Author Topic: Airabonita (Read 2519 times)

Lee Thiel · « **on:** August 17, 2009, 04:47:53 PM »

Thinking about getting back in carrier. Anyone know where I can get the plans for the Airabonita?
Lee TGD

Joe F Just · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2009, 05:54:12 PM »

Can't help with plans, but the Brodak Yak is easily converted to the "bonita" Also, in 1989 a midwest morphing of one of their kits was entered in Sportsman at that yhear's Nats
Joe

Thomas Wilk · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2009, 06:07:24 PM »

Bell XFL-1 Airabonita * 1967 MAN Dec p11 * Span 33.30 * Area 205.00 * engine .60 * Plan # 74A * designer Reeves, Chuck W.

I cab scan it for you.

TA Wilk
www.cpinternet.com/~tawilk36

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2009, 06:57:25 PM »

I still have a 40 year old one hanging from the rafters in my garage in Sacramento. In its day it did over 100 mph w/a K&B 40 RR w/ Johnson fuel metering system. Actually it is a Class I design, not Class II (60) as stated in Tom's post (MAN often gets their C/L descriptions wrong, not Tom's bad).

That being said, unless you are an experienced plans builder I would not recommend it as a first time project for getting back into the event. It's not an easy plane to build. If you absolutely have to have an Airabonita, you might want to consider Joe's suggestion. I drew up the plans for that one long time ago but never got around to building it.

Bob Heywood · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2009, 07:12:13 PM »

The plan is available from AMA Plans Service, AMA # 26318 / Pond # 55A7. The cost is $ 8.00 + shipping. The AMA Librarian can also photocopy the MAN article. Check the AMA web site under the Store "radio button".

The Reeves XFL-1 is a favorite of mine. I saw his original at a NATS and was duly impressed.

Bob Heywood
Dayton, OH

eric conley · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2009, 08:25:06 PM »

Lee, were you thinking about a profile carrier plane or a class 1 or 2 scale carrier plane? eric

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #6 on:** August 18, 2009, 04:13:12 AM »

Quote from: Bob Heywood on August 17, 2009, 07:12:13 PM

The plan is available from AMA Plans Service, AMA # 26318 / Pond # 55A7. The cost is $ 8.00 + shipping. The AMA Librarian can also photocopy the MAN article. Check the AMA web site under the Store "radio button".

The Reeves XFL-1 is a favorite of mine. I saw his original at a NATS and was duly impressed.

Bob Heywood
Dayton, OH

Bob, one of my favorites. I built one to those to the plans and it was equiped with a gray case RR .40 K&B. First test flight was a rocket like wing over (tork roll) and then wham pretty much destroyed. The highlight of that project was stopping in at the plant in Buffalo, NY where the original was built and asking about pictures. Sure enough I got three differant vues. Unfortunately someone else may have them as I sold everything in the early eighties. I have thought about converting a YAK to an Airbonita.
Wayne

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #7 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:55:57 AM »

Thanks for the suggestions and answers. I built the built up version in 67 or 68, with a KB 40. Don't remember now if it was rear rotor or not. It, if memory serves, a pretty fair flier, with great fast laps and acceptable slows. A couple of us want to do a little carrier again just for kicks and grins. I will check out the plans suggested. Thanks for the assist.
Lee TGD

Dennis Saydak · « **Reply #8 on:** August 19, 2009, 08:21:38 AM »

Quote from: Wayne J. Buran on August 18, 2009, 04:13:12 AM

First test flight was a rocket like wing over (tork roll) and then wham pretty much destroyed.

I recently read the Airbonita article and it says that no wing tip weight is needed because the side mounted engine compensates for it. Perhaps you built yours without any wing tip weight? Some weight may have prevented your torque roll off the deck.

It sure is a pretty design.

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #9 on:** August 22, 2009, 07:02:48 PM »

I am going to order Tom's cd for the carriers plans. Can someone direct me to a fuel metering devise? Need also to locate and purchase a KB 40RR.
Lee TGD

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #10 on:** August 22, 2009, 08:12:50 PM »

Quote from: Dennis Saydak on August 19, 2009, 08:21:38 AM

I recently read the Airbonita article and it says that no wing tip weight is needed because the side mounted engine compensates for it. Perhaps you built yours without any wing tip weight? Some weight may have prevented your torque roll off the deck.

It sure is a pretty design.

Cant remember that clearly, although I know it wasnt around long because I never took a picture on the first flight. You are right though, it is one cool looking airplane. But is it really as cool as a "Skypirate" . The late Greg Baker built one as a Class 2 with a McCoy 60. Those were the days!
Wayne

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #11 on:** August 22, 2009, 10:25:46 PM »

Johnson fuel metering devices have been extinct forever and the engine would have to be modified for an exhaust slide. Also, the engine would have to be run on crankcase pressure w/ preferably a tank with a one way pressure valve, also extinct. Way more trouble that it's worth .

