez · « **on:** January 12, 2011, 05:37:49 PM »

Hello Coaches,
Let me just start by saying that the last stunt ship I built was the Gieseke Nobler in 1978-79. I got the bug back for C/L after many years of R/C flying in 2008. My friend Jim Carpenter "poisoned" me with one of his infamous "Yankee Nipper" slow combat ships.Lacking the time to build, as many of us do, bought many R/C and lately C/L ARF's. Flew a few combat events a couple of years back but the equipment was too old and gummed. New things, new technology and outstanding engines are plentiful now for almost any application. The best part is that it won't break your wallet (Well, almost). Now the questions:
I have acquired a Stiletto 660 from eBay. It arrived 4 weeks ago. I was in shock at the laser cutting accuracy (first built up that I open!) The things almost fall out of the balsa! No more crushing like a splintered 2x4. Heard many comments about the laser cutting but did not believe it. I have 90% of the control surfaces built. Fuselage stage in progress.
I know I have a lot of questions, please bear with me. I always search before I ask.
1.- What is the best approach to put the 660 together. a) Assemble the wings/elev, etc. and cover with primary coats, then, put together as an ARF with the trim and final coats after or; b)assemble all before covering ( Obviously, minus the moving surfaces) From experience, I see that the fuse and wing can line up really nice with the flat top fuse an an incidence meter before the fuse is topped with the canopy, etc.

2.- I will have a ~13 oz. w/muff engine to install. I can not find the approx. weight it should be. Plain or with the engine.
3.- What covering is lighter with a decent finish? I know this part can be heavy with some folks that want the ultimate drooling finish. I am not there yet. SLC with silkspan (I've used both, not together), The NELSON coverings (never used), Polyspan(never used), anything else?
Any improvements on the kit?
Your input will be very appreciated by the "new guy"!
Regards,

Rafael

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #1 on:** January 12, 2011, 07:21:04 PM »

Rafeal,
I have used polyspan, I think your stilleto is an I beam wing? if so, then the normal way is to build it as part of the fuse, if it is an Ibeam, then polyspan may not be the best option, I would reccomend silkspan and dope. If its a D tube, then polyspan and dope would work fine and you can build and cover the wing before assembly into the fuse. I think its kind of a personal preference thing.
Polyspan is somewhat elastic in that it does not contribute a lot to torsional rigidity,, in MY experience. Hence the silkspan on an Ibeam.
Hope this helps,,
as to weight,, what I do is to add all the fixed weights I know, find the overall projected weight and subtract the fixed weight, ( motor, fuel tank, landing gear and controls) then you can begin to look at how much each part weighs.
Is this a Walter Umland kit?

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #2 on:** January 12, 2011, 08:11:25 PM »

Quote from: Mark Scarborough on January 12, 2011, 07:21:04 PM

Rafeal,
I have used polyspan, I think your stilleto is an I beam wing? if so, then the normal way is to build it as part of the fuse, if it is an Ibeam, then polyspan may not be the best option, I would reccomend silkspan and dope. If its a D tube, then polyspan and dope would work fine and you can build and cover the wing before assembly into the fuse. I think its kind of a personal preference thing.
Polyspan is somewhat elastic in that it does not contribute a lot to torsional rigidity,, in MY experience. Hence the silkspan on an Ibeam.
Hope this helps,,
as to weight,, what I do is to add all the fixed weights I know, find the overall projected weight and subtract the fixed weight, ( motor, fuel tank, landing gear and controls) then you can begin to look at how much each part weighs.
Is this a Walter Umland kit?

