stunthanger.com
Classic Designs => Classic Planes => Topic started by: Ty Marcucci on February 09, 2008, 06:50:50 PM
-
I don't know whose planes these are, but I had fun taking pictures of them. If anyone knows, speak up. H^^
OK, I do recognize the blue and yellow plane, that is Lenny Gadomski modified Nobler at it's first meet. The gent in the suit, came with another gent, also wearing a suit. I think they were from Cuba or Puerto Rico. Very formal and polite. The gent in the tee shirt with the metallic pink Nobler, I asked who he was and was told he was "some potato farmer from Maine". I still don't know if this is fact or just a wise crack, but some guys from Maine did show at the contest. n1
We usually had combat, stunt and scale at the same meet. Sam Abdow ,from Fall River, Mass, a club member, always flew scale. I saw his photo years later in FM and he sure got better with each plane.
-
The bottom picture, center two from left to right are Jean Pailet's red Skylark (original design, not Southwick) and Jim Kostecky's blue and navy Talon.
Chris...
-
I always thought Pailet's Skylark was a cool looking plane. Don't know if it flies very well, but it is sure attractive.
-
Sorry, the Zephyr. I knew that, too. I've been looking at that plane in the Classics book for a long time and it's on my list of eventual builds. For some reason, it just strikes me a very slick ship.
-
And I thought you said you were retiring. At least your having fun, I hope. DOC Holliday
-
Attached are pages from the articles on Jean Pailet's Skylark & Zephyr Lotsa similarity in the fuselage the Zephyr has a somwhat faster canopy slope. Note that Jean was using the NASA Laminar flow sections.
Personally I really like the Skylark, but would cheat the windshield so it matched the Zephyr!
-
Bob, "Spinaflow" muffler. I had one in the 60s, VERY quiet, Rainman, aka Gary T. H^^
-
Bob,
I don't know, I like the smell of burning Castor in the morning. ;D
I would certainly commit to build a Zephyr. I'm working on a Bill Simons Shoestring right now. I loved the one I had before and will power this one with a more reliable powerplant. That's certain. After that I have to finish my current PA plane. But the Zephyr could be next up after that. You don't have to use my ridiculous paint schemes. I am easily carried away with that stuff, often to my detriment. I'd prefer to use yours. Perhaps for VSC next year, a Zephyr would be a cool entry, though if I could get started on one this summer, I may be able to have it done before season's end. Sure would be fun. I have no idea what I would power it with. That will take some noodling.
I will be at VSC this year <and the crowd goes wild> Man, I really have to get out of the rain for awhile and dry out.
-
I have my eyes set on the Uranus. Have you all checked it out?
-
we could pick up ques from the topography and the natural colors of the mountains, which, at sunset, glow a bright bronze color...
gee, somehow I just knew that was coming...... LL~ LL~ LL~
(BTW: Thank you Bob, from Gail, too. It meant more than you will ever know)
-
Yeah, Gary, and boy did they ever look cool! It's interesting to me that in that timeframe there were those who hated the idea of using a muffler. Now everybody uses them (We're talking stunt here...) and they love them. But, it is some of those same people who are against electric power because it doesn't make any noise! Go figure...
The noise thing I can almost understand (almost). It's the other argument that with electric power there is no smell that really makes me laugh. That's the part my wife likes best!
Bob
Hey Bob, another product out of the Hunt Works? A cologne for men that smells like burnt castor. DOC Holliday
-
Sounds fine to me, Bob.
-
What a coincidence??? I've only just seen this thread on the Zephyr, as a few weeks ago I enlarged the drawing from the old FM magazine. So now I can turn the motor upside down and call it a Playmate? Not keen on upright motors.
Cheers Neville
-
For what it's worth, Several years ago, maybe 5 or more, I drew up a new set of plans for the Zephyr that made it a take apart plane. I did this in CAD. I cut out all the ribs, but that's as far as I got at the time.
Bob, do you have the ability to display a CAD drawing? If so, let me know.
Here's a webpic of the Cad plans. In preparing them, I found out that I started the plans back in '98. Wow, time sure flies.
-
I may have to talk with you John, since I don't currently have a set of plans for the Zephyr. :)
-
Sorry guys, not the Uranus, it is the Pegasus. Twin boom looking much like the Zephyr!
So Bob, where can one get the plans for these planes?
-
Sorry Bob, Based on your above comments, I had the idea that the plans were no longer available from Flying Models. If they are, that would be great. Or is it that the flying models version is somehow incorrect? I misunderstood. Of course I would want to use a version from an approved source! Just wasn't sure that Flying Models still had it.
If you can get permission to draw up a correct version, that would be great.
-
I assume that it is ok to make your own set of drawings from the magazine? After all a full drawing is shown and a scale is usually drawn in the bottom of the plan!!
