stunthanger.com
Speed,Combat,Scale,Racing => Combat => Topic started by: hoythawkins on January 03, 2007, 12:51:02 AM
-
I flew both in combat back in early fifties. The Quicker was fast and turned tighest of the two. But if you landed inverted after engine quit or skimmed the ground inverted the upright engine would brake the motor mounts. We were making them with oak motor mounts and that helped. But you could bend an engine.
The Half Fast was a flying wing and had the engine mounted upright also.
Hawk
-
Yup, remember them both very well. The Half-Fast and the Wow were direct competitors. The Quicker was kind of a transition design to the later smaller straight wings that ended up with the seperate stabilator a la Voodoo, etc. Those big ol' swept flying wings could be a handful.
--Ray
-
Yup, I think I have a full size set of the quicker plans somewhere in the junk barrell.
Bigiron
-
Barry Baxter has plans for both, if you want do another. http://www.controllineplans.com/index.htm
-
I can remember Ed Herbert and the rest of us making 100 kits in his workshop and selling them for $1.00 each. That was cost in 1958. We sure loved them. Fox combat special was the best then.
-
The "Tee Square" seems to be a jarring note in that otherwise harmonious list of great-flying airplanes. Out of era, at least.
Not criticizing, just an observation.
--Ray
-
The Quicker was my first really fast combat plane. I had been flying all those big and heavy flying wing combat models before the Quicker. The motor mts in the Half Fast were a lot stronger than the Quickers as they were inside the wings leading edge. I have a Reactor almost finished to be flown as a sport model.It should be fun. I had a few Omega's that were quite fast but they didn't turn like a Quicker.Back in those days 2/3 of the combat models were originals.
Ed
-
Of that list of planes, the Quicker was clearly, by far, the best. The wing was what became know as the VooDoo wing. The upright mounts and conventional tailplane were the difference between the Quicker and the ultra-popular VooDoo.
As mentioned here, the upright engine mount was stone-age thinking, which was cured by the VooDoo and never revisited. The last thing we wanted was combat job that couldn't "go in" inverted.
In my opinion, and that of all successful combat designers, the very short tail, ala T-Square, Wow, Half Fast, and Omega, was another bad design error. Planes really started to fly with the avent of loooonger tail moments, as evidenced by the Combat Cat, Motivator, and Nemesis.
-------------------------------------
A couple oldies not yet mentioned were the MidWest Hornet & Wasp (named after aircraft carriers # 7 & 8?). The Wasp was a really potent machine, with a bigger and thicker wing than some, and a conventional flipper in the era of the stabilator. The Hornet was a mistake, basically a retro-Quicker that didn't fly as well and the engine mounts still broke.
-
Quicker !!! I am glad I am not the old guy around here. I have some very fond memories of the Quicker. It really was one good combat wing. When I was kid back in the 50's we tryed every thing we could get our hands on.The Quicker was my best plane.Recently I picked one up on Ebay just for old time sake.Paid an outrages price but I would never part with it now.Some day I plan to copy it and throw my old mccoy on it and see just how bad age has taken it's toll.
-
the original Quicker(mag plans) had a diffrent airfoil from kit-it was reflexed or concaved.
the kit quicker is same as voo doo i think--will compare Quicker kit to voo doo if any intrested.
my dad loved quickers and built bunches of em for hoped up g.h. torps
my mom hated t-squares and only built one--it was tail heavy and she was hard headed--sent her back to being rat racer anchor.
my first combat was a voo doo with a fox rocket square intake--won my first contest at shereveport state champs with that thing
Where did the good days go?
David
-
Quote: "......In my opinion, and that of all successful combat designers, the very short tail, ala T-Square, Wow, Half Fast, and Omega, was another bad design error. Planes really started to fly with the avent of loooonger tail moments, as evidenced by the Combat Cat, Motivator, and Nemesis................."
Note:
I'll be posting a Nemesis II kit in the Classifieds in the next day or so. Proceeds will be for donation to Stunt Hangar fund. 12/4 -It is posted!
