Profile Ringmaster or Profile Flite Streak?

[Andre Ming]

Okay, when I'm active in C/L, my main "thing" is building/flying vintage combat wings and powering them with vintage engines. That's my "Happy Place".

HOWEVER...

It's now been 7 years since I've flown AND I'm now 71. I don't think I need to return to flying via a combat wing, even with a restrictor in the venturi. (Even with a restictor and on 10% nitro, it will still be tootin' along about 90 MPH.)


SO...

I think I ought to build a 35 powered profile sport plane. Two come to mind: Either a .19-35 size profile Ringmaster or a .19-.35 profile Flite Streak. (I haven't done "sport planes" in a long time.)

I intend to power the airplane with a suction fed Fox 36 CL sleeve bearing engine. I can run it in a rich 4s to get my wings back... then lean it out as I get more comfortable with flying again. Also, I will likely have a daughter that will want to fly again (it's been decades for her), plus, her boyfriend wants to learn. SO, my future sport plane will need to double as a trainer for both of them.

PLANE OPTIONS...

I have a 50 year old profile Flite Streak in the box... but should it be built, or should it stay in the box? (i.e. Can I supplement my retirement with it?  )

FWIW: IF I purchase "repli-kits", they're not true replicas. That is, the repli-kit Ringmaster uses a square stick for a leading edge that you sand the front edge into a more aerodynamic shape. The repli-kit Flite Streak appears to use a formed LE, but still isn't a replica.

However, I'm sure the repli-kits will fly fine.

SO, which would you chose if you were in my shoes?

* Build the Flite Steak kit?

* Purchase a repli-kit Ringmaster?

* Purchase a repli-kit Flite Streak?

Help me Obi-Wan... for you are my only hope.

 


Andre

[Dennis Moritz]

Flite Streak. Replica ok.

[Gary Dowler]

Whatever you build, do yourself a favor and make a couple changes from tradition, since you stated it had been a long time

NO rudder offset. It never did what it was supposed to do anyway.

No engine offset (unless flying dictates a need)

Adjustable leadout guide. (the more you can adjust things, the better they fly)

Adjustable tip weight box (see above)

Carbon fiber pushrod!

Uniflow vented tank


And Id also suggest ditching the old Fox and buying a OS 20FP or 25LA for it.  Equal power to the Fox 35 of old (yes, I know you stated a different engine), much more consistent engine runs and you done need a ton of Castor in the fuel.
Set up this way and built nice and straight, either one will work beautifully (though the Flite Streak is the better flier of the two)

Gary

[Ken Culbertson]

You have a conundrum.  If it is just you, by all means the Flight Streak with the controls SLOW.  You know how to fly so dizzy will be your issue.  Don't worry, it IS like riding a bike, you don't forget.  I sat out 35 years and also came back at 71.  Flew an entire, although very sloppy, pattern on my third flight.  It will also give you the chance to see how you react to turning while looking up.  Trust me it is not the same as when you were in your 40's.  Thanks to Climate change, the sky moves on you and that is confusing.

Now for the multi-use prospects.  The daughter has flown and will probably handle the Flight Streak just fine.  Plus, at her age be less affected by climate change.   The boyfriend is another issue.  The Flight Streak was, and still is a slow combat plane.  I would go with the Ringmaster for him.  Feel him out and decide if he has good hand-eye coordination while turning.  He will get dizzy at first on a Flight Streak, you can't slow them down as much as you can a Ringmaster.  My first maneuvering plane with something over a .049 up front was a Flight Streak Jr. with a Fox 15.  It landed with the engine running a lot at first but it was strong and rebuilt easily.

For either one - set the controls to SLOW, especially the Ringmaster.  It stalls easily and with very little warning.

Good Luck and Welcome Back!

Ken
ps:  It it is the streak for the boyfriend do it with a streamer attached at first.  Helps dampen the jitters.

[john e. holliday]

Do Like I do.  Clone the kit.  I made the leading edges by riblets and gluing to 1/8 sheet and formimg 1/16 over the riblets.  The rest is just tracing parts.  I had pictures over on the Ringmaster forum and maybe some on this forum.  Will put the search in line with other things I said I will do.  Main thing is cgarge battery in my camera.  Oh I also cloned the Combat Streak.   

