Author Topic: Vornholt Me 262 (Read 3830 times)

Luke Spreadborough · « **on:** December 20, 2007, 10:25:04 PM »

Hi guys,

I bought the plans for this model years ago, built and flew it for quite some time until a flame out the climb into a loop destroyed it. I intend to build one again in the near future.

I mistakenly thought this was a Jack Sheeks design until I finally found the magazine article. What lead me astray was the strong similarity to other Sheeks designs I had, and then I read Jack's biography and it mentions he designed models in Jim Vornholt's name. The Sheeks swept wing thread here has prompted me to ask, does anyone know if it really is a Sheek design?

wwwarbird · « **Reply #1 on:** December 21, 2007, 08:01:32 AM »

I don't know who designed it, but it's really cool!

Where do I get plans?

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #2 on:** December 21, 2007, 09:49:18 AM »

It's a Flying Models plan, CF 210 from March 1967. It was my first big stunter, total blast to fly with an OS 35S in the nose.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #3 on:** December 21, 2007, 11:10:05 AM »

Luke:
First off I see this was your FIRST post on StuntHanger - Welcome aboard!

I do not personally have the answer to your question, but I think that your supposition is pretty darned close to correct. Jack, Jim Vornholt, Bernie Ash, Bob Randall, and the rest of the Indianapolis Stunt Team certainly shared a lot of ideas and influenced each others airplanes. Jack built and published the most by far, and as you noted if you put the ME-262 published by Vornholt along side several of Jack's designs in the same time frame there is certainly a strong family resemblance.

I never saw a 262 fly, hoping you can elaborate more about yours: Engine used, weight? How did it fly? How'd it compare to other stunters you flew?

Jim Oliver · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2007, 11:18:21 AM »

Luke,

Welcome the Stunt Hangar hangout.

I checked FM plans list and found no plan numbered CF 210

Was checking to see who authored the article but No Joy........sorry.
Jim

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2007, 12:13:11 PM »

Quote from: Jim Oliver on December 21, 2007, 11:18:21 AM

Luke,

Welcome the Stunt Hangar hangout.

I checked FM plans list and found no plan numbered CF 210

Was checking to see who authored the article but No Joy........sorry.
Jim

Jim:
Found the plan on FM plan service; did the search by "Plane" looking for "ME-262". It is CF210, but the Jim's name was miss-spelled as "Vornolt"

I have the mag plan sheet at home, I'll try to scan/post when I get home...

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2007, 05:11:20 PM »

Thanks for the welcome.

This was my first big stunter and my first I-beamer, it tracked very well for a flapped model and the OS 35S seemed to be a match for it. I was sold on I-beamers after this model. It had one vice, it "wiggled" at the bottom of corners but I think this was due more to the leadout location than anything else. The leadout exit on the plan is (from memory) too far back from the CG. I built it heavy but it didn't seem to bother it and it always gave me excellent performance.

As for the flight envelope I can't really comment, I was still learning to fly the pattern and this was hampered by my desire to not destroy the model and a balance problem (me, not the model) when I looked directly overhead. The potential was definitely there though. It flew most manouvers suprisingly well but I never flew triangles or the cloverleaf. I built a Steve Wooley Argus after this but the 262 was a better flyer for me.

There is a small mistake on the published plan, the leading edge should be 1/4x1/2, not 1/4" square.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2007, 05:17:52 PM »

My apologies if this scan is too big. I built mine with equal length wings after nasty experiences with my All American Snr (flying from a grass field), it didn't seem to bother it having the wings equal and I kept the original span.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #8 on:** December 21, 2007, 07:59:02 PM »

Luke:
Thanks for posting the plan sheet. I'm posting what I have from the article just because there are a few more pix of Jim Vornholt's model.

You mentioned leadout postion: The model pictured in the article clearly had the leadouts well in front of the LE of the wing, but the plans show the leadouts INSIDE the wing - as you built yours?

One of the captions says the airplane was designed for a Fox 35, yet the pix show what looks to be a Johnson in it. Either way, the OS 35S was the best choice of those three!

With your second pix I see you mixed the solid green wings with the speckled camo fuselage - an EXCELLENT color choice and contrast!

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #9 on:** December 22, 2007, 08:55:13 AM »

A few months ago I asked Jack about the airplanes that were published under other names. He told me that he would not want to offend anyone by revealing himself as the actual designer, and would rather not comment. We did not talk about any particular airplane.