Designed by: Howard Rush
Kitted by: M&P Design Group
Watch the classifieds. Kit is original, just missing label from box. H^^
Roger V.
-
Quicker !!! I am glad I am not the old guy around here. I have some very fond memories of the Quicker. It really was one good combat wing. When I was kid back in the 50's we tryed every thing we could get our hands on.The Quicker was my best plane.Recently I picked one up on Ebay just for old time sake.Paid an outrages price but I would never part with it now.Some day I plan to copy it and throw my old mccoy on it and see just how bad age has taken it's toll.
The family had several of them, about 1959 or so, I think, along with a very similar Wooten design with a very much shorter tail, and a couple of Half-Fasts (an older design by 3-4 years, right?). In a retro mood, we modified a double VooDoo kit into two of them, a lot more recently than 1959, and forgot how easily those thing barrel-rolled from a casual combat hand launch. Ruined a good set of lines and a never-flown new plane in seconds.
My uncle has a Quicker wing, in bones, modified with a full fuselage, wing flaps, inverted engine, hanging on his bedroom wall 40-45 or some years after it was built, with a Fox 19 in it.
-
ama21835 said:
"In my opinion, and that of all successful combat designers, the very short tail, ala T-Square, Wow, Half Fast, and Omega, was another bad design error. Planes really started to fly with the avent of loooonger tail moments, as evidenced by the Combat Cat, Motivator, and Nemesis."
Ah, the MOTIVATOR, flown by Bernie Varnau in the early seventies-- that was a hot bird. Does anybody know if plans for it are available anywhere? Bare doesn't list them.
-
I still have remains of my Quicker - it is pretty far gone but could be resurrected with lts of effort- would be easier to build a new one- just need a set of patterns for ribs- I can measure other dimensions directly from the remains I have. If I build new - it will be home for one of my JS CS- same as first time. My second JS CS is awaiting a new Sneeker- and the third JSCS is inline for a Voodoo. Also have unbuilt Sterling kit of a Super Swoop- triple boom- This would use my Fox .36BB slant head CS. Never flew a SuperSwoop- where does it fit in the combat wing evloution towards foam? Only foam Combat wing I attempted was a Wooten design that had a solid foam wing covered with some type of a white paper stock. If I recall it might have been called a Viper? It was sold by Fliteline - which I belive was company run by Riely. I never completed that project.
-
Vampires were Riley's own personal choice as combat weapons in his final seasons of competition (the Viper was someone else's something, but the albums fail to come up with any matching pictures). Of all of Riley's combat designs, our favorite was the "full span" 42 inch Sneeker, but we never used Hi Johnson's engines in contests. we'd had too many break where the cylinder attached to the case with only two screws.
We tried G21's when the shafts were as brittle as glass, and ended up with Willie Wylie's Fox rebuilds, although the first custom-tuned X motors we had worked on were by George Aldrich.
-
Thanks for responding- yes it was the Vampire I was referring to. Never knew there was a Sneeker with larger wing span than the kit 36" design.
Regarding failure of JS CS at the cylinder liner attachment- I just looked closely at my engines - never before paid attention to that detail-I assume you mean the two screws which extend from cylinder head and break out into the exhaust port? On one of my three engines I can see some kind of reinforcing feature which was part of the crankcase casting which are located where the two screws intersect the exhaust opening- the other two engines just have the end of the head screw visible.
Never experianced any failure at those locations- but of course I was not intense competitor- I flew those engines once in awhile- I doubt anyone of them ever had more than 1 gallon of fuel through them. Can't recall type of fuel I used- most likely Missle Mist- and maybe one quart of "Blast"; perhaps some K&B 1000.