[john e. holliday]

By the way at 71 I can call you kid.  Yes the preceding post takes time.  But, being retired I have a little time to do things when the family will let me.

[Andre Ming]

THANKS all for tossing some input my way!

Sounds to me like the Streak gets consensus.

I do recall I built a pair of Streaks for training purposes back in the early 1980s that taught several to fly, even used them for some slow combat with a couple friends. That pair flew very slow with 35 Stunt power.

(My family called them the "Green Wienie" and the "Orange Crate" by virtue of the transparent Monocote on them of the same color.)

Here's a pic (they're in the background) during the late 1980s while they were serving "combat duty" with a couple friends...

(Ross Nash seated, Greg Hoogstrait standing.)





(LOL! Looks like I didn't even bother with the tail fins on that pair of Streaks! Either that, or they've already been knocked off in air-to-ground incidents!)


BTW, here's a pic of the kit I have that was gifted to me by a Fox Mfg friend with whom I flew with and ran with for a while:





Surprisingly, the LE and TE look quite straight. However, I don't think I can bring myself to building it. Perhaps if I hadn't been gifted it, I could... but I dunno'.


Looks like those in favor of Streaking (with clothes on hopefully) are winning.


Andre

[Colin McRae]

I have both and the Flite Streak flies much better in my opinion. Mine uses a stock OS 25LA. An OS 20FP would also be a good option. The Ringmaster is prone to wing stall if you hit the corners too tight.

Not a fan of the Fox 35. The OS's just run much better.

And if you decide on the Streak, ditch the single center landing gear wheel and install 2 wheels. With the single center wheel, you WILL damage the wing tips on landing.

[Dan McEntee]

   If I were you I would build the Streak just to get into the air. You can then have a whole year to build a Ringmaster to get in on the annual Ringmaster -Fly-A-Thon fun. Both models can be scratch built easily. If you need plans and patterns drop me a line. The newer replica kits have new construction but is still the same S-1 kit, but the old style method of construction can still work also if you can fins the pre-shaped leading and trailing edges. A Fox .35 Stunt would be just fine, you know what you are doing with them. If you don't have one, let me know. We have also figured out better tanks for the short nosed models also in order to get a full stunt pattern in, if desired. I think I would be lost if I didn't have acouple of airplanes to fly with Fox.35s on them!!
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Dave_Trible]

I vote for the Streak as well.  The wing is much more effective and can handle a little more weight if it has too.   If you have a Fox, run the Fox.  They do the job without the scream.  For what it is and what you are doing with it I'd just build it all box stock and have fun with it.  It isn't, and you aren't, building a Nats Top Five stunt airplane so trying to adapt every 'new' thing to it won't achieve much.  They flew pretty good back then-they still do.  They were tops for slow combat and have taught many to fly most of the stunt pattern.  There sure are a few notable Ringmasters out there but ARE notable because they over achieve what an average one will do and weren't built from a stock kit and kit materials.

Dave

[Andre Ming]

Colin:

Yup, the Streak seems to be the preferred airplane for actual sport flying.

I will NOT be powering this airplane with a Fox 35 Stunt. Too slow once I'm back up to speed. I will want one of my .36 sized Fox engines on the nose with the idea of slow 4s needle setting for re-acclimating to flying... then lean it out for more spirited sport flying and working on my maneuvers.

For training purposes, I'll slow it up with a bigger prop and a fat four stroke needle setting.

FWIW: Y'all can forget trying to sell me on another engine besides one of my Fox engines. Old habits die hard. Besides, I've don't have issues with my Fox engines. Stone reliable and run forever if treated with care.


Dan:

Thanks much for your kind offer in regards to a Fox 35 Stunt. However, I have several Fox 35 Stunts, but like I said, the sport plane will get one of my .36 sized Fox engines. Exactly which/what remains to be seen.

What I will definitely be interested in hearing would be advice for a reliable hard tank.

As for my 35 Stunts: The airplane I have in mind for one of my 35 Stunts is my Doc Passen "Generix" Wooten "Guided Missile" kit I have. I will use that airplane as a stunt trainer for the kids as well as for myself when in the mood. For trainer use, I will run it with rich needle settings and a larger prop.

