Author Topic: Formula S (Read 7459 times)

Bill Little · « **on:** March 21, 2011, 11:39:20 AM »

There is a picture here (somewhere) of a Formula S at VSC this year. Looks like a correct copy of Jim's original paint scheme. Anyone have more info, please? (owner, power, etc..)

Thanks!
Big Bear

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #1 on:** March 21, 2011, 04:57:49 PM »

I think that was entered by Bob Whitely. No more details but an impressive plane.

James Mills · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2011, 05:36:15 PM »

Bill,

I have some photos of the original Formula S hanging in Shaffer's Hobby Shop in St. Louis, I'll try and find them if you wish.

James

Shultzie · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2011, 08:57:32 PM »

Quote from: James Mills on March 21, 2011, 05:36:15 PM

Bill,

I have some photos of the original Formula S hanging in Shaffer's Hobby Shop in St. Louis, I'll try and find them if you wish.

James

Found these on our search engine.. Jim's last HIGH WIND flight at the 68 Nats was awesome...AND I TRULY THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO TAKE HOME FIRST PLACE! IT WAS THAT GOOD.
OLATHA WINDS TRULY SEPERATED THE SUPA-GRUNTS FROM THE MINI GRUNTS!

Bill Little · « **Reply #4 on:** March 22, 2011, 02:49:57 PM »

Thanks, fellas.

Big Bear

Clint Ormosen · « **Reply #5 on:** March 24, 2011, 10:07:35 AM »

Quote from: Pete Cunha on March 21, 2011, 04:57:49 PM

I think that was entered by Bob Whitely. No more details but an impressive plane.

Yup, Bob Whitely's plane. Power is a DS 54. Just chugs through wind!

Bill Little · « **Reply #6 on:** March 24, 2011, 09:19:46 PM »

Quote from: Clint Ormosen on March 24, 2011, 10:07:35 AM

Yup, Bob Whitely's plane. Power is a DS 54. Just chugs through wind!

Wow! With a DS .54 I guess Bob could fly it in one of our "hurricanes"!

Nothing like having enough power.... now I have to "re-think" what I would use to power one. Was "going" to use a McGas .40 that still needs running in.

Big Bear

Clint Ormosen · « **Reply #7 on:** March 25, 2011, 03:33:53 PM »

Quote from: Bill Little on March 24, 2011, 09:19:46 PM

Wow! With a DS .54 I guess Bob could fly it in one of our "hurricanes"! Nothing like having enough power.... now I have to "re-think" what I would use to power one. Was "going" to use a McGas .40 that still needs running in.

Big Bear

I doubt you need to re-think anything at all. That McGas 40 should be plenty of power for it. You'll have to run it differently, of course. Bob's Formula sounded like a really low RPM, more pitch setting whereas you'll probably need a little more RPM. Different but same. Besides, that old McCoy is period correct!

Randy Powell · « **Reply #8 on:** March 25, 2011, 09:00:51 PM »

Hmm, maybe I could squeeze a RO-Jett 61 in the nose.

Clint Ormosen · « **Reply #9 on:** March 26, 2011, 12:52:25 AM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on March 25, 2011, 09:00:51 PM

Hmm, maybe I could squeeze a RO-Jett 61 in the nose.

Ha! I'll see your Jett .61 and raise you a PA .75!

EddyR · « **Reply #10 on:** March 26, 2011, 06:45:03 AM »

Bill I would use your ST/46 in it. I saw Jim's plane fly plenty of times when I was going back to RIT for some classes. I am sure he would have used the ST 40-46 if it had been available.The McCoy is only OK if you have a great one. Also that is a long tail moment to try and balance with a McCoy. I lived less than 100 miles from Jim so two Friends and I went up to his flying field several times each year.I saw one fly a few years ago with one of Randy's TT.36 but that is a lot more motor than a McCoy 40
Ed

James Mills · « **Reply #11 on:** March 26, 2011, 05:26:31 PM »

Quote from: Ed Ruane on March 26, 2011, 06:45:03 AM

Bill I would use your ST/46 in it. I saw Jim's plane fly plenty of times when I was going back to RIT for some classes. I am sure he would have used the ST 40-46 if it had been available.The McCoy is only OK if you have a great one. Also that is a long tail moment to try and balance with a McCoy. I lived less than 100 miles from Jim so two Friends and I went up to his flying field several times each year.I saw one fly a few years ago with one of Randy's TT.36 but that is a lot more motor than a McCoy 40
Ed

I am using a Barker 36 with my Formula S, which is a bit on the heavy side, and it pulls it very well.