Thank you. It is a D tube with webbing on the spars and on the trailing edge and obviously, capstrips. I made the capstrips a little wider (1/4 in.)than the supplied ones I hate sagging on the covering between ribs. It is a Walter Umland. I've set it with Morris stuff (laminated prebuilt bell, horns, central hobbies pushroods, etc.) I've sort of caught up with the times. Between the web and this place I've absorbed a lot! Many things have changed in the last 20 or so years! I always loved the Stiletto. I used to go to the hobby shop Les worked at in Miami. It was Orange Blossom Hobbies on SW 27th. Saw him fly at the Nats in Chicoppe, MA. Did not get to talk as I was back and forth between Carrier, Combat, and the wife. The kit was kitted by the same people that kitted the Nemesis II, I believe it was M&P. Built over 50 Nemesis IIs! I may be totally wrong, it was a long time ago. I was dying to go to the King Orange Internationals, but never made it. It was the dawn of electric R/C cars and I was heavy into them. This website along with the folks in here, bring back a lot of memories...
I have looked at the instructions for Polyspan. It sounds very touchy. I have never worked with it and do not know anyone around here (MA) but it sounds like the old Coverite? maybe lighter?
I would hate to screw it up on the Stiletto but I am leaning to Poly... I've worked with the SLC covering (Yankee Nipper combat foamies) and it is much better than the old Mica film. And of course silkspan. But putting them together is another story.

Thanks for the input

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2011, 08:31:01 AM »

Rafael,
I just finished building one of the Umland Stiletto kits for someone else. The model will have a Stalker 51RE in it and weighs 55 oz. Les McDonald told me in letter that his weighed in the 54 oz neighborhood. The kit is really nice but is over-engineered so that it can be built as a take apart model. There is way too much plywood used in the construction and no matter how light the balsa is it would come out overweight by using all that plywood. Be careful and use only enough plywood in the areas that actually need the strength. This was the first kit I have built in about 40 years and have to admit that laser cut kits are outstanding especially Walter's.
Here are a couple of pictures of the model nearing completion.
Alan Resinger

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #4 on:** January 19, 2011, 06:37:06 AM »

Quote from: Alan Resinger on January 17, 2011, 08:31:01 AM

Rafael,
I just finished building one of the Umland Stiletto kits for someone else. The model will have a Stalker 51RE in it and weighs 55 oz. Les McDonald told me in letter that his weighed in the 54 oz neighborhood. The kit is really nice but is over-engineered so that it can be built as a take apart model. There is way too much plywood used in the construction and no matter how light the balsa is it would come out overweight by using all that plywood. Be careful and use only enough plywood in the areas that actually need the strength. This was the first kit I have built in about 40 years and have to admit that laser cut kits are outstanding especially Walter's.
Here are a couple of pictures of the model nearing completion.
Alan Resinger

Holy Cow!!! What a beautiful ship. I only hope that mine comes 1/8 as good as yours. Yes, I am planning to exclude the take apart components. I do not like full ball links as they are not really secured from detaching. What did you use for paint and covering? Did you assembled as an ARF (build major parts and then assemble) or as a structural system (cover last)?

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #5 on:** January 20, 2011, 09:09:20 AM »

Rafael,
The wing and tail were built up, covered and finished up to the point of final color before assembly. Large sheeted areas were covered in carbon veil and open bay areas covered in medium weight silkspan. Finish is Randolph clear and Brodak colors.If you think ball links can come detached you are doing something wrong. Controls are Tom Morris components with adjustable elevator horn and adjustable pushrod length.
Alan

Les McDonald · « **Reply #6 on:** January 20, 2011, 10:37:50 AM »

Rafael,
Do yourself a big favor and listen to what Alan is telling you.
The days of sealed up controls are gone. The ability to adjust pushrod length and elevator travel are essential.
If you don't make your plane adjustable I can see a thread here in the future that goes something like--- "I want my 660 to turn tighter" and you are going to be very disappointed when the first post replies--- "Recheck the CG and if it's okay add a bit more elevator travel"!
The hardware available now is high quality and dead reliable so do a little research and buy some stuff that suits your taste.

Les McDonald

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2011, 06:24:21 AM »

Thank you so much Les, Alan!