HOWEVER (get ready to roll your eyes all you 35 Stunt purists)... I will use a different NVA and run it on bladder with more nitro than "Superfuel" stunt blends, in addition I will use a smaller prop for some more RPM. Y'all would be surprised what a 35 Stunt can do when you get outside the "stunt mode" mindset. (Factoid: Did you know that Stunt 35's were "run-in" at the factory using cut-down wood 9/6 props and Missile Mist fuel? They can scream far more than most realize.  )


All fer now!

Andre

[Andre Ming]

Thanks Dave for tossing your experienced input my way.

I readily admit that I have very little experience with "sport flier" type airplanes (Ringmasters, Flite Streaks, Shoestrings, etc.) Most of my air time has been on the handle of a combat wing of some sort.

Sport flying with a profile airplane is going to sort of "new" again to me, so I truly appreciate all of you experienced fliers sharing your input with me.

Yes, I will stick with one of my Fox engines. (As mentioned above.)



All:

It is looking like a repli-kit Streak will be the way I'll go. I doubt I'll put that huge tail fin on it, though. (Likely cut it down to something I like the looks of better AND be less prone to losing in the event of an inverted dead stick landing.

Sort of getting anxious to get this candle lit, but it will be a process getting that that point. Example: I also need to learn more about hard tank options. All in good time, I suppose.


All fer this 'un!

Andre

[Paul Smith]

I'm building a Ringmaster from bulk balsa stock right now.

The BIG plus for Flite Streaks, Skyrays, Busters and Giant Stunt Masters is the one piece straight LE & TE.

The spliced LE and swept TE are needless challenges for the young/inexperienced build.

There are advantages to the taper wing, but not if it's built wrong.

[Andre Ming]

Hi Paul!

Yes, simplicity is the name of the game for me at this point.

Say, you ARE the same "Paul Smith" that I met at Doc Passen's "Vintage Combat" meet way back in 1990 or so?





If so, great to see that you're still flying!

Hope you're doing well.

Andre.

[Andre Ming]

All:

Below is a pic of the engine I plan to use on the nose of a Streak. It was purchased years ago NIB. It's never been mounted to an airplane. After loosening it up via the oven... it feels great and has very good compression.

At least, that's my current plan!

Andre

[Paul Smith]

Hi Paul!

Yes, simplicity is the name of the game for me at this point.

Say, you ARE the same "Paul Smith" that I met at Doc Passen's "Vintage Combat" meet way back in 1990 or so?




Yes, that's me at Doc's Passens old time combat contest in Jasonville Indiana.  Doc did a great job of hosting this contest.

If so, great to see that you're still flying!

Hope you're doing well.

Andre.

[Andre Ming]

Yes, that's me at Doc's Passens old time combat contest in Jasonville Indiana.  Doc did a great job of hosting this contest.

I figured it would pretty much have to be!

Looking back, I think Doc's Vintage Combat Meet was the catalyst that caused me to consider building "vintage" combat planes for sport flying. That I've done off/on ever since, which I did shortly thereafter.

Anyway. Good to see you're still active within the hobby.


Andre

[John Rist]

All:

Below is a pic of the engine I plan to use on the nose of a Streak. It was purchased years ago NIB. It's never been mounted to an airplane. After loosening it up via the oven... it feels great and has very good compression.

At least, that's my current plan!

Andre

Fox 35 stunt are famous for the Fox burp.  I am not sure which ones are prone to this.  Read all about it :

https://stunthanger.com/smf/engine-set-up-tips/curing-the-fox-burp/msg619471/#msg619471

[Dave_Trible]

Andre worked for Fox.  I’m sure he knows about the burp.  It’s really not that big a deal usually.  Actually though that pertains to the Fox .35 Stunt.  That isn’t what he is showing here.  This is a later generation.36 that Duke built to use up parts he had made for a failed combat special engine.  My limited experience with this on the test stand was it started and ran smoothly with considerably more gumption than the .35 Stunt- and I be surprised if it burped.

Dave

[Andre Ming]

Fox 35 stunt are famous for the Fox burp.  I am not sure which ones are prone to this.  Read all about it :

https://stunthanger.com/smf/engine-set-up-tips/curing-the-fox-burp/msg619471/#msg619471

Hi John!

I've heard of the "Fox Burp" before, but I do not recall ever having issues the few times I've used Fox 35 Stunts on profiles... but it's been decades since I've used one on a profile. (I may have simply forgotten.)