A modern .36 engine would go as fast as you need to go and give much greater reliability. A .40 if you must but the .36 engines are much lighter and will give plenty of power for a plane as small as the Reeves Airabonita. BTW Thunder Tiger .36 engines are now listed at over $150 on the TT4U site, still listed at Tower for $81.00 but in limited supply. Better get one now while you still can!

eric conley · « **Reply #12 on:** August 23, 2009, 11:01:15 AM »

FYI, I picked up a couple TT-PRO 36 engines from ehobbies.com back in April-09 for $74.99 each. I was never a big fan of the Airabonita but have always been fond of the Airacobra and King Cobra. The thing that turned me off with the Airabonita was the way it looked on the ground resting on it's landing gear. To me it looked like it was about to tip over on it's nose at any minute and from what I have read the landing gear location was a problem during sea trials.
I understand that England did some sea trials with a Airacobra with the tricycle gear during WW-2 and have been trying to find more information on the web but without much luck. Eric

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #13 on:** August 27, 2009, 02:55:13 PM »

Wonder if a real one was painted like this..

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #14 on:** August 27, 2009, 05:35:39 PM »

I assume it was a real color. I found this today.
Lee TGD

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #15 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:21:38 PM »

Cept they shoulda painted the fuselage blue.... Ya NAVY

At least you are starting with something that really had a prop, my jet ain't gonna look really scale

Bob Heywood · « **Reply #16 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:26:43 PM »

Quote from: Lee Thiel on August 27, 2009, 05:35:39 PM

I assume it was a real color. I found this today.
Lee TGD

The Ginter Book is well worth having. Not all that expensive. Squadron Hobbies or from Ginter directly.

Pg 44 has two (2) photos showing field arrested landing tests. Tried to stand on its nose. Spooky...

Bob Heywood
Dayton, OH

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #17 on:** August 27, 2009, 10:10:26 PM »

Speaking of color: If I read the rules in carrier correctly, it says that aircraft must be painted to represent any military paint scheme. Now, does that mean literally "any" or does it mean it has to be painted like the Airabonitas only? Like Bob Reeves said, yellow and blue would be better than yellow and aluminum.
Lee TGD

skyshark58 · « **Reply #18 on:** August 27, 2009, 10:50:35 PM »

Yes ANY Navy color scheme from ANY country will do! I like them authentic and correct but you can just paint away! Mike

bfrog · « **Reply #19 on:** August 28, 2009, 08:49:58 AM »

One year at the Nats Bill Bishof questioned my DeHaviland Vampire in Canadian markings. He wanted to see a picture of a Vampire flown by Canadian forces. I was able to provide a suitable photo but my take was that they were military markings whether or not that particular plane was flown by that particular country.

It's a fine point but was never really resolved to my satisfaction. From my reading of the rules it shouldn't matter if the plane in question was flown by a specific country as long as the markings are military in nature. I have seen plenty of models with very creative "military" markings that may or may not have been country specific.

Further note, for Skyray and 15 carrier there are no appearance point there is no requirement for any markings.

Bob

Peter Mazur · « **Reply #20 on:** August 28, 2009, 08:58:23 AM »

The rules say (8.1.4) To receive bonus points in any class: a. The color of the model must be similar to any military-type aircraft paint scheme... But also, 8.1 says "A scale model of a carrier aircraft of any nation, provided it displays the national markings of the using nation, shall receive bonus points. A carrier aircraft is any man-carrying aircraft which was successfully flown and which meets..."
So it looks like you can paint the Airabonita in any military colors you want, but the 8.1 rule demands that the markings have to be USA unless you can find document that another country used it.
Pete

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #21 on:** August 28, 2009, 12:55:26 PM »

Thanks guys for the paint answers. That is how I read it, but just wanted to be sure. Thats still a ways down the runway. Engine will be here Tuesday. I ended up ordering plans from AMA, so who knows how long that will take. I still need to get Toms CD for more ideas.
Lee TGD

Lee Thiel · « **Reply #22 on:** September 01, 2009, 07:44:12 PM »

I received the TT36 yesterday for the Airabonita. I will break it in this weekend with the recommended prop. What prop should I start with once engine and plane are ready for flights? Seems like "way back when", I ran 9/7s on the Torp RRs.
Lee TGD
PS. Seems to be four of us now that will be trying carrier out next spring.

eric conley · « **Reply #23 on:** September 01, 2009, 08:56:21 PM »

Use a APC 9/6 period. The early engines handled the higher pitched props ok. The TT Pro 36 likes more RPMs.

Douglas Ames · « **Reply #24 on:** September 28, 2009, 06:42:45 PM »

Quote from: Lee Thiel on August 27, 2009, 10:10:26 PM

Speaking of color: If I read the rules in carrier correctly, it says that aircraft must be painted to represent any military paint scheme. Now, does that mean literally "any" or does it mean it has to be painted like the Airabonitas only? Like Bob Reeves said, yellow and blue would be better than yellow and aluminum.
Lee TGD

Lee, Bob- Blue is what the Army Air Corps painted their fuselages in the 20's-late 30's, then later, OD.
Navy was always Silver or Gray w/ Chrome Yellow wings on the top surface and L/E.

Here's a sight on the correct markings for pre-war and on.
But really, you could paint it any way you want.

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq2-1.htm

Author Topic: Airabonita (Read 2519 times)

Joe F Just