I did not write it correctly. I meant to say that I will skip the removable wing, landing gear and tail wheel. Those will be fixed. I forgot about the removable hatch for the elevator adjustments! That is being added per the plans. It is taking a little while to put the fuse together as I am not familiar with the staging of the turtle deck and all I have is the plans. Finally, figured it out after an hour or so. I do not know if there were some photos with it. I bought the kit on ebay and that is the only way I could have afforded it. I am very happy with the result. Nothing was missing. I am already saving/planning to build a 2nd model as it is usually always better than the first. Will follow any suggestions for a good ship/model. I truly appreciate it.
Best regards,

Rafael

Les McDonald · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2011, 08:01:50 AM »

Rafael,
The turtle deck on the Stilettos has always been a unique focal point, however it also makes the entire fuselage very rigid.
Best of luck with your project.
Les McDonald

john e. holliday · « **Reply #9 on:** January 22, 2011, 08:13:07 AM »

If you want to verify that everything is in the kit, go to Walters site. Clck on the kit name. www dot builtrightflyright dot com Guess he didn't have a construction series on this one. Lot of good stuff on his site also.

Bill Little · « **Reply #10 on:** February 02, 2011, 02:19:36 PM »

Quote from: Les McDonald on January 21, 2011, 08:01:50 AM

Rafael,
The turtle deck on the Stilettos has always been a unique focal point, however it also makes the entire fuselage very rigid.
Best of luck with your project.
Les McDonald

Hi Les,

First of all, THANK YOU for all the help over the years.

Now then, where did those plans come from with all the "mm" call outs for the balsa?

Bill

Les McDonald · « **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2011, 06:45:28 PM »

Hey Bill,
The 1978/1979 Aeromodeller Annual had a little info and drawings for the Stiletto and Bob Hunts World Championship Genesis.

Les

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2011, 10:16:20 PM »

Hey Les - I had a Stiletto years ago. In 1989. I painted it a horid Dark green with Red trim.. Looked like baby sick.. Flew great though coming from a " Stardust " .. That stilletto Crashed when the Tank flew out half way through the flight and I commenced the overhead 8 instand engine stopped = Instant Peices bear in mind I was only 10 years old!

You would have been ashamed and embarresed to see that paint scheme representing your fine W/c design.

Bill Little · « **Reply #13 on:** February 03, 2011, 07:49:49 PM »

Quote from: Les McDonald on February 02, 2011, 06:45:28 PM

Hey Bill,
The 1978/1979 Aeromodeller Annual had a little info and drawings for the Stiletto and Bob Hunts World Championship Genesis.

Les

Thanks, Les.

I cannot ever get use to the way the British stuff goes. I'm still trying to figure out how big "14 SWG" wire is!

Bill

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #14 on:** February 13, 2011, 08:40:06 PM »

This aircraft is taking every micron of knowledge that I have (a pinhead) What an engineering accomplishment and design! I've searched the web for photos of this beauty, but they are very limited and far apart. Everytime I discover a new one, I marvel at the beauty of the finish and the aircraft lines. I do not know if it is just me, but I believe this has to be the design of all times with the turtle deck. If anyone has any hints how to best assemble the components, please let me know. I have the wing, stab/elevator, lucky boxes (added 1/2 in. in span and blended accordingly), built the fuse minus the bottom wing saddle and turtle deck. Should I:
1 add wing w/flaps, saddle and elevator, connect controls
2 connect the saddle to fuse and add wing w/o flaps after, then elevator and controls
3 connect saddle to wing w/flaps and then match to fuse, etc.
I am planning the turtle deck last or should I add at any particular step?

I am at 41 oz. without covering and flaps. Tank, engine w/muff, wheels, landing gear and controls are included. Engine is going to be an AVIASTAR 60 modified from Brodacks. Tank 7 0z. I am planning white ultracote with Krylon plastic paint for navy blue L.E. detail. Tested paint already. IT STICKS!!!!

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #15 on:** February 14, 2011, 06:19:31 AM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on February 13, 2011, 09:05:24 PM

I would do number 3. I almost always cover my wings before installing them. That way I can overlap the covering in the middle and add some strength there. Paint the flaps seperately, then install them. Same for elevators. Once the wing is in and the thrust line and incidence of the wing are at zero, I install the stab, zero it too, then install all controls, make very sure they are almost sloppy free. NO binding of any type. If there is find it now and correct it. Never assume it will wear into a free set. Never happens. Guess how learned this tid bit???. Then add the bottom sheeting, flip it over and do the top. The top is easier than it looks. The instructions should be clear on this.