Either way, I do not intend to use a 35 Stunt on the upcoming profile plane. It will be the above Fox 36 Sport.

Now, I have used Fox 35 Stunts in super slow combat... but they were on bladder pressure (with different NVA's), used smaller props, and higher nitro. They ran full tilt two cycle mode for entire flights. There were zero burp issues.

Anyway, it is something to be aware of for it appears there have been many that have experienced the "Fox Burp" using a Fox 35 Stunt.


Andre

[Andre Ming]

Hi Dave!

You got it right: I plan to use the Fox 36 Sport engine on my profile. Speaking of which, when I get home from church tonight, I'll share with you some info from the manufacturing level about the 36 Sport.

As for 35 Stunts: Duke had me build a few for Bob Gieske(sp?) one pre-season. I don't know if Bob actually used them or what, but I do recall building them for him. I can't remember the year, but it would have had to have been between 1970-1975.

All fer now. Off to church!

Andre

[Ken Culbertson]

Hi Dave!

You got it right: I plan to use the Fox 36 Sport engine on my profile. Speaking of which, when I get home from church tonight, I'll share with you some info from the manufacturing level about the 36 Sport.

As for 35 Stunts: Duke had me build a few for Bob Gieske(sp?) one pre-season. I don't know if Bob actually used them or what, but I do recall building them for him. I can't remember the year, but it would have had to have been between 1970-1975.

All fer now. Off to church!

Andre

He used them.  It's Gieseke.

Ken

[Dan McEntee]

Hi John!

I've heard of the "Fox Burp" before, but I do not recall ever having issues the few times I've used Fox 35 Stunts on profiles... but it's been decades since I've used one on a profile. (I may have simply forgotten.)

Either way, I do not intend to use a 35 Stunt on the upcoming profile plane. It will be the above Fox 36 Sport.

Now, I have used Fox 35 Stunts in super slow combat... but they were on bladder pressure (with different NVA's), used smaller props, and higher nitro. They ran full tilt two cycle mode for entire flights. There were zero burp issues.

Anyway, it is something to be aware of for it appears there have been many that have experienced the "Fox Burp" using a Fox 35 Stunt.


Andre

   If you built up some engines for Bob Gieseke in that time frame, you may have built up his World Championship engine, which he won in 1974, correct? I have read a lot of the Fox Burp and hours worth of reading about it is available here on the forum. I have not really experienced it myself, and have only ever seen one that did it on a predictable basis. The "Burp" is supposed to be the result of the huge bypass port between the cranks case and the intake port. Big pressure changes as the fuel/air charge makes it way up into the combustion chamber. I think most people's experience with The "Burp" is from running 10-6 props at too low RPM trying to get that knarely 4-2 break that  they think they remember. On smallish models, that can be avoided by going to a 10-5 prop and going up in RPM to get your lap times. Experiment with different props. It's my experience that at a take off RPM near 9000 you should not have a problem. If the model speed is too fast, go to longer lines. here is a video of me flying the late Mike Gretz's Fierce Arrow that I purchased from his estate. Past about half way in the video is a full pattern. This is a 700 plus square inch airplane, 50 plus ounces, a stone stock Fox .35 Stunt that has never been apart, an earlier version with no muffler ears. Fuel was SIG 5% nitro 25% all castor. Listen very closely and tell me if anyone hears any kind of burp, then make note of what time time is on the video so I can go back and review.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Dave_Trible]

I have one of Bob's engines from that time frame.  It COULD be the WC engine,  I have no way to know now.  Andre might have built it. It has the tumble polished finish.  I put it on the stand and fired it up a couple years ago.  Started first flip and ran fine but maybe a little tired.  Sometimes Bob pushed the nitro to them.  I also remember Bob bringing the airplane to a much later Nats to show and had his brother Don flying it.  He wasn't running it like Bob flew it,  but rather in a full 2 cycle scream most of the time.  That would leave the engine as it now seems to be.  I've considered putting new guts in it and put it an airplane.......not sure I will.

Dave

[Ken Culbertson]

Dan, the "burp" seemed to only happen with inverted mounts.  I had an All American with an upright mount that did not burp alongside my Sandpiper that did burp.  Same engine.  It did it as well on my Profile Sandpiper. All three 1963-1965.

Ken

[Andre Ming]

Dave T said:

Andre might have built it. It has the tumble polished finish.