Cheers Neville
-
Hello Bob,
Correct me if I'm wrong, (I usually am!) but by using the Mk1 eyeball alone, the Playmate looks different in several ways to the Zephyr? The wing looks to have a higher AR and the tail moment looks longer! And I can't see the kink in the LE. This might be a trick of the camera? Mind you my eyeballs need strong optics to correct them! (getting old!)
Cheers Neville
-
Bob, I too am concerned about copywrite laws.To the effect that I went to the Government CopyWwrite office's web site, and did an extensive search to learn exactly what the laws and rules are. It matters to me because of the many drawings I've produced. Like you, I've had the pleasure of seeing my drawings offered by others.
The drawing I did of the Zephyr was for my use. While true to the outline, it has several changes in structure, and differs from the original due to the fact that it's designed to take apart. The wing removes, the vertical stab, stab and elevator all remove. My reason for posting it was to show the result of my work, not to sell copies of the plans, I also wanted to show you the work already done with the idea of making it available to you to help in your desire to produce a new set of plans for the Zephyr. That's why I asked if you had the means to display a CAD file.
Now, it was about 10 years ago that I researched the CopyWrite office's web site, but from memory, which, admitadly, isn't all it used to be, here's what I believe I found.
Up until some where in the 70's or 80's copywrites had to be applied for and granted by the CopyWrite office. I found that Patents for model airplanes, real, full sized airplanes, and other common use items are no longer granted, so copywrite is the only protection you get for your intellectual property. The old copywrite ran out in a similar fashion as patents, and I believe they passed when the copywrite holder passed.
At the point in the 70's or 80's there was a change made. Now, a copywrite is automatic, when the document is created. It is no longer necessary to obtain one from the CopyWrite office. Nor is it necessary to include the CopyWrite symbol, year and name, though it's a good idea to include them on your drawings.
Some of the existing CopyWrites, (I'm assuming the ones in force at the time the change was made), were changed to the new standards. Not all, but some.
The new standards give the rights to a copywrite to the heirs of the holder for a specific term, and it's over a 100 years after the death of the holder.
Now, here's the sticky wicket.
Art works, which is what plans and drawings are considered, can be worked around when there are sufficient changes made. Different placements can be a part of it, but is usually insufficeint on it's own to overcome a copywrite. Additional details, changes in other areas, such as construction and sub assemblies, 1 sheet to 2 or more sheets etc. can be enough to constitute a new piece of art, worthy of it's own copywrite. A simple copy, or a tracing, of the original are not new art work, but violations of the CopyWrite.
I can see where someone with a great picture of Half Dome in Yosemite, Ansel Adams for instance, could call for copywrite protection every time a similar picture of Half Dome was published, if his copywrite were still in force.
Now, back to my drawing of Jeans Zephyr, which where copywrited at the time of creation, it's highly likely that there are enough changes to the art work, that if I wanted to I could market the drawings without infringing on Jeans CopyWrite.
Basically what the CopyWrite does is protect, in this case Jean, and whomever he sold the plans to for publication, from having someone make copies of his work, as published, or originally drawn, and selling them without permission, if indeed his CopyWrite was grandfathered when the change occurred.
I'm not bringing this up for any other reason than to clarify what I understand to be the current state of affairs as far as CopyWrite's go. I certainly respect you, and all who have created our cherished designs over the years. Also, I have to say that all the above is from memory of a 10 year old search and study of the subject, so I may have some errors due to faulty memory, for which I apologise in advance.
-
John,
this is NOT a pointed comment to you, it is ONLY MY OPINION and as such carries ,, well franklly little weight but to me . As an Artistic sort, I have done paintings and photography, drawn a few plans, designed a couple this and thats. I have had my creations basterdized by both ill willed and good willed persons. I think My perspective is slightly scewed. IMHO I think that regardless of meeting the letter of the law , there is a certain respect due the designers of our model masterpeices that should be honored. So that being said, what do I mean, well even though copywrite law maybe honored, its still a valid and correct morally to pursue permission from the designer or heirs.
Like I said, John this is in NO way an implication nor pointed at you, its simply my take. Each person has to live within their own set of morals and ethics and that is the way it is.
For example, I showed you the plans for my world beater biplane last year, legally there is no copywrite in place on those drawings as they were created prior to the changes (as I understand it) However, I being of similar mind to you, would expect that I wont ever see a plane come from your computer that resembles my design without having heard from you first. Does that make more sense?
-
BOB, Mark, and Ty,
Please don'r misinterpret me here. My post was to clarify the state of CopyWrite laws, as I understand them.
I agree in principle with Bob, and Mark.