Thank you Ty. But the kit has no instructions... only small schematics on the plan for building some features of the kit.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #16 on:** February 15, 2011, 05:42:36 PM »

Don't give Walter too much flak. The Stilletto is one kit that should be built after numerous other kits. I am surprised he didn't put the instructions in the kit.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #17 on:** February 16, 2011, 08:47:50 PM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on February 15, 2011, 05:42:36 PM

Don't give Walter too much flak. The Stiletto is one kit that should be built after numerous other kits. I am surprised he didn't put the instructions in the kit.

Numerous?

How many? Do you mean numerous Stilettos?

I know the second one will come out much better than the first. While many ARFs are in that price range, it is not the same as when you build it yourself. However, the allotted time is the most expensive part of the project...

I won't say anything about any instructions to Walter. The kit is a magnificent pack as is. It just takes a while to figure out/plan the best way to assemble it. Any suggestions or hints are very appreciated. As I've been digging info on this and other sites, I am trimming some of the changes in.

Best,

Rafael

Dick Pacini · « **Reply #18 on:** February 16, 2011, 09:38:21 PM »

I have a Stiletto 660 from Walter, still in the box. I spoke to him prior to purchase and I asked about instructions. He said it was a "builder's kit" and it was advertised that way. No instructions, since most buyers would be experienced builders.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2011, 04:02:17 PM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on February 18, 2011, 07:30:12 AM

On the good side, there are numerous call outs on the plans. I'm half done with my wing. The only problem is the little "feet" or bottom tabs keep breaking off. I guess a lighter touch may help.

I don't feel so bad now... I don't think there was one without Scotch tape on...

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #20 on:** February 20, 2011, 01:42:43 PM »

This is what i ran into with the wing, Ty (i hope is not too late)
1 Wing is a double taper, so MAKE SURE THAT WHEN IT IS UPSIDE DOWN, YOU BRING UP THE TIPS THE SAME AMOUNT OF TAPER. To make it true, I built everything that I could glue while using the rib tabs. Top spar, rib webs, leading/trailing, sheeting, etc. when I could not glue anything else, I turned it upside down. Pinned the trailing edge flat on the board and tapered the wing tips the same amount. Then, I glued the rest of the stuff, trailing webs, sheeting, etc. Not using the wing as removable, so I added a little extra on the landing gear ribs.
From experience, I rounded the leading edge quite a bit more than the plans showed. Since it became quite thin, I reinforced it with silkspan and Sig glue. Then I used a little dope. It is very strong now.
2 I am planing to set the wing without the bottom saddle cover. I believe that once I set the controls and the wing/stab, I'll be able to match the saddle cover better to the bottom fuse.
3 The wings/stab will be aligned with the fuse resting on the top, against the flat surface. Since the top is flat, it is perfect to use the incidence meter and square everything.
I forgot the blocks for the landing gear wire ends (into the wing wire) so I had to cut the 2 rib webs to install them. I did not see them until I looked for other parts in the bag.
Had to make the tail wheel wire as it was not in the box. (bought at Ebay, so I am not surprised)
I have the laser cut top spline. the sides fit right into the slots. Finally got that figured out!

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #21 on:** March 01, 2011, 03:30:18 PM »

Well Ty,

That is much better than mine. With the Tom Morris aluminum bell/horn, carbon rod, 1oz. out board lead and everything minus the L.G. and flaps. It comes at 18.7oz. I wonder if the white Ultracoat is heavier than the typical treatment of silk/dope... I am getting depressed... I started on the fuse and cowling... Fuse will be painted. I was planning to stiffen the flaps but now I am worried about the weight... The flaps flex quite a bit. Oh well

I hope it doesn't become a pig...

john e. holliday · « **Reply #22 on:** March 02, 2011, 09:20:06 AM »

Rafael, don't worry about that weight. I mean you have 660 Sq. In. airplane. My P-39 weighs in at 64 ounces ready to fly and flies great. It just needs a pilot on the handle.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #23 on:** March 08, 2011, 04:30:07 PM »

Today, I spent 5 hours carving the cowl for the Stiletto.