-
I'll have to look at a Johnson, but my recollection is that the case stops below the cylinder fins, like a GH Torp or RH McCoy, and the fins/ liner are all one piece. But only the front and rear screws on the Johnson get that far, and they will literally allow the top of the engine to pop off in flight when juiced by high Nitro fuels. We used to use Blast as a mix with K&B 100 and Missile Mist to adjust Nitro. We seldom used it straight, but it was my eventual understanding that Blast could cause a Johnson to come apart, even at moderate rpms.
-
I remember those airplanes. Did Pete Jaden fly the long-wing Sneekers at the 1962 Nats? They were pretty cool. I built a kit Sneeker and covered it with pink silk and put black trim on it like Pete's.
The Super Swoop was designed by a guy named Carpenter from California. He did well at a Nats approx. 1960-- he may have won-- with the Swoop, which, as I remember, had a 10" chord and 33" span + tips. It got published in a magazine and was a pretty good airplane, although the structure was substandard. The Super Swoop had a "laminar-flow" airfoil with the max thickness pretty far aft, a result of some bad advice from an aero engineer. Sterling wanted to kit the Super Swoop. He told them OK, but not to use the "laminar-flow" airfoil. Sterling went ahead with the bad airfoil, thus making a kit that was both structually and aerodynamically substandard. I may not be telling the story accurately, but the resultant kit was a dog. I met Mr. Carpenter at the 1964 Nats, where he was flying airplanes named Super Too. He had fixed the airfoil by then. They were covered with amber silk and were very nicely finished. I watched all his matches. He opened every one with a half outside. He went fairly low inverted until he passed under his opponent and then did a partial outside to get on the opponent's tail, often to good effect. I was impressed that he could get away with the same move for the whole contest, so I started doing it myself. It was a couple years before anybody countered it.
-
That year's Nats isn't one I recall any mentions of, but at the Southwesterns of 62 or 63, Wooten was flying them to good effect, before building so many of his Demons for the next year. Interesting tidbit, according to my uncle, who is the one active in contests then, Riley never used a VooDoo after it was kitted by Goldberg.
-
My first "real" combat model was a Half-Fast from magazine plans. Forster powered! Flew all right for me, but then I was 15! After a few years finally met Bill Netzeband when he moved to California, he's still kicking around out here.
-
My first combat contest was in Beaumont, Texas in 1954 (I believe this date is correct but it has been a long time). I went fully equipped with a single Fox powered Ringmaster. We had practiced in the small town in Louisiana, but everyone was flying Ringmasters so we thought they were pretty good. It was there I first saw my first real combat airplane. It was called the Sweet Sweep and they were powered by hopped up Torp GH 35s with pen bladder tanks. Compared to my Ringmaster they looked like they flew 1000 mph and turned 3 ft. dia loops.
I went home discouraged and looking for a real combat design. The Half Fast turned out to be that airplane and I flew them for several years - most powered by OS Max 35s. After trying several airplanes, I built a Half Fast with a side mounted engine notched into the leading edge of the engine much like the Sweet Sweep. This reduced drag and improved the turn considerably. While I was working development on this, Wild Bill published his Equalizer and that became my airplane of choice. By then, the K&B Series 61 and later 64 became available so they became my engine of choice. I still have a couple of engines and a set of plans, maybe time for some old combat airplane.
Steve
-
In my opinion, and that of all successful combat designers, the very short tail, ala T-Square, Wow, Half Fast, and Omega, was another bad design error. Planes really started to fly with the avent of loooonger tail moments, as evidenced by the Combat Cat, Motivator, and Nemesis.
[/quote]
Paul,
I had a really interesting discussion on combat design with Riley Wooten at VSC last year. He was not a believer in long tails to improve the flight characteristics. He thought that long tails reduced the agility he wanted. He confessed that the "long booms" on later Voodoos were only for CG control with the heavier big case Jounsons. The length was scientifically set by putting the big engine in the airplane and sliding the booms/stabulator aft until it balanced. The long boom Sneeker was done the same. My favorite of his airplanes was a Sneeker built with 36" spars so that the total span was 42" and the stab 3" aft of the TE.
