This is a derivative design from the Chipmunk, but i am afraid it might be too new.  The plans in the kit were last copyrighted in 1971.  Is there any documentation out there suggesting that the prototype might have been built early enough to qualify for classic?

I got the kit off ebay because I liked it.  Mike Stott always did a nice job with his semi-scale designs!

It would be great if it turned out to be legal for Classic, but I doubt it is. I flew one for two seasons in competition about 10 years ago. I think it's a great model design. I would defiantly build another, given the chance.

Bill, who here can give give us a definitive answer? I would love to know if this plane could be added to the Classic list. I'd be all over it.

I just opened my kit of the Akrobat cl-16 from sig. Both sheets say at the lower left corner Copyright - 1971 . Dang!

Ahem! lower Right corner.

Wow same as my plans!   

All seriousness aside, and as Bill alluded to.  It can take awhile for a kit to go from prototype to production stage.  I think the Acrobat uses the same wing (different tips and flaps) as the Chipmunk which IS classic legal.  Thus I was hoping someone MIGHT have some kind of documentation that the prototype was built befure the classic cut-off date.

(but it don't look good, folks!) 

Hmmm.

I just read a couple of posts in another forum that suggest that the RD-1, by Bob Hunt uses the same wing as the Twister. I, however have no idea if this is true or whether the RD-1 predates the Twister.

Robert

Isn't the rule "kitted or published" by a certain date, not imagined or thought about before the date?

Maybe a guy thought about it 10 or 12 years before he got around to kitting and/or publishing.

The original rule was well-stated, and easy to enforce.  There seems to be enough slack in "new thinking" to fly anything you want to bluff by.

The rule, as you've quoted, is only partly correct.

As I understand it, the criteria is Kitted, published, designed, or built before the cutoff date.

Dennis and all,

I wish I could give you the answer you are hoping for, but all I can say is that I'm doubtful that the Akrobat makes the classic deadline.  I wasn't here (at SIG) at the time the Akrobat came out, but the original "Bill of Materials" in here in my files at work, in Mike Stott's own handwriting, is dated November 16, 1971.  Typically the BOM would be one of the last things finalized before going into production, so that is very close to the date the first kits were made -- maybe 2-3 weeks after that date. 

I also know that Mike Stott worked on these projects very fast, so my opinion would be that he most likely started drawing up the Akrobat design in spring or early summer of 1971.  Too late to be classic legal, even though the design is certainly not much different than the SIG CL-3 Chipmunk which came out in 1969 and is classic legal.

Mike Stott came to work at SIG right after winning Senior Stunt at the 1969 Nats (I think a kid named Dennis ? was the Junior winner that year!).  His first project was to improve the CL-3 Chipmunk, which he did (that's when it got the bright yellow box).  IN 1970 he worked on the R/C Ryan STA project, along with the Banshee and several 1/2A control line designs.

The Akrobat uses the same wing and moments as the CL-3 Chipmunk.  The design obviously is a 1960s era design, IMO.  Nothing new there.  Nobler/Chipmunk all the way.  This is why at the annual SIG Contest we refer to the Classic event as "SIG Classic" and allow the Akrobat and Twister to fly in the event even though they came out too late to make the normal cutoff date.  I don't see where they have any technological "advantage" over the older classic legal Chipmunk and Banshee.

If you want to pursue this further, Mike Stott's home email address is
mike.stott@chartermi.net

I'm sure he would enjoy hearing from any of you.

FYI -- the Akrobat was discontinued due to slow sales on March 24, 1992 -- over 15 years ago!

Mike G

Bill, thanks for that. I honestly had no idea. I just happened across a thread asking about the RD-1 (their topic) and saw this mentioned. At first I did not think anything about which came first, or how much later.

As for Bob Hunt, his name is quite familiar to me regarding C/L. The RD-1 however I had no knowledge of. I am sure however that if Bob Hunt designed it, that it is a good performer.

When I saw that it was being compared to the Twister, I wondered if it may somehow be a part of this whole design scheme. Since it is not, I say, onward and forward with the investigation!

Robert

Hi Brother Dennis!

I would, personally, be more in favor of the 35 year rolling cutoff, too.  Maybe I will be the "Villain" and put in a proposal to PAMPA for a change!

Hi Brother Dennis!

I would, personally, be more in favor of the 35 year rolling cutoff, too.  Maybe I will be the "Villain" and put in a proposal to PAMPA for a change!

I'll be sidekick #2!

BRING BACK THE ROLLING CUTOFF DATE FOR CLASSIC STUNT!!!