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