Author Topic: Question (Read 5009 times)

Bill Little · « **on:** July 14, 2006, 05:48:16 PM »

I think it is time to ask this question again now that the membership has grown considerably.

What would be the ONE airplane you would build to use as a double duty or even triple duty plane? Considering the needs for "hauling" and getting use to a couple different planes, many up and comers would benefit from haveing one plane that could be flown in front of judges in more than one event.

I am not considering OTS, due to the different pattern which negates what I am looking for. PAMPA, Classic, Profile where the same pattern is flown.

I know I would have progressed quicker if I had been flying 4 to 6 flights with the same plane at a local meet all those years.

Thanks!
Bill <><

Bill Sawyer · « **Reply #1 on:** July 14, 2006, 06:04:27 PM »

Bill,
You have hit on an idea I have had for years. When I started flying I went from one design to another. Each time I changed planes I had to learn how the new plane handled and get used to it before I could start to progress my flying skills. Looking back I can see the advantage of building the same plane repeatedly. I would have learned building and flying skills more quickly. Looking back I know that a lot of building so many different planes was looking forward faster than my abilities took me.

peabody · « **Reply #2 on:** July 14, 2006, 06:09:53 PM »

Bill:
I agrree about progressing quicker with a single aeroplane, but believe that few would stick to only one....they want to build and fly "cool" stuff....

My Choice would be the Gieseke (sp) Nobler....witness Steve Moon's performance.... that would be skipping profile.
Skipping Classic, I would opt for a Pathfinder....

Steve Fitton · « **Reply #3 on:** July 14, 2006, 06:17:22 PM »

Off the cuff I would say Gieseke Nobler or maybe Shark 45.

Ken Deboy · « **Reply #4 on:** July 14, 2006, 06:25:07 PM »

I'd build a Coyote. I like Dick Mathis' designs because he designed them to fly slow, and I need all the help I can get keeping up with the plane. For a full bodied plane, I'd build a Chizler. Before I can stick with one design though, I've got a couple Brodak warbirds, a Shoestring, Skyray 35, Shark 402, Shark 45... too many cool designs to pick just one.

cheers,
Ken

Dick Fowler · « **Reply #5 on:** July 14, 2006, 06:45:42 PM »

Quote from: Steve Fitton on July 14, 2006, 06:17:22 PM

Off the cuff I would say Gieseke Nobler or maybe Shark 45.

Ditto!

john e. holliday · « **Reply #6 on:** July 14, 2006, 07:01:56 PM »

All you have to do is measure the right amount of fuel for the Brodak Nobler. I flew mine several times at one contest in Old Time, Classic and PAMPA Int. DOC Holliday

Bill Little · « **Reply #7 on:** July 14, 2006, 07:46:02 PM »

Good so far.

I wasn't asking in terms of NEVER havnig another design, but ONE design that can duoble up for a guy climbing the ladder. I also didn't include OTS because it is a different pattern.

PAMPA plus Classic and/or Profile

Thanks!

Jay · « **Reply #8 on:** July 14, 2006, 08:47:36 PM »

Profile Oriental. Should just about cover all your bases.
I have one the paint stand now. Hoping to have it come out light and straight.

Jay

Paul Taylor · « **Reply #9 on:** July 14, 2006, 09:13:20 PM »

Well I am not sure what would qualify, but two planes on my short list are:
Cardinal and a ARF Tutor II.

I know a few folks flying the Tut II and have done well in contest with them.
Rumor I heard today is one of these guys got 13th place in I think Advance at the NATs with a Tutor II.

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #10 on:** July 15, 2006, 06:37:30 AM »

Bill,

I'm just thinking along the lines of double duty right now, where the pattern is identical.

1. Shark 35 or 45

2. Gieseke Nobler
3. Caprice

4. Minado or Playboy

5. Chizler

6. Thunderbird II
7. Green Box Nobler

8. J.P.'s Akromaster

Now for triple duty.