Steve
-
Speaking of the Quicker, my wife has a VERY interesting tale to tell about those planes concerning the launch, waist high weeds, and red ant dens.
Bigiron
-
How about "Mongoose"? Mathis?
-
Speaking of the Quicker, my wife has a VERY interesting tale to tell about those planes concerning the launch, waist high weeds, and red ant dens.
Bigiron
C'mon, you can't just leave it at that...
-
Hey, BigIron:
I HOPE you take her out to dinner a LOT!
-
Sounds like when I launched my little brother's first flight...ROG though. He held full up and when I turned it loose it came back at me like a yoyo. Quick reflexes saved me, today I'd have a facefull of .15 powered Jr. Ringmaster. That's when I learned to launch from beside, not behind!
--Ray
-
And did anyone else notice the Midwest Half Fast that just went on the 'Bay for $177 ??!!!!
-
Speaking of the Quicker, my wife has a VERY interesting tale to tell about those planes concerning the launch, waist high weeds, and red ant dens.
Anyone want to tell any stories about Quickers or Whatzits doing barrel rolls on launch from engine torque effects ? I've heard a few from the old timers after I saw a replica launched that took a left turn and went after its pilot . .
Supposedly, the launched Quicker needs to be aimed 15-20 degrees outward, and outboard wing low. Right ? Sound familiar ?
-
My Quicker- with JS CS / Missle Mist fuel / hard tank on crankcase pressure and 9-8 prop hand launched same as my VooDoo and my Sneeker- maybe folks with launch problems forgot to add tip weight or they didn't drill engine mtg holes with some outboard bias?
If anyone knows about a repli kit for Sneeker please let me know- I'd love to recreate those good old days-
-
Bare has Sneeker plans at
www.controllineplans.com
Chad Hill
-
if you like the old combat models i might have what you seek.
CD # 5
C/L Combat
This Volume contains the following files:
Table of Contents
1/2A Combat 39 models
FAI Combat 34 models
Fast Combat 92 models
Slow Combat 36 models
Total 201 models
Thomas Wilk
301 West Redwing Street
Duluth, MN 55803-1711
email me at Tawilk36@cpinternet.com H^^
-
I still have one hanging on my wall-
-
$177.00 for a Half Fast????? I guess I didn't do too bad a job by trading my Harter's Regal Raider for one in the 70s when I lived in Hawaii! I used it for templates and still have the two halves from where my son crashed it in the late 80s. I also plan to build some more. I do remember using Half Fasts and Ringmasters with my McCoy 36 in combat in the 50s. In fact, I used that McCoy for everything. I also remember the adults (they could afford Firecats and Foxes) using those in combat. Aah! The way things were! We should all go back to riding our bike 20 miles while holding a plane and flying box to get to a contest! And those Quickers??? That's when I got out of serious (?) combat. Nemisis was a plane from another generation. That one was from the 70s. At least that's the first time I ever saw one.
I gotta get these Firecats finished. Bye all!
Bob
-
The McCoy 36 was "early" 50's, and pretty weak for combat. The RH 35 was '57 onward, and some of the non-contest combat pilots used those. I describe them that way because there was a lot of casual, just for fun combat going on when the event was new. I used my Torp 29 for that, starting with my Sterling Yak-9 (weighed a ton, flew badly), progressing to a couple of Circus Kings, before my first Don Still Nobody, about 1955 (Torp 35).
I'd just started building Quickers some when I started college, and gave most of my stuff, not including engines, to some younger modellers.
-
You are totally correct! The McCoy 36 was pretty weak for combat. But then, of course, with 10 pound airplanes that 36 was weak for everything. If I remember correctly in '55-'56 I made about $8.00 a month from my weekly paper route. Later on I started cutting grass for $3.00 a yard when I could get people to employ me. It took until about 1958 before I could get enough money together to buy a Fox 35. Later on, I bought two Fox rocket 36 CSs. Those I used in my Renegades with crankcase pressure. Those were fun to get running with neoprene tubing HB~>. I finally learned and quit flooding the engines on startup. Combat was very relaxed in the 50s. When I started flying combat again in the 70s, in my first match, we both got up and I eas waiting for the two of us to agree to start and was killed while flying level. That was a major surprise! New style combat flying had a short learning curve though. Once the plane was let go it was fair game. Very cutthroat!