Dennis is correct in that the Indianapolis groups all influenced each other.

One thing that Jack did say was that Charles Mackey was a major influence on him.

Jack and Charles are still very innovative

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #10 on:** December 22, 2007, 03:29:46 PM »

Whoops, I didn't consider the embarrasment side of things.

So, the best thing to say would be that it's a Vornholt design with strong Sheeks influence. A very nice design regardless and the next one I build will have the leadout position sorted out along with lighter construction. The 1/4 balsa I used in the tail feathers on the original was more like pine. Didn't seem to bother it though.

Update:

I have just discovered the Stunt Hanger Hall of Fame thread and read Jack Sheeks autobiography there which answers my original question as to who designed the model.

I really need to address my memory.

Bill Little · « **Reply #11 on:** December 22, 2007, 08:25:24 PM »

Hi Luke, and welcome ot the Stunt Hanger! An asylum for the Stunt Handicapped!

A friend of mine built an ME 262 about 1971. It flew real nice! I cannot remember how the elevator pushrod is rigged, though. Can you shed some light on that??

Thanks!

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #12 on:** December 22, 2007, 10:57:36 PM »

Quote from: Bill Little on December 22, 2007, 08:25:24 PM

A friend of mine built an ME 262 about 1971. It flew real nice!

Exactly! A great flying model.

I can barely remember how I set the elevator pushrod up but it was fine. I'm fairly certain I commited the great no-no of bending the pushrod at an angle to meet the horn.
I used a conventional RC horn judging by the pic above.
The flaps were rigged with seperate home made horns (brass strip, silver solder and music wire). I had several other Sheeks plans and some of them weren't as spartan as the 262, so I robbed them for ideas. I really wish I could recall what ratios I used, because it worked. To be honest I'm almost certain I used the same horn/ratio setup as Jack's Enya Demon.

Ty, agreed re the sparse plans. The fuselage is as wide as the engine between the bearers and I used no framing as per the plan, relying on the top and bottom blocks/sheet for rigidity.

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #13 on:** December 23, 2007, 08:30:21 PM »

Looks like sumones stolen a march on Berringer there , with that FLAP configuration .

i figure the correct way to install the controls is put the bellcrank in the normal relationship to the CG ,
with the back line straight and the Fwd swept to half way to it .

CG @ 20 % of the Avg. Area back , - ? ? ? ? .

Anyone else remember fly one or seeing one fly ?

Nice to see the pictures , Thanks .

wwwarbird · « **Reply #14 on:** December 25, 2007, 03:21:30 PM »

Welcome aboard Luke! What's the 262's wingspan and wing area?

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #15 on:** December 26, 2007, 05:59:53 PM »

Thanks for the welcome Wayne, you guys are very welcoming here!

Appreciated.

The wingspan as measured from my ratty old Carstens copy is a true 55.5 inches. The wing area seems to be around 460 inches but I'm doing it wrong I'm sure, the average chord is 8.5 inches x the length, is that right?

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #16 on:** December 26, 2007, 06:31:31 PM »

Here's a shot from the magazine article which shows the leadout position, completely different from the plan. Judging by the leadouts the bellcrank appears to installed in the spar which isn't really required. The plans themselves show a better bellcrank location .

wwwarbird · « **Reply #17 on:** December 26, 2007, 08:03:50 PM »

Luke,

When you calculated the wing area, did you include the flaps too?

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #18 on:** December 26, 2007, 10:41:55 PM »

OK, I didn't include flaps. It appears to be 499.5 inches in area.

Bill Little · « **Reply #19 on:** December 27, 2007, 08:05:05 AM »

Jack drew the Me262 as a two place trainer variant. I really like th elook of the bubble canopy fighter version. Does any one think I would have to go postal if I took a *fighter* version to a Classic contest?? it's a canopy and *very slight* turtle deck change.

John Miller · « **Reply #20 on:** December 27, 2007, 08:56:30 AM »

Bill, IMNSHO, I can't see any reason why you coud not modify your Me262 to the fighter version. Remember, Classic's first rule. "It's supposed to be fun".

Jack will be doing the judging for the Sheeks Perpetual Award, so I can't speak for him, but, Since the criteria is "The best appearing Classic Sheeks design", I would do it in a heart beat.