1. Humongus
2. Jamison
3. Viking
4. Stuntwagon
5. Barnstormer
6. SD Zilch

That's the best I can come up with Bill.

Jim Pollock

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #11 on:** July 15, 2006, 08:59:31 AM »

The biggest step in advancement is to go to a full fuselage airplane. This gives better rigidity resulting in better aerodynamics, and more consistant engine runs. A worn out statement is that "I am not ready for that airplae" when the fact is that in most cases the profile is holding the person back.

That said, the Classics offer the best all around solution. My personal favorite is the "J.D. Falcon", which has been very successful, it is as good as it gets!

To this you can add Kostecky's "Talon", The "Roadrunner", the various "Noblers", "Skylark". "Jerseyan", "Cavalier" and many others.

If you still insist on a profile then, "Profile Road Runner", "Profile Cavalier"

While the straight wings are easier to build, the improved performance of tapered wings is much more desirable.

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #12 on:** July 15, 2006, 06:15:56 PM »

For flying all three I would say the Magician. I flew one for 5 years and it really flew great. Corners well, easy to build, easy to fly. Mine had a Fox 35 on it, but my new one is going to have a McCoy 40. Should be killer. It is about ready for color. I build mine with flaps, and they come out at about 35 oz. They can balance behind where it shows on the plan by quite a bit, and fly very well that way. I also build mine per the midwest plan so it is eligable for classic.

L0U CRANE · « **Reply #13 on:** July 15, 2006, 09:05:10 PM »

To Ken D:

Dick Mathis' COYOTE might not be acceptable for P40 where the AMA Profile definition is used. The inboard cheek cowl is 1", and the outboard cheek "surrounds" the motor. Check the rulebook for the AMA profile definition...

Not knocking the design, just pointing out that it might be disallowed by the AMA Profile definition.

L0U CRANE · « **Reply #14 on:** July 15, 2006, 09:09:31 PM »

Bill, except for P40, it would be hard to beat a plans-built MAN original Aldrich NOBLER.

That covers OTS, Classic, and modern - if not P40 - and is the Adam, before she offered the apple - of CLPA.

Oregon_Flyer · « **Reply #15 on:** July 16, 2006, 07:35:22 AM »

Bill,

Perhaps no one mentioned Windy's Cardinal Evolution because few have been constructed. It is a scaled down Cardinal that requires scratch building and I talked around before I started mine. As we speak it is not complete but some input from those that have flown it would be worth the read as it is supposed to fulfill the builders wishes and for the pilots it is supposed to perform well with a wide range of 40 size engines - time will tell for me.

Marv

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #16 on:** July 16, 2006, 08:38:16 AM »

The classic closest to modern numbers is the 46 size Skylark, really surprised it was mentioned only once.

Bill Little · « **Reply #17 on:** July 16, 2006, 02:27:06 PM »

Quote from: Oregon_Flyer on July 16, 2006, 07:35:22 AM

Bill,

Perhaps no one mentioned Windy's Cardinal Evolution because few have been constructed. It is a scaled down Cardinal that requires scratch building and I talked around before I started mine. As we speak it is not complete but some input from those that have flown it would be worth the read as it is supposed to fulfill the builders wishes and for the pilots it is supposed to perform well with a wide range of 40 size engines - time will tell for me.

Marv

Hi Marv,

The Evolution is PAMPA only, correct? Isn't it a built up fuselage? It would not be eligible to use in Classic or Profile. Looking for ideas for up and comers to help get in more contest flights with only one plane.

Bill <><

Bill Little · « **Reply #18 on:** July 16, 2006, 02:34:56 PM »

Quote from: Bob Reeves on July 16, 2006, 08:38:16 AM

The classic closest to modern numbers is the 46 size Skylark, really surprised it was mentioned only once.

Hi Bob,

I agree! There have been several designs mentioned that are "Classic" eligible, and a good Classic plane will serve through Expert on the local level.

One that I haven't seen mentioned (and is "my" choice) is the USA-1. It can be used in PAMPA and Classic with no loss of performance.