James

Bill Little · « **Reply #12 on:** March 26, 2011, 08:19:10 PM »

Quote from: Ed Ruane on March 26, 2011, 06:45:03 AM

Bill I would use your ST/46 in it. I saw Jim's plane fly plenty of times when I was going back to RIT for some classes. I am sure he would have used the ST 40-46 if it had been available.The McCoy is only OK if you have a great one. Also that is a long tail moment to try and balance with a McCoy. I lived less than 100 miles from Jim so two Friends and I went up to his flying field several times each year.I saw one fly a few years ago with one of Randy's TT.36 but that is a lot more motor than a McCoy 40
Ed

Hi Ed,

I have engine choices now, that is a good thing! LOL!! At one time, it was a case of just having to use what I had. I can go with an Aero Tiger, .36, the McGas .40 (George's "custom" build of the McCoy, it's still new) which would be a pretty period correct engine, a stock ST G21.40, a Big Jim ST G21.40, a "lite" (29 case) ST G21.46 that Randy built, A T&L G21.46, a "stock" ST G21.46, an ABC ST G21.46, a couple different ST G.51, etc,.

Just a case of picking and choosing now, and that is a good feeling.

I feel pretty sure that I can build one in the mid to low .40 oz. range, so I don't know what I need to use.

But since I have a lost foam fixture for the wing, I think I really need to build one, plus I sorta always liked the looks.

Thanks
Bill

James Mills · « **Reply #13 on:** March 26, 2011, 11:24:25 PM »

Quote from: Bill Little on March 26, 2011, 08:19:10 PM

Hi Ed,

I have engine choices now, that is a good thing! LOL!! At one time, it was a case of just having to use what I had. I can go with an Aero Tiger, .36, the McGas .40 (George's "custom" build of the McCoy, it's still new) which would be a pretty period correct engine, a stock ST G21.40, a Big Jim ST G21.40, a "lite" (29 case) ST G21.46 that Randy built, A T&L G21.46, a "stock" ST G21.46, an ABC ST G21.46, a couple different ST G.51, etc,. Just a case of picking and choosing now, and that is a good feeling.

I feel pretty sure that I can build one in the mid to low .40 oz. range, so I don't know what I need to use. But since I have a lost foam fixture for the wing, I think I really need to build one, plus I sorta always liked the looks.

Thanks
Bill

Bill,
If you can get it in under 50 I'd go with the Aero 36.
James

Clint Ormosen · « **Reply #14 on:** March 26, 2011, 11:53:09 PM »

Quote from: Bill Little on March 26, 2011, 08:19:10 PM

I feel pretty sure that I can build one in the mid to low .40 oz. range, so I don't know what I need to use.
Thanks
Bill

Bill. can you really build one around 4 tenths of an ounce? This I gotta see!

Bill Little · « **Reply #15 on:** March 27, 2011, 12:02:41 AM »

Quote from: Clint Ormosen on March 26, 2011, 11:53:09 PM

Bill. can you really build one around 4 tenths of an ounce? This I gotta see!

ROTFLMBO!!!!!!!!!!! Well, it might have to be a really SMALL Formula S!

(.010 size?? naw, couldn't even do that.... LOL!!)

Where did that decimal come from Clint??

Sorry, I was a but peeved (not at this thread or anyone posting here) when I wrote that..... gotta be more careful.

Bill

Robertc · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2011, 09:52:17 AM »

Here is Bob Whitely's Formula S.

Shultzie · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2011, 11:02:04 AM »

Thanks to Bob Whitely for his amazing tribute Classic... Roberto' WOW!GREAT FLYING SHOT!

Hey....
Speaking of beautiful CLPA at its finest!!!!
I still remember that amazingly beautiful Formula S that you built and shared that photo with us.

afml · « **Reply #18 on:** April 20, 2011, 12:56:33 PM »

Here are a few more pics of Bob's plane taken at this years VSC through the lens of Allen Brickhaus.

"Tight Lines!"

Wes

Neville Legg · « **Reply #19 on:** April 20, 2011, 03:09:49 PM »

Very nice

Is that the same red as Jim's model? If so what red is it? It seems strange seeing these models in colour. When my copy of Flying Models dropped through the door every month here in England, I could only imagine the colour the models from the black and white pictures in the mag.