I used the old X-acto carving tools. I had not used one of these since the G. Nobler I built in 1979. I am now with cramps on my hands.

The Avia 60 has a very short crankshaft and I do not like prop extensions as the are harmful to the engine. One must have a very light prop to use them properly, which means no APCs. I personally love them (My opinion), from using them in R/C and C/L. But they are a tad heavy. The cowling just barely covers the engine after all the cutting and carving. I am going to cover it with F. glass cloth and finishing epoxy resin then sand again. It is way too thin and flimsy. Then, I will match the wing saddle to the fuse temporarily before I set the wing and stab. I am wondering if once the aircraft has all the surfaces attached, I have enough room to work on it!!!

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #24 on:** March 08, 2011, 08:42:56 PM »

Funny,
I always think of engines as the rebuildable, replaceable part and the model as the irreplaceable part I want to look good. Hence, I use extensions if necessary to get the look I want! What's a bearing replacement after 1000 flights when it looks so good.

Chris...

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #25 on:** March 08, 2011, 08:47:00 PM »

Quote from: Alan Resinger on January 20, 2011, 09:09:20 AM

Rafael,
If you think ball links can come detached you are doing something wrong. Controls are Tom Morris components with adjustable elevator horn and adjustable pushrod length.
Alan

Hi Alan,
Beautiful ship.
I wonder if you are using "ball link" terminology when you are really using "ball rod ends". The ball links that snap onto the ball with a spring are the no,no's of C/L. The ball rod ends with a bolt through the trapped ball are A OK!
Chris...

john e. holliday · « **Reply #26 on:** March 09, 2011, 09:14:07 AM »

So far I have never worn out an engine using prop extensions.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #27 on:** March 09, 2011, 01:30:45 PM »

Quote from: Chris McMillin on March 08, 2011, 08:42:56 PM

Funny,
I always think of engines as the rebuildable, replaceable part and the model as the irreplaceable part I want to look good. Hence, I use extensions if necessary to get the look I want! What's a bearing replacement after 1000 flights when it looks so good.

Chris...

Quote from: john e. holliday on March 09, 2011, 09:14:07 AM

So far I have never worn out an engine using prop extensions.

It may be my lack of "stuntness". Since I've been mostly tinkering with Combat, Carrier and R/C, the engines have always been more important than the looks of the model. Turning 20,000 on a Nelson Q500, any unbalance will cause the racer to disintegrate, damage the radio/servos or eventually damage the engine. Perhaps if a wood prop is used, it maybe O.K. In Combat, I used to balance the thrust washer, crankshaft and prop washer. I "pitched/staged" every prop and balanced them (wood). The Foxes ran as smooth as silk. Everyone has their preferences and priorities. I love the APCs since the airfoil is computer generated for efficiency at every stage, many of my friends do not. I care more about the engine than the looks of the aircraft. I guess I will never get to a 15 AP in Stunt... But that is O.K. I will have fun doing it

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #28 on:** March 12, 2011, 08:14:08 AM »

Chris,
OK so I fell into the oft stated ball links terminology when I meant ball rod ends. I just figure everyone knows what we mean. The only time I can remember seeing ball links used, it was either for a Rabe rudder connection or one of Ted's ill fated circular bellcrank connnections back in the 80's. I know I never used one. Ball rod ends are practically foolproof with a litttle care in installation and are highy reccommended for all control systems as the play in the ball system takes care of slight misallignments encountered with bent wire pushrods. If bends aren't exactly parallel or perpendicular to each other there will be slight binding and wear to the bearing surface in the horns and crank.
Alan

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #29 on:** March 12, 2011, 08:25:54 AM »