-
My very first paper route, in 1952, generated right at $35 a month, for roughly 50 to 55 subscribers. That was for the local afternoon paper. I did better after switching to the other publisher's morning paper, and about 80 subscribers on essentially the same route. But a couple of years later, part-time at a grocers' was when there was really enough for new 35s, instead of used 29s.
My original Nobody flying wings had suction tanks, but I saw some modified versions called Streamer Creamers, and built at least one, using a pen bladder tank, and liked that system. Then, there was a Half Fast, with which I think I reverted to a plain suction tank at first. I'm fairly sure I modified that to use the pen bladder system. Whichever came first, Whatzit, Quicker, or Super Whatzit, I built for a Fox CS Series I (Silver Head), and crankcase pressure tank (disliked it).
The summer of '57, I built a Quicker as my last combat plane for the next four years, but I used a Johnson that another modeler owned, to fly faster than I'd ever gone with any combat model. There weren't very many sanctioned contests within easy reach, unless I cadged rides with older competitors, so I continued building modified profile models without LG, for plain fun bouts, and continued using one or another of an original pair of Torp 29s I more or less started with.
I used a Hotter'n'that wing in a couple of those. The only planes I still had to start flying again in 1961 with were two Veco Tomahawks, with gear, and a Palmer Mars. But a friend gave me a couple of old Quickers that I repaired (one became a 19-size flapped stunter), and I took the singleton semi-stock Quicker (longer tail) to a contest, using the Fox CS engine I'd used four years before. I think I was eliminated in the first round.
-
My paper route was for a weekly local (Kirkwood, Mo.) small paper. It's the kind that's now delivered free with the grocery store ads in it. The subscription rate was $0.20 a month. The entire route was a little over 1/4 mile square. I think I was 11 or 12 when I started doing it.
I knew nothing about bladders or pacifiers until the late 70s. The fastest thing I flew was a Nemisis. I couldn't keep up with it. Winders Matadors and Voodoos were more my speed.
Just bought an F2d and 3 fast ships along with a couple of modified Foxes and some hot 15 at Toledo this year. The fast ships are Mejzliks. The fuel compartments appear to be too small to hold bladders. I was using surgical tubing in the 70s which extended quite a bit. I have some yellow jacket tubing from Phil C. but haven't tried it yet.
I'm not sure it will fit. I also have to get up the nerve to put those engines on and try to fly them.
Bob
-
You know, I ought to 'fess up to one thing (and if the EDIT here didn't shut down so fast, I'd put it where it belongs). The original poster who started this thread is the same person whose Quicker I turned into a small stunt model, Hawk Hawkins. He cleared out his collection of damaged combat ships one day, including a Combat Cat, Quicker, and a VooDoo. My Fox CS broke its con rod, and I had to make do with a 35X in its place.
By the time the Matador and Nemesis were current, pacifiers for bladders were what we used, inside of a "wiffle ball" bladder compartment, or a vienna sausage can. I was very happy to get away from crankcase pressure systems. I used the Fox 36X-BB engines after too much trouble with bearings and shafts on some earlier G21-35 Tigres, until the baldie 36X came along, and couldn't keep up with a Perry-ported G21-35.
It wasn't until the hottest of Fox Mk IIIs & IVs became available, between 1985-1990, that I needed to enlarge my planes to keep them from being quite so fast . . of course, by then I was a lot slower, myself, as well.