Well, if it was a tumble polished* case, and he won in 1974, my last stint with Duke (the 3d and final) was from November of 1973 to October of 1975. Assuming he used the batch of engines I built that was sent** to him, that indicates the WC winning engine may indeed have come from that small batch of Stunts I made for Mr. Gieseke.

Setting out to hand build a batch of engines would involve selecting all parts to be used (cases, heads, all internal parts, and so forth), then performing the hone work needed on all parts requiring honing, then lapping, relieving, fitting, assembly, testing, etc, etc.

I can't recall how many engines were involved or how long it took me.

* My first two sessions with Duke which spanned from August of 1970 to February or March of '73, the 35 Stunts that passed through my assembly lines were natural finish.

** A memory jog: I "may" now remember boxing them up and taking them to Jewel the shipping lady for shipment. Can't remember for sure whether it was me that shipped, or if I gave them to Duke. Darn. So long ago, and I didn't have a clue something like this would be important to me some 50 years later.


Anyway, how cool is that? I may have hand built the engine that Bob won the World Championship with! Who'd a thunk??

I need to get me some glossy 8 x 10's with my beaming face thereon, sign 'em, and hawk them here for $20 bucks a pop. I'll bet they'll go like hotcakes and I'll get rich!

 

erdnA

[Juan Valentin]

Okay, when I'm active in C/L, my main "thing" is building/flying vintage combat wings and powering them with vintage engines. That's my "Happy Place".

HOWEVER...

It's now been 7 years since I've flown AND I'm now 71. I don't think I need to return to flying via a combat wing, even with a restrictor in the venturi. (Even with a restictor and on 10% nitro, it will still be tootin' along about 90 MPH.)


SO...

I think I ought to build a 35 powered profile sport plane. Two come to mind: Either a .19-35 size profile Ringmaster or a .19-.35 profile Flite Streak. (I haven't done "sport planes" in a long time.)

I intend to power the airplane with a suction fed Fox 36 CL sleeve bearing engine. I can run it in a rich 4s to get my wings back... then lean it out as I get more comfortable with flying again. Also, I will likely have a daughter that will want to fly again (it's been decades for her), plus, her boyfriend wants to learn. SO, my future sport plane will need to double as a trainer for both of them.

PLANE OPTIONS...

I have a 50 year old profile Flite Streak in the box... but should it be built, or should it stay in the box? (i.e. Can I supplement my retirement with it?  )

FWIW: IF I purchase "repli-kits", they're not true replicas. That is, the repli-kit Ringmaster uses a square stick for a leading edge that you sand the front edge into a more aerodynamic shape. The repli-kit Flite Streak appears to use a formed LE, but still isn't a replica.

However, I'm sure the repli-kits will fly fine.

SO, which would you chose if you were in my shoes?

* Build the Flite Steak kit?

* Purchase a repli-kit Ringmaster?

* Purchase a repli-kit Flite Streak?

Help me Obi-Wan... for you are my only hope.

 


Andre

 I will vote for the Flite Streak. I built a few over the years,some as designed and a few like warbirds. I built my first one in Jan 1970 while I was in the Air Force stationed at Mcdill AFB powered with an OS.35 Combat special. Later on I used the wing of the kit and built a P-51 mustang and a Bearcat which I painted with Pactra Aerogloss similar to Al Rabe`s Bearcat Stunter also using the OS.35 Combat Special engine also. I still have the engines. But if I build another one I will go with an OS.25 FP that I have.

                                                                                                                                                                                juan

[Gerald Arana]

All:

Below is a pic of the engine I plan to use on the nose of a Streak. It was purchased years ago NIB. It's never been mounted to an airplane. After loosening it up via the oven... it feels great and has very good compression.

At least, that's my current plan!

Andre

Andre, what are you going to do about a muffler? Now days noise is a problem.....................just saying.

Jerry

[Dave_Trible]

We don't have any issues here anyplace we fly so we run some things open-like classics.  However if nothing else tongue mufflers can be had.

Dave

[Dan McEntee]

Dave T said:

Well, if it was a tumble polished* case, and he won in 1974, my last stint with Duke (the 3d and final) was from November of 1973 to October of 1975. Assuming he used the batch of engines I built that was sent** to him, that indicates the WC winning engine may indeed have come from that small batch of Stunts I made for Mr. Gieseke.