Quote from: Alan Resinger on March 12, 2011, 08:14:08 AM

Chris,
OK so I fell into the oft stated ball links terminology when I meant ball rod ends. I just figure everyone knows what we mean. The only time I can remember seeing ball links used, it was either for a Rabe rudder connection or one of Ted's ill fated circular bellcrank connnections back in the 80's. I know I never used one. Ball rod ends are practically foolproof with a litttle care in installation and are highy reccommended for all control systems as the play in the ball system takes care of slight misallignments encountered with bent wire pushrods. If bends aren't exactly parallel or perpendicular to each other there will be slight binding and wear to the bearing surface in the horns and crank.
Alan

Thank you Alan, et al, I understood about the "ball links".
The only time I have ever used (ball links) them is on the throttle control of a Carrier or R/C. I have used "ball ends" for push rods for a very long time. I usually add a wide washer to make sure that it stays if it ever gets loose (almost impossible). A good procedure that I have applied with success is to dab a little tooth polish and rotate the assembly on the ball. It becomes very smooth with no play. Of course, it is washed very thoroughly afterwards and add a little vaseline for many years of use.

Thank you all for the great inputs and suggestions.

Cheers!

Rafael

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #30 on:** March 13, 2011, 09:31:24 AM »

Ty,
Here are some pics of the one I just finished.
Alan Resinger

Paul Smith · « **Reply #31 on:** March 13, 2011, 10:02:24 AM »

This is good info. I have one of these in the box. You might even motivate me to deploy it.

Step One was buying the kit, along with 3 gallons of dope and ten yards of silk.
Step Two might be buying a bigger house.
Like the builder, getting it out of the basement might be an issue.
Maybe I'll wait until may and assemble it (one can't honestly say "build" vis-a-vis a kit) in the garage.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #32 on:** March 15, 2011, 04:59:47 PM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on March 13, 2011, 08:22:01 PM

Thanks Alan. Here I was trying to make a cowl with a separate hole for the venturi. No longer. Now where did I put my big knife?

This is my mess... It will be nice and thin when it's done. Lots of sander work. I will be leaving the venturi hole as it makes it more stream lined with a tongue muff. Looks nice with a rear Alan!

The drips ARE dried. It was turned right side up... No more epoxy

builditright · « **Reply #33 on:** March 16, 2011, 02:09:24 AM »

Unfortunately my camera ceased operating so we do not have more photos of the frame work but I have posted a bunch of compressed folders of what I do have on my Stiletto webpage that can be down loaded for anyone that wants them.

http://www.builtrightflyright.com/New_Web_Pgs/kits/stiletto660/660BldgPics.htm

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #34 on:** March 17, 2011, 05:00:39 PM »

Quote from: builditright on March 16, 2011, 02:09:24 AM

Unfortunately my camera ceased operating so we do not have more photos of the frame work but I have posted a bunch of compressed folders of what I do have on my Stiletto webpage that can be down loaded for anyone that wants them.

http://www.builtrightflyright.com/New_Web_Pgs/kits/stiletto660/660BldgPics.htm

WOW!!! Those are fantastic photos. It would have saved a lot of thinking time

if the URL would be made available on parts list. Thank you for posting these

Great kit!!

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #35 on:** March 20, 2011, 02:32:42 PM »

For anyone thinking of building Walter's kit, here are some photos of the model I just finished. The model has a Stalker 51RE for power and weighs 55.4 oz.
Alan Resinger

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #36 on:** March 20, 2011, 03:14:51 PM »

Alan,
thats awesome! Well done sir, well done!

wwwarbird · « **Reply #37 on:** March 20, 2011, 06:37:50 PM »

That is really nice. Kind of a step back in time just looking at this one, neat to know it's fresh from the shop. What is the small lettering on the T/E of the indoard wing?

Bill Little · « **Reply #38 on:** March 20, 2011, 07:29:33 PM »

Really sweet, Alan! With that Stalker you should have plenty of power.

Big Bear

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #39 on:** March 20, 2011, 08:44:21 PM »

Wayne,
The lettering is just a decal I made which singles out the people and suppliers of the items used in this build. Like the engine builder, prop makers, control system, finish material etc. As I mentioned this model was built for someone else. I had built a couple of Stiletto 660's back in the early 80's and really liked the way they performed. I've always thought it was one of the slickest looking ship ever designed. I've kept Les up to date throughout this build and just got a really nice note from him when I sent this last set of pictures.
Alan Resinger

wwwarbird · « **Reply #40 on:** March 20, 2011, 11:03:03 PM »

Nice job Alan.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #41 on:** March 21, 2011, 10:05:48 AM »

Yep, Alan does nice work. His typical clean and well done job.