In the specific case cited, My Cad drawing of Jean Pailet's Zephyr, There are many chqnges to the design elements. Making it a take apart design required a lot of different techniques. Still, it is called a Zephyr, as the outlines are the same, and Jean is credited as the designer. I'm credited for the CAD work, and the modifications.
In this specific case, would I morally be required to recieve Jean's permission, to make a drawing showing the changes I made to make the plane a take apart?.
I believe it's exactly for this type of improvement or changes, that the Copy Write laws were changed.
In any case, Bob, Mark, and Ty are good friends of mine, and nothing in my posts was meant to cause any ill feelings between us. I sincerely hope that is not the case.
I'm as concerned as any about the rules and laws. I'm just pointing out that in some cases, there is room, under the rules and laws, for new drawings of old subjects without infringing on the CopyWrites. H^^
-
Ty,
I am sorry we took over your thread, However I really feel this was a constructive discussion. John, and I both do cad work, and Bob is in the mode of desiring to reissue some drawings too. I think this was a pretty informative discussion. I am sorry if we offended you by hijacking your thread however. Perhaps we might have served your interests better by carrying this conversation in a different thread?
-
Topics often wander, and as long as they are productive, I see no problem. Others may feel differently, but then that's everyone's right.
I understand the desire to keep things *above board*, and this was a place to express those feelings, by others, through a natural progression. A palne was ID'ed, it was discussed, mention of available plans, etc., and if it had NOT occurred, then maybe some interest in building a unique Classic plane would not have taken place. Or at least not mentioned.
-
Does anyone know about any of those other airplanes in the photos?
(Mark Hughes has had a Talon on the board, for a long time. I hope he finishes it some time soon, I really like that model.)
Thanks for the pictures, Ty.
At least your stuff gets things going!
Chris...
-
Does anyone know about any of those other airplanes in the photos?
(Mark Hughes has had a Talon on the board, for a long time. I hope he finishes it some time soon, I really like that model.)
Thanks for the pictures, Ty.
At least your stuff gets things going!
Chris...
I agree. Ty's post got a LOT going, and it was all positive. y1
Because of it, we just might get updated plans for a couple planes. Looking back, IMHO, that is more important in the long run *scheme of things* than a few old geezers (which I apparently AM one! LOL!!) going orgasmic about how great it was back then. I was around back then, and I STILL have mixed emotions about how great it was! LOL!! (no offense to any one)
-
I can tell you they fly better now, because we know more now.
That big green trike gear model looks very familiar, and I know I know it. Just can't think of it right now.
Chris..
WE know more, and we have better engines! That last part REALLY makes a difference!
And thanks again for the pictures Ty. Sorry the thread was hijacked................
-
HI Chris. I believe lthat is an I beamer and may be a plans built version of the "Detroiter" with the trike gear. I forget the name just now. (Challenger?). A McDonald design? H^^
Hi Ty,
I think you hit that one on the nose. There was a Challenger trike gear (Strathmoore/Detroiter) I-Beamer.......
-
My only recollection of New Bedford is 1959 at the airport. Only contest I went to there. Joined the Army in July 59.
-
Yeah, Gary, and boy did they ever look cool! It's interesting to me that in that timeframe there were those who hated the idea of using a muffler. Now everybody uses them (We're talking stunt here...) and they love them. But, it is some of those same people who are against electric power because it doesn't make any noise! Go figure...
The noise thing I can almost understand (almost). It's the other argument that with electric power there is no smell that really makes me laugh. That's the part my wife likes best!
Bob
Of course Bob, with electric just getting started in stunt, we haven't had the opportunity to put many into the turf or macadam---at least in front of spectators at a contest.
Once that happens and the lipo bursts open and into flames, then we will have the smell!
-
GADS!
That little yellow Ukie "gyro-copter" (if that is the right name?) I had the pleasure of working with one amazingly gifted Boeing model builder who other hobby was building and flying full scale ultra light gyro-copters.
He was in the process of building a control line version and I was going to be his "test pilot" on this project.
Sadly......all this came to an sudden and sad ending one weekend...during one of his test flights when one of the rotors blew apart........and Phil Taylor lost his life that day.
Small solace and comfort, knowing that Phil died doing---"WHAT HE LOVED TO DO!"
(I have always detested...that saying? :-[ )
I never did get a chance to finish that gyro that CL Gyro....or get to fly it, so with that in mind.
I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW HOW THAT WHIRRRLEEE BIRDEEE' flew? H^^
-
Interesting concept...but when watching my departed friend fly his own ultra-light before his fatal flight.
Phil always looked like he was having his HANDS FULL when flying that deadly homebuilt of his.
:X :-[
-
The Talon pictured is a Kostecky design, it's just not one of Jims personal models. That one was built by someone else.
Arch