Setting out to hand build a batch of engines would involve selecting all parts to be used (cases, heads, all internal parts, and so forth), then performing the hone work needed on all parts requiring honing, then lapping, relieving, fitting, assembly, testing, etc, etc.

I can't recall how many engines were involved or how long it took me.

* My first two sessions with Duke which spanned from August of 1970 to February or March of '73, the 35 Stunts that passed through my assembly lines were natural finish.

** A memory jog: I "may" now remember boxing them up and taking them to Jewel the shipping lady for shipment. Can't remember for sure whether it was me that shipped, or if I gave them to Duke. Darn. So long ago, and I didn't have a clue something like this would be important to me some 50 years later.


Anyway, how cool is that? I may have hand built the engine that Bob won the World Championship with! Who'd a thunk??

I need to get me some glossy 8 x 10's with my beaming face thereon, sign 'em, and hawk them here for $20 bucks a pop. I'll bet they'll go like hotcakes and I'll get rich!

 

erdnA

     I think this coincidence is pretty cool!! I'm sure Bob had several engines at the ready at any one time, and you may have built them all!  I had heard through the years that Duke would let him have the run of the factory to hand pick the parts for his engines. Just something I heard and have no reason to doubt your story. I have one of the first R/C versions of the .36X still new in the box that you may have glued the carb on!! I bought that engine cheap just because you had told that story. I'll never run it in anything!!
  In case you have not seen it, Bob's 1974 Wor5ld Champs model has been restored and I believe resides with a family member. There was a recent question about it and there are pictures in previous threads.
  Type at you later,
  Dan McEntee

[Andre Ming]

Juan:

Nice pics and nice looking airplanes! Thanks for sharing!


Gerald:

Two of the potential fields I have access to are in an industrial park where it shouldn't be an issue.


Dave:

And I hope that will again be the case with me. Only had one issue over the decades, this was back the early 1990s, and that was by a grumpy old man with mental issues. Historically, when I fly C/L planes around these parts, oft times bystanders come over to the circle and ask questions and watch them fly for a while. They usually think it's pretty neat. However, I admit that today's world is totally different than it was just a few short years ago. Nowadays the kooks and weird-o's proliferate faster than feral hogs.


Andre

[Andre Ming]

Hi Dan!

I would not be surprised if Bob had the run of the plant a time or two before my time with Fox.

At the time, I knew of Bob Gieseke, but stunt wasn't my personal thing, so I didn't give much thought to building some engines for his use. It was just a task I was given. In my case, I used to enjoy such a task and was always happy to fulfill when Duke would give me an assignment like that.

Your Fox 36X RC:

Actually, one of the assembly line workers would have glued the carb in place.

During the short Fox 36X RC era, my task was primarily honing the pistons/sleeves. However, I did whatever it took in the hone department when needed, such as honing nose bearings, or honing carb bodies/fitting the carb "butterfly" (or whatever it was called), and what have you.

The two most prevalent pistons and sleeves I've honed would be the .36 and the .35 Stunts. Honed thousands of those. Also 15x and whatever else, but .36's and .35's more than anything.

I most definitely remember the 36X RC with its glued carb. I think I recall it also had a three jet carb. A royal booger to get right manufacturing wise, and adjustment wise... but when the stars aligned.. it was a wonderfully responsive carb. We had a chap that ran-in most of them as well as setting their carbs before leaving the factory. His name was Chester Avis. He was a model airplane flyer and a really nice guy. I ate lunch with him lots of times because of the model flying we had in common. Though he was into RC at the time, he had flown C/L previously. We flew C/L together a few times, too. (Out back behind the plant, as I recall?)

I have tons of good memories from my years at Fox Mfg. (The bad ones have been softened by time.)

Andre

[Ken Culbertson]

Andre:

I flew a lot with Bob Gieseke during the 1975-1982 time frame.  His Fox engines always outperformed my OS35's.  Didn't make sense.   Now I know who to blame! 

[Andre Ming]

Andre:

I flew a lot with Bob Gieseke during the 1975-1982 time frame.  His Fox engines always outperformed my OS35's.  Didn't make sense.   Now I know who to blame! 

Well... I guess I was likely the culprit!

Thanks for sharing that tidbit. It's fun to discover a nugget left over from among my short (in the perspective of things), yet so very meaningful (now) time at Fox Mfg. At the time it was a job I mostly enjoyed, but I had no idea how lasting and warm the memories would be from those few years.