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #42 on:** March 23, 2011, 04:33:22 PM »

I KNOW mine WON'T look as nice... Maybe if I build 4-5 of them... NOT!

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #43 on:** April 06, 2011, 04:48:02 AM »

Put wing and elevator on fuse. I am starting with 2:3 ratio. I am used to elevator turns(ei almost everything I have flown has elev only). I can adjust if too sensitive to 1:1. Getting ready to cap the fuse with the spline and add rudder. I still have not been able to fly anything around here...

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #44 on:** April 06, 2011, 12:07:45 PM »

Why not a tongue muff? That is some weight saving...Unless the engine doesn't like the tongue.

James Mills · « **Reply #45 on:** April 06, 2011, 07:24:01 PM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on April 06, 2011, 03:49:03 PM

I am considering it, but the ST .51. so I hear, runs better on a tube muffler. Mine is made by a gent in New Mexico. Very, very light. But I do have tongue mufflers foir the ST .51 and will go to it if need be.

Ty,

I wouldn't worry about using a tounge muffler, I ran one on my 51 in my Shark for several years and couldn't tell it hurt the run any between that and a tube (I have an Adamisin tube that I tried and if I had needed nose weight would have used it). I think mine may have had a little more power with the tounge. My 51 wasn't stock (that may make a difference), rework by Byron Barker.

James

Bill Little · « **Reply #46 on:** April 07, 2011, 04:31:26 PM »

Hi Chief,

I only used a tongue muffler on the ST G.51 in my USA-1. No engine run problems at all. It was a T&L engine, but I don't think that would make a lot of difference in whether or not a tongue muffler would make a difference. I think fuel, prop, needle setting, etc., has more of an effect as long as the tongue isn't too restrictive.

Big Bear

DanielGelinas · « **Reply #47 on:** April 20, 2011, 06:38:27 PM »

Wow, lovely plane!
I recall seeing this plane in 73-74 flying models magazine. I used to dream of building one.

38 eight years later I still dream of building one.

Unfortunately, I'm not <there> yet.

Mind you, I just got back to the hobby 6 months ago and was away for 35 years...

Great looking plane!

-Danny

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #48 on:** April 26, 2011, 07:48:03 PM »

I am in the final stages before paint and trim... This aircraft is of a beautiful design and proportions. I think after this, I can build anything...

I can only imagine the work building this from scratch...

Thank you Walter for allowing us to succeed by the laser cutting and re-design of the Stiletto with Les. Photos will be taken after trim. Hopefully, I will do justice to this beautiful aircraft.

Rafael

Rafael Gonzalez · « **Reply #49 on:** May 23, 2011, 06:26:13 PM »

I really don't care anymore. I am so disappointed. It is not as pretty as a Stiletto should be and it comes in at 65 with an Aviastart 61 and a tongue muffler. I just do not have the time available to dedicate to this finish and what the aircraft deserves. It is not a 15 AP. Working 2 jobs, I spend ( if lucky) 2 or 3 hours a week working on a buildup. I introduced a rules proposal to create a different class of entry to be part of PA. If it was not for the availability of ARFs, I would not have reentered control line. I did not have a control line aircraft until I entered combat in the 1990s. I can put together a Yankee Nipper in 4 hours. And can be fixed in a couple. But nowadays, if you want to fly a nice, and pretty build up, you need to cut your working hours (not), spend less time with your family (not) or be retired ( not currently). We all should be a part of this hobby in any level at any competition. We can do this without eliminating tradition.

I know, I know, this has nothing to do with the Stiletto. I just had to vent out some frustration. I was also planning to attend Brodacks, but this SH&&^%$ weather has made it impossible to practice when I can...

Sorry, my apologies.