I built the Talon directly from the magazine when it came out, complete with those awkward wheel fairings, flew well though, I was only about 14 at the time. When and from what did Jim Kostecky die?

Cheers

Robertc · « **Reply #20 on:** April 29, 2011, 01:56:39 PM »

If I remember right, Jim died September 2002.
I think the original has a bit more orange to it than
Whitely's.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #21 on:** April 29, 2011, 02:18:26 PM »

Neville,

And wasn't it a shock when you built some plane out of Flying Models and tried to paint it as it looked in the magazine (black and white pictures) only to find out later when you saw a color picture that you weren't even close? I built a Novi when I was a kid and painted it white with red trim. I thought that's what it was (based on a guess and black and white pictures) only to find out years later when I saw a color picture that the thing was green.

Bill Little · « **Reply #22 on:** April 29, 2011, 09:27:39 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on April 29, 2011, 02:18:26 PM

Neville,

And wasn't it a shock when you built some plane out of Flying Models and tried to paint it as it looked in the magazine (black and white pictures) only to find out later when you saw a color picture that you weren't even close? I built a Novi when I was a kid and painted it white with red trim. I thought that's what it was (based on a guess and black and white pictures) only to find out years later when I saw a color picture that the thing was green.

Yeah, it was several years after I built my Ares that I found out the original one Billy built was blue........ mine was red.

Big Bear

Neville Legg · « **Reply #23 on:** May 01, 2011, 01:52:54 PM »

I painted my Talon silver, and wished I hadn't! At the tender age of 14 or 15 I just didn't get a good enough surface for the silver, it had red and black trim, an OS 35 and as I said, flew well, till the motor stopped in a wingover!

I didn't get to see the colour of some those models published in FM, until I joined this forum, a few years ago, my world was black and white!

Cheers

Bill Little · « **Reply #24 on:** May 01, 2011, 02:44:06 PM »

HI Neville,

Did you get my PM?

Thanks
Bill

Neville Legg · « **Reply #25 on:** May 02, 2011, 09:46:39 AM »

Hello Bill, yes I got your PM the other day thanks will reply this evening, hope Mrs Bill and the rest of you are all well?

Cheers

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #26 on:** May 03, 2011, 05:17:10 PM »

I have the plans for the Formula S and intend to build it soon. Are there any ticks or pitfalls I should be aware of ? I intend to use an OS LA 46.
Jeff

Bill Little · « **Reply #27 on:** May 04, 2011, 08:53:21 AM »

Quote from: Jeff Prosser on May 03, 2011, 05:17:10 PM

I have the plans for the Formula S and intend to build it soon. Are there any ticks or pitfalls I should be aware of ? I intend to use an OS LA 46.
Jeff

HI Jeff,

Do you have the plans that have the "corrections" that Jim K. put on them? It is mainly in the LG lengths. As drawn, the landing gear is shorter than what Jim actually had on his. The tail is also thinner in the plan view and a couple other "minor" corrections.

There isn't anything that is really out of the ordinary or difficult, but using the "as drawn" length LG makes getting a prop on the plane difficult.

Big Bear

Randy Powell · « **Reply #28 on:** May 04, 2011, 10:05:51 AM »

Wasn't the nose (cowl mainly) somewhat different than the plan?

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #29 on:** May 04, 2011, 05:41:57 PM »

Thanks for the info Bill.
I think the plan I have does not have the changes you mention as the LG is very short. I had decided to change this for clearance with a larger prop. I believe the original used a 3 blade prop which would help. Also, the tail lookes a little thinner than I would have expected. One of my concerns was the LG mounting in the wing as there does not seem to be much support if a heavy impact occurs.
Randy, the nose cowl could be slightly different on the plan but it's difficult to see in the photos.

Jeff Prosser
South Australia

Bill Little · « **Reply #30 on:** May 08, 2011, 01:08:21 AM »

Hi Randy,

It seems there is an area open the cowl which Jim redrew with about a heavy pencil line difference, but I would have to get both sets out to confirm.

The fuselage behind the wing is even "thinner", side to side, and the plans "as drawn" are already real skinny!

Hi Jeff,

The gear is not real heavy duty, but I suspect Jim always flew off a smooth surface and wasn't too concerned.

The fairings around the stab at the fuselage really makes a difference in the strength of the rear. Not much "meat" back there otherwise.