Remembering building some engines for Mr. Gieseke, and then the unexpected fun of discovering he actually used them (and won!) with them... well... that's just cool on so many levels!

A minor point:

I think I recall Duke pronouncing Bob's last name as "GHEE zuh key". Is that correct?

Andre

[Dave_Trible]

I think it was more like "geese key".

Dave

[Andre Ming]

I think it was more like "geese key".

Dave

And that may be exactly what Duke was saying. Been too many years. At least I wasn't remembering it as "Guh ZEEK ee"! 


Andre

[Dennis Toth]

Andre,
So what made the engines for Gieseke different from the regular production engines? Did you ever do any of the Ceramic stunt 35's, what happened to them?

Best,    DennisT

[doug coursey]

Okay, when I'm active in C/L, my main "thing" is building/flying vintage combat wings and powering them with vintage engines. That's my "Happy Place".

HOWEVER...

It's now been 7 years since I've flown AND I'm now 71. I don't think I need to return to flying via a combat wing, even with a restrictor in the venturi. (Even with a restictor and on 10% nitro, it will still be tootin' along about 90 MPH.)


SO...
WE USE TO CUT THE LAST WING TIP SECTION OFF EACH END AND PUT A 1/4' FLAT TIP ON THE END AND SHORTEN THE NOSE AND TAIL AND CUT OFF THE CANOPY ,FLEW REAALY GOOD..IT HAS A FAIRLY THICK AIRFOIL....
I think I ought to build a 35 powered profile sport plane. Two come to mind: Either a .19-35 size profile Ringmaster or a .19-.35 profile Flite Streak. (I haven't done "sport planes" in a long time.)

I intend to power the airplane with a suction fed Fox 36 CL sleeve bearing engine. I can run it in a rich 4s to get my wings back... then lean it out as I get more comfortable with flying again. Also, I will likely have a daughter that will want to fly again (it's been decades for her), plus, her boyfriend wants to learn. SO, my future sport plane will need to double as a trainer for both of them.

PLANE OPTIONS...

I have a 50 year old profile Flite Streak in the box... but should it be built, or should it stay in the box? (i.e. Can I supplement my retirement with it?  )

FWIW: IF I purchase "repli-kits", they're not true replicas. That is, the repli-kit Ringmaster uses a square stick for a leading edge that you sand the front edge into a more aerodynamic shape. The repli-kit Flite Streak appears to use a formed LE, but still isn't a replica.

However, I'm sure the repli-kits will fly fine.

SO, which would you chose if you were in my shoes?

* Build the Flite Steak kit?

* Purchase a repli-kit Ringmaster?

* Purchase a repli-kit Flite Streak?

Help me Obi-Wan... for you are my only hope.

 

WE USE TO CUT THE LAST WING  SECTION OFF EACH END AND PUT A 1/4' FLAT TIP ON THE END AND SHORTEN THE NOSE AND TAIL AND CUT OFF THE CANOPY ,FLEW REALY GOOD..IT HAS A FAIRLY THICK AIRFOIL....

[Douglas Bykoff]

If you are in doubt why not a FliteMaster?

[Andre Ming]

What's a "Flitemaster"? Who kits it, or is it even a kit?

At this point, my return to flying will be via this nice looking Flite Streak (on the left) that was gifted to me by John "Doc" Holliday...

Andre

[Douglas Bykoff]

What's a "Flitemaster"? Who kits it, or is it even a kit?

At this point, my return to flying will be via this nice looking Flite Streak (on the left) that was gifted to me by John "Doc" Holliday...

Andre

FliteMaster is the fusion of Flitestreak with a RingMaster. It's not a kit.

Flitestreak has a good wing but a very large rudder and a small stab/elevator.

Combining the two gave an interesting result in flight and did not go unnoticed in the field.

[Andre Ming]

FliteMaster is the fusion of Flitestreak with a RingMaster. It's not a kit.

Flitestreak has a good wing but a very large rudder and a small stab/elevator.

Combining the two gave an interesting result in flight and did not go unnoticed in the field.

AH! Now I get it!

The large fin on a Flite Streak always sort of bothered me. Hadn't noticed the small elevator.

Thanks for the explanation!

Andre