60 size no flaps

[Fred Quedenfeld jr]

Is there a 60 size stunt-er without flaps
did Bob Barron campaign one in the 90's
thanks
Fred Q

[M Spencer]

Humbug .

[M Spencer]

maybe ? .appears the big one does have flaps .



http://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/great-article-by-bob-hunt-on-the-humbug/msg438740/









So there appear to be a few contradictions .



Filched from : https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?2273786-Vintage-Old-Timer-Plans-After-1960/page5 may be downloadable F. S. .

Lastly ,

[Brett Buck]

Is there a 60 size stunt-er without flaps
did Bob Barron campaign one in the 90's
thanks
Fred Q

   Baron had one version of it at the 93 NATs (the orange one in the MA article above), where that well-known member of the Algonquin Round table Windy said it "looks like something you would scoop out a litterbox with"!  It flew OK, but not nearly as well as his more conventional airplanes.

     Brett

[Dalton Hammett]

Take a look in the Vendor section at PDK kits.    Pat has a 67.8" 60 size Magician kit listed.     One of my sons has a similar plane he built from blowing up plans that he flies with an Evo .60.   The 60 is plenty of power.

[Brent Williams]

This one might be worth a look also.

http://stunthanger.com/smf/mikey's-models/p-foece-xl/

A bigger version of the Primary Force with a 58" wing span and 644 sq. in. of wing area.  Powered with either glow or electric.   .46 to .51 glow, or E-Flight to 25 along with a 5 cell 2700 mHl pack.

The P-Force XL has many new features such as, thicker wing, stabilizer triplets, wing or fuse mounted landing gear.  The profile fuse is built-up that is very stiff and strong, and light weight.  It resist tail twisting in ruff weather that is common to many profile fuselage models.  This provides crisp, and sharp corners with a sold feel and grove.

P-Force XL

[afml]

Try here:

http://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/my-humbug/msg103462/#msg103462

Good luck & "Tight Lines!"
Wes

[Brent Williams]

One begs the question of flapless 60 sized ship...Why?   Unless you're just wanting something somewhat more simple and different, it's going to be a big ship anyway, you will probably appreciate the lift and the pretty turn that flaps afford. 

Howard Rush's thoughts from 14 years ago probably sum up the whole matter correctly.

Howard Rush:
   You can go flapless if you like, but you will be at a disadvantage. The main reasons for flaps are improved control response and reduced turbulence response, not extra lift.

Howard Rush

http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=59451&mesg_id=59451&page=369

[john e. holliday]

Boy Wes that was a long time ago.   If I build another one, it will have a bigger power plant even though this one flew okay if you did not push it.  Lost it in the hour glass and I have ribs for another one.

[wwwarbird]

 I've often thought a Sig "Fazer" wing kit would be a good start for an original design .60 size model. I've got one I still need to dig into at some point. An OTS "Humongous" might be one to consider too.

 Edit: The Sig Fazer wing is 697 square inches.

[Target]

My buddy Hulan has a giant flight streak (900 sq in) that will fly with a .60....

[wwwarbird]

My buddy Hulan has a giant flight streak (900 sq in) that will fly with a .60....

 That reminds me, doesn't either Pat King or Pat Johnston offer a kit for a giant Ringmaster?

[Eric Viglione]

I have to chuckle whenever I see my fireplace show up in a thread... it was one of the FEW times I actually could justify lighting it up here in Florida.

Still have that Humbug hanging in my 3rd bedroom as wall art. It is surprisingly well finished and still in great shape. The stab is huge as you can see by my yardstick laying behind it. I bought it from Tom Dixon at a KOI shortly after Bob passed.

Of the large Humbugs, I think this was the last and best of the bunch, and it flys great. The plane fly's very conventionally, which might make some people scratch their heads. It was originally set up for an FSR, and it was under-powered. He switched it over to a ST60 and it was pretty good. I had a ST56 V case in it (I have no idea why, I had plenty of ST60's at the time, but it seemed like a good idea at the time? I plead temporary insanity)

I may revisit the plane and stick a fresh ABC ST60 in it, or my Casalles Randy Aero ST 67 in it, because the only real problem I seem to remember is that it was always searching for a little more power. The weight is fine, it is just a huge draggy plane. The wing is basically a Patternmaster wing with the flaps permanently attached to the trailing edge.

I have a side exhaust PA61, but the dimensions aren't even remotely close, which is too bad, because I bet that would be THE answer for this plane.

PS: Owen Richards who sadly has long since passed, was a local club member and had the Orange Humbug for a while, on loan from Owens son who lives in Georgia. Owen never warmed up to that plane. He tried trimming it 9 ways to Sunday... pinned the flaps, with flaps, moved the CG around, just never got it to turn a real corner.

[M Spencer]

Just tripped over THIS , ( in my search for authentic Hallmark data .  ) ( Bob Baron 88 W. C. ' Hallmark ' derived, So They Say . Just need Dimn's of Barons 88 entry . 

http://library.modelaviation.com/ma/2004/1/barecat-650-c

Thats a Netzband Double Star 50 THING , similar to eartlier . May even have a bit of tech data . Jan. 2004 mudle aviation .

[dennis lipsett]

That reminds me, doesn't either Pat King or Pat Johnston offer a kit for a giant Ringmaster?

Both Pat King and Pat Johnson offer plans and kits for a Ringmaster 1000 which is on the large size.
A more useful version was done by Pat King with the Ringmaster 853. With an improved modern airfoil it is deadly in the circle and can fly with the best of them. Wish Joe Gilbert was close. He just might win the nats with a profile. just kidding but it does fly that good. Pat also has a large Flite Streak 900 and a Magician 900. All of these are really surprisingly good stunt models and they don't pull your arm out of the socket to fly them.
To give Pat Johnson credit he also makes some serious versions of the Ringmaster that are also highly competitive. But I don't envision any of them ever going to the nats

[Tim Wescott]

Flaps give prettier turns (and, probably, smoother straights and rounds) at the cost of a more difficult build, more frequent and difficult repairs, and more complicated trimming.

I strongly advocate going flapless when you're a beginner, because you'll be crashing all the time and part of flying is knowing how to trim.  Flaps are sort of reverse training wheels for trimming, and they complicate building and repairing.  Fly something like a Sig Skyray, or one of my 40-sized foam-wing Skyray derivatives until the ground stops rising up unexpectedly and an outside observer doesn't need to refer to the pattern to know what maneuver you're performing.

But about the time that you stop crashing regularly (which will probably happen midway through your Intermediate career, but everyone is different), and you know all there is to know about trimming a flapless plane, you should switch to something with flaps.