Without checking, I am guessing the LG was actually about 1 inch longer (plane sat about 1 inch higher) than what the published plans showed. I never did actually measure the differences in the two sets of plans. The "corrections" are all done in Jim's hand written notes around the plans with some lines drawn to correct some areas, so it is obvious if they are "corrected plans". There just seemed to be some mis-communication between Jim and the fellow who did the inking of the plans. Not a lot of major differences, like I said, mainly the length of the LG. A model built from the published plans will be a great flying model! I saw them fly before I ever saw the corrections.

I do have a Lost Foam fixture from Mr. Bob Hunt, and I am planning on building a "corrected" one, hopefully soon. I don't think I will go quite as large on the engine as Mr. Whitely did, although I cannot argue with what the "Alfadawg" does (he is a past NATS Champion!!). If I can get some really "primo" wood, I will probably use the McGas .40

Too many models, not enough time........

Bill

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #31 on:** May 08, 2011, 06:09:49 AM »

Thanks again Bill
I will strenghten the wing a little for the LG but will be wary of adding too much weight. I fly over grass so there are sometimes a bit more impact - especially with some of my landings. I will work out the LG length to suit the intended prop size etc.

Jeff

Chris McMillin · « **Reply #32 on:** May 08, 2011, 11:07:20 AM »

Bill,
That DS 54 Whitely uses is a special deal Roy Trantham has built. They aren't very big and don't weigh much, just have a big displacement. He had the same in his Chizler. That McCoy 40 should be good. I have one too, mine's a T&L, neat engine.
Chris...

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #33 on:** May 08, 2011, 05:48:00 PM »

Bill
I have just realised that my plan does have an alteration. The bottom rear of the fuselage shows a "sub rudder" made from 1/4 balsa. It also has additional line work indicating that the bottom block extends to the rear of the fus and the rear formers also extend down over the sub rudder. I found this confusing until I looked at a print that I have of the plan as published in Flying Models magazine where this additional line work is not shown. It clearly just shows the sub rudder. I suspect the line work was added to show an alternative cross section shape for the rear of the fus. As the plan has no cross sections this is difficult to see from the plan. Do you know what the rear of the fus should look like?

Jeff

Bill Little · « **Reply #34 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:03:30 PM »

Quote from: Jeff Prosser on May 08, 2011, 05:48:00 PM

Bill
I have just realised that my plan does have an alteration. The bottom rear of the fuselage shows a "sub rudder" made from 1/4 balsa. It also has additional line work indicating that the bottom block extends to the rear of the fus and the rear formers also extend down over the sub rudder. I found this confusing until I looked at a print that I have of the plan as published in Flying Models magazine where this additional line work is not shown. It clearly just shows the sub rudder. I suspect the line work was added to show an alternative cross section shape for the rear of the fus. As the plan has no cross sections this is difficult to see from the plan. Do you know what the rear of the fus should look like?

Jeff

HI Jeff,

I will get both plans out and look, but there should be no "fuselage" back there, underneath, just the 1/4" sub rudder. The plans that have Jim Kostecky's alterations have hand written notes in several places. If yours doesn't have these, I would be leery of them.

Bill

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #35 on:** May 09, 2011, 07:12:14 PM »

Hi Bill
That's as I suspected Bill so I will build with the sub rudder. Should look nice. In a previous post you mentioned that you have a foam wing and hoped to build a Formula S at about 40oz. That seems very light to me as previous models this size that I have built more recently seem to be more like 50oz ! (eg ARC Vector). My 50 oz weight is the all up weight, ready to fly, except fuel. Motor, spinner, prop, tank etc included. Just so I know what to aim for when building this model, does your 40 oz include everything ?

Jeff

Bill Little · « **Reply #36 on:** May 12, 2011, 10:20:39 AM »

Quote from: Jeff Prosser on May 09, 2011, 07:12:14 PM

Hi Bill
That's as I suspected Bill so I will build with the sub rudder. Should look nice. In a previous post you mentioned that you have a foam wing and hoped to build a Formula S at about 40oz. That seems very light to me as previous models this size that I have built more recently seem to be more like 50oz ! (eg ARC Vector). My 50 oz weight is the all up weight, ready to fly, except fuel. Motor, spinner, prop, tank etc included. Just so I know what to aim for when building this model, does your 40 oz include everything ?

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I don't have a "foam wing", rather a "lost foam building fixture". It consists of the cradles, and the cores have been sectioned to give accurate templates at each rib station. So the wing is built in the cradles using the "cut parts" of the cores for templates.