No more dilly dally, get to work.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #21 on:** December 27, 2007, 09:02:03 AM »

Quote from: Bill Little on December 27, 2007, 08:05:05 AM

Jack drew the Me262 as a two place trainer variant. I really like th elook of the bubble canopy fighter version. Does any one think I would have to go postal if I took a *fighter* version to a Classic contest?? it's a canopy and *very slight* turtle deck change.

Brother Bear:
Paragraph 3 of the text (see earlier post above) says build it with the bubble or as the 2-place.

Like John says JUST BUILD IT!

You don't want the RNMM to turn on one of their own!

Bill Little · « **Reply #22 on:** December 27, 2007, 09:14:20 AM »

No worries here from the RNMM.......... I just wanted to see if there would be any objections. I blew the picture up big enough to read it and see the comment about the bubble vice turtle deck.

Several projects to finish, but it seems it will have to go on the list!

A calendar year from full retirement in the State system. Just got to find a fool proof way to kock off some licquor stores to fund buying enough balsa! And a source, sine my belived Lone Star is out, at least for now.......

PLENTY of good running engines!

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #23 on:** December 28, 2007, 02:12:47 AM »

Bill,

a friend of mine built one as a fighter after I built my two seater. It does need a slight turtle deck change as you say to suit the bubble canopy but it works fine. Unfortunately I don't have pictures of his model, like mine he creamed it doing stupid things.

Here is a good source of colour schemes for the 262B two seater, and here are some nice schemes for the single seater.

Start building!!

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #24 on:** December 30, 2007, 11:17:06 PM »

Luke, since this is a very cool plane, and there seems to be a lot of interest...

What year did you build yours, with the equal span wing? If it was built that way, before Dec. 31, 1969, then it would be an authentic modification. Is that you holding it, by chance? And what part of Australia are ya from?
G'day

Steve

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #25 on:** December 31, 2007, 05:40:32 PM »

Hi Steve

,

I built that model in 1981 (thereabouts) and that's my kid brother Joe holding it. I did my level best to get him interested in CL but he wouldn't have it, his mind had already been captured by hand held games and cartoons.
You would think a roaring 262 performing loops and wingovers etc. would hold a kid captivated !

There were two reasons for my building it with equal span wings, my All American Senior flew nicely but was a head hunting terror at launch due to the long inboard wing and NO tip weight( I fell for the "no tip weight required" spiel) , and I had read several of Dick Mathis articles and he mentioned that no offsets were needed on most models. I'm inclined to think he was correct, although I did weaken and built the 262 with some rudder offset because I had built several other models before this one and had gone through the horrors of being chased by one. The leadouts were ahead of the CG on a 15 sized profile of mine, I didn't quite realise that at the time. Seriously, there is nothing worse than having your own model hunt you down. There is a limit to how fast you can run, and duck, etc.

BTW, I hail from Brisbane.

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #26 on:** January 27, 2008, 07:01:53 PM »

Luke...you have my permission to give your kid brother a sound thrashing...

I positively loved Brisbane and what parts of Qld. I got to see in Oct. '83.

Thanks for posting your pics and experiences with the Me-262. G'day,

Steve

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #27 on:** January 29, 2008, 11:29:22 PM »

I thought that I had posted it here.. I talked to Jack again about the ME 262. He did design the airplane. Then, Jim Vornholt built the airplane. That is why it was published under Jim's name.

Jack says that this makes the airplane eligible for the Sheeks award.

Mike Lauerman · « **Reply #28 on:** January 31, 2008, 06:59:52 PM »

Not to seem "uninformed", but is there:

1) a collective place that encompasses all the Jack Sheeks plans? I used to see them one after another in the plans classifieds (Flying Models, M.A.N.?)

2) a source for this "Jack Sheeks Autobiography"? That would be a READ.

Thanks. (Gosh, I'm glad I found my way back here!!!)

Mike, 'knee deep' in Atwater (CA)

Bill Little · « **Reply #29 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:19:37 AM »

Quote from: Mike Lauerman on January 31, 2008, 06:59:52 PM

Not to seem "uninformed", but is there:

1) a collective place that encompasses all the Jack Sheeks plans? I used to see them one after another in the plans classifieds (Flying Models, M.A.N.?)

2) a source for this "Jack Sheeks Autobiography"? That would be a READ.

Thanks. (Gosh, I'm glad I found my way back here!!!)

Mike, 'knee deep' in Atwater (CA)

Hi Mike,

Here's Jack's bio:

http://stunthanger.com/smf/index.php?topic=1532.0