-
I've got some G-35s (they look like the G-21s but are bushing engines instead of bearings) and one G-21-35 a bit modified. I planned to put them in some Voodoos and Gotcha streaks. I think I'm going to get some Gotcha SS at Brodak this year if P. Cartier brings some. I have 2 new OS 25FPs to put into them. I'm sure I can hold those. I built a bunch of Winders in the mid 80s with Vienna Sausage cans to hold the pacifiers. I cut too much out of the spars in an effort to get the cans into the wing. When I flew in the very late 80s after moving to Columbus, Oh. I stuck my Mark III in a Winder and proceded to fold the wings and watch the plane explode on the 2nd lap even before the enging came up to full rpm. I haven't had the guts to try to fly another since. Maby I can stick a little engine in one and fly it, but probably better pull the covering and stick on some carbon fiber then recover them , what to you think? Maby even recover them with polyester and dope rather than Monokote.
-
I was never a fan of the Winder, and saw some well built ones fold up from high-G maneuvers. I think that they needed silk covering to stay together, and not any lightweight Half-A FF model silk, either.
We've flown a great many Arrowplanes (similar to the Gotcha) with various Asian 20s and 25s, including FPs, and had a lot of fun with them. They worked pretty well for Speed Limit, but we preferred the BB-shaft FXes, with restricted intakes for that. Back in the 1960s and 70s, I never did own a "C-35" Tigre (which is what I suppose you meant by "G-35"), although I eventually did get more G21-35s, after the Fox 36X BB-Baldie CS was a bit of a bust (ended up using mine in AMA Slow Combat).
-
Yes, C-35. I looked at the cases wrong. Never owned any Fox Xs. The thing I like about the Winder is that I can (could?) fly it and keep up with it. I can probably keep up with the Gotchas too, at least I hope so. I don't know who Mr. Hawkins is. Actually, I don't know anyone in combat since I haven't flown it since I lived in Hawaii.
And none of them fly on the mainland. My biggest problem was that where I was stationed there weren't any controline flyers, except Hawaii. I know, a lot of people were able to continue flying even under those conditions, but I wasn't. I also had this wife mw~ who hated my airplanes but that was probably my fault due to my chosen profession. She hated the Army too. Now, I'm married to the sweetest baby doll in the world, so that problem's eliminated!
Actually, I don't know many people in any discipline. I talk to those I do know and read a lot while trying to relearn the stuff I forgot and learn a whole bunch of stuff I never did learn when I was flying before. At the moment, I'm trying to get out of beginner Stunt and go to more than two contests without totalling my plane. Am also attempting to get planes built. Besides reflexes, my building has slowed way down. I used to buy a plane and supplies on Saturday and fly that plane at a contest on Sunday. Now I can't even get the wing framed up in that time. I take 10 times longer and they still don't look any better. I really envy those who can make a plane look beautiful!
Bob
-
Robert, it is amazing what we can do when we want. I took a "Big Iron" to club meeting one night as it always seemed windy on club meeting nights. It is powered with an old Johnson Combat Special on crankcase pressure. running 10% SIG fuel and 9-7 nylon prop it was timed at 90+ mph. Talk about a rush. I was a little hesitant on the first maneuvers, but, then I started hammering the controls. Even let Melvin fly it once. To top it off I did not get dizzy in level flight like I thought I would with the speed of it. Have fun, DOC Holliday
-
John,
Bad point. I'm back to work with another employer. Now I'm back on the "Big" road (I drive a big truck). I get to come home to go to the doctor. Any more time I have to turn the truck in and take 4 days to get home and back out on the road. However, what I plan to do is to get my small flying box and toss a couple of planes into the truck to fly if I find someone where I end up stopping I'll ask if I can fly with them if they are going flying. I'll take the PAMPA member list. I'm not in MACA since I haven't flown competetively since before it was formed. But if I get in your neck of the woods, maby we can get together and fly. I am subject to be anywhere but "the great northwest". I'm also sticking a couple of kits into the truck for when I'm sitting.
I'll try and see if I can keep up with those fast planes. When I get this Gotcha finished I know I will fly it.
Thanks for the insiration. I'll Do it.
Bob