The sub 40 oz. might be a bit optimistic considering my wood supply, etc. But having built a USA-1 with a ST .51 (700 sq in model) at 53 oz, RTF, I am hoping I can build the somewhat smaller Formula S a good bit lighter. It will all depend on the wood and how careful I am! LOL!! Anything 45 oz, or less, would probably be fine for my own needs. I have tended to build light since listening to Bob Hunt and Bill Werwage all these years.

Bill

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #37 on:** May 12, 2011, 06:31:08 PM »

Bill
53 oz for a USA1 is certainly light so you must have been very careful during the whole build. I will just have to be very mindfull of weight at each step to try and get it is light as possible. My down fall is worrying about strength and adding bits here and there to 'beef things up a bit' when it's probably not necessary. At the time the additional strenght seems worth it as the weight gain is small, but it all adds up. And it always surpises me how heavy the paint is on a model.

Jeff

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #38 on:** May 13, 2011, 01:39:04 AM »

Thats the first time ive seen Bobs Formula - and the ode to the orginial. That is indeed VERY VERY impressive. Im not lost for words, but its incredible, the details in the new version are very nice indeed.

The old Dawg still has what it takes. It looks 20 out of 20.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #39 on:** May 13, 2011, 09:45:00 AM »

On weight, keep in mind that a lot depends on how much a particular design can handle. Every plane has an ideal weight. The USA-1 just doesn't tend to fly all that well if it's over a certain weight. Bill's 53oz is about ideal for that design and it flies very well at that weight. It's a dog when it gets too heavy. Some planes fly better if they are a bit heavier. Ted's Trivial Pursuit design can handle quite a bit of weight and still fly pretty well. I've seen them upwards of 72oz and still fly really well. Every design has a design window that as long as you are in the window, the plane flies pretty well.

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #40 on:** June 22, 2011, 10:11:28 PM »

Hi All
Well it's been a bit of slow start but I have now made some progress with my Formula S. I have the wing built and will move slowly on. No deadlines with this one ! I haven't scratch built a model for a long time and seem to have forgotten how long it takes. An ARC kit (which I have done lately) is certainly doing the easy way.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #41 on:** June 23, 2011, 08:27:17 AM »

It is best to do things right and not rush it. Normally I would be planking the fuse on the P-47, but I am just now getting ready to cover the wing, stab/elevator and flaps.

Neville Legg · « **Reply #42 on:** June 23, 2011, 11:27:05 AM »

That Formula S hanging on the wall with all the other models, doesn't have the white trailing edges of the one jim is holding

Cheers

Les McDonald · « **Reply #43 on:** June 23, 2011, 02:20:29 PM »

No one, absolutely no one has more love and respect for the trim schemes created by Jim Kostecky than I do. However, I like the modified graphics on Alfadogs Formula S better than the original.

Neville Legg · « **Reply #44 on:** June 25, 2011, 05:24:27 AM »

Who is Alfadog?

I think modern digital photos enhance the colours and sharpness over the old film process, which fades, and was never that sharp unless you had the top range (expensive) equipment ? I too loved Jims artistic styling and colour schemes, but then he was an art teacher!

Cheers

Mike Keville · « **Reply #45 on:** June 25, 2011, 04:43:58 PM »

Quote from: Neville Legg on June 25, 2011, 05:24:27 AM

Who is Alfadog?

===========================================================

Bob ("R.J.") Whitely -- 1978 U.S. Nationals winner....and still a potent force.

Neville Legg · « **Reply #46 on:** June 26, 2011, 02:17:39 AM »

Thank you

Cheers

Jeff Prosser · « **Reply #47 on:** August 02, 2011, 07:33:48 PM »

My Formula S progresses slowly but now looks a bit like it should. A lot of work to do yet though.

Bill Little · « **Reply #48 on:** August 15, 2011, 02:35:57 PM »

Quote from: Jeff Prosser on August 02, 2011, 07:33:48 PM

My Formula S progresses slowly but now looks a bit like it should. A lot of work to do yet though.

Looking good, Jeff!

Big Bear

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #49 on:** August 23, 2011, 06:15:38 PM »

We've finally got a couple of Aero Tiger .36's running here in the NW, and I'm VERY impressed. Excellent starting on the wheels and lots of well controlled power. I believe both (McClave and Peterson) are running tongue mufflers and muffler pressure and the 10.6 x 4.5 "Magic" prop that Randy Aero sells for it. Highly recommended!

Steve