I have not used a Classic Legal Profile, but I might would consider one of those mentioned to use for "triple duty".

I believe the advantage comes using this theory from not having to switch planes during a local meet. Re-adjusting from one plane to the next during a weekend is tough enough for anyone, let alone a person trying to advance from Beginner to Intermediate to Advanced.

I watched Steve Fitton for a couple years fly a Gieseke Nobler in Classic and PAMPA. He was flying Advanced at the time and moved right up to Expert. I tihink it helped tremendously that he only had to "get serious" with one plane during the weekend for both events.

Bill <><

Oregon_Flyer · « **Reply #19 on:** July 16, 2006, 08:29:32 PM »

Bill,

Ooooops, srrry I mis-read the original post and I yield my wrist to be smitten

As for the pampa part, dunno. Oh well open mouth spew stoopid

I'm thinking I'll
just read from now on. Oh! yes, it is a full fuse BOM though

Marv [and yes I sometimes spell it with just one Oh]

Bill Little · « **Reply #20 on:** July 17, 2006, 03:06:10 AM »

Not to worry, Buddy!

The Evolution is a very good flying ship! It is only "modern legal", though. It was definitely designed after Jan. 1970.

Just about any of the well known Classic Ships will do fine for "Double Duty" for all but top 20 Open at the NATS.

And if it's a good flying "Profile" Classic ship, you can "triple" up at local contests and get in even more flights infront of judges without the switch over from plane to plane which can be very difficult for less experienced flyers to do in a weekend.

Bill <><

Eric Viglione · « **Reply #21 on:** July 17, 2006, 05:54:27 AM »

One? One!!!! You want me to pick just ONE?!!!

You gotta be kidding Bill!

These are on my "someday" dual duty capable list. Hope I live long enough, heh.

Warburton Tony ST46 (check off the list, did one & still love it)

Cavalier - (check off this one too, good flyer, JS and Kenny proved double duty!)

Shark-45 (Checked off. The big one used at the WC, most forget there were at least 3 sizes of these! Had one handed down to me, good flyer with a ST60.)

Silhavy Gypsy 46
Skylark 46
Formula-S
J.T. Collosus
JD Falcon
Cobra
USA-1
Mirage III
D.W. Tempest / Electra

Choosing your next design and dreaming about it and how it will fly and how you will paint it is half the fun of this hobby, and I always seem to get fickle right before I make up my mind. Enjoy the madness Bill!

EricV

Bill Little · « **Reply #22 on:** July 17, 2006, 08:19:07 AM »

Quote from: EricV on July 17, 2006, 05:54:27 AM

One? One!!!! You want me to pick just ONE?!!! You gotta be kidding Bill!

These are on my "someday" dual duty capable list. Hope I live long enough, heh.

(snip)

Choosing your next design and dreaming about it and how it will fly and how you will paint it is half the fun of this hobby, and I always seem to get fickle right before I make up my mind. Enjoy the madness Bill!

EricV

Hi Eric,

Yeaj it's fun to look at a coulpe hungred sets of plans and start wondering what to build next!

I posted this hoping to stimulate thought for all of us, and especially those who are starting out on the "stunt trail", as to the benefits of flying only one plane during a weekend. We get caught up in the "Big Boys" and the fact that they can bring two or three planes to a meet and transition from one to the other seemingly withot missing a beat. It's not too easy to do that unless you have had the stick time they have, both overall and with each ship.

I have seen John Simpson do extremely well flying one of his Cavaliers in both Classic and Expert at the local meets, so it is a viable alternative. Tom Dixon does that, also, much of the time using his T-Bird.

The "one" aspect of the question was to see if there would be many candidates or more of a consensus on just a coule of planes. No OTS because the pattern is different!

Bill <><

Ron King · « **Reply #23 on:** July 17, 2006, 10:21:21 AM »

Quote from: Tom Niebuhr on July 15, 2006, 08:59:31 AM

If you still insist on a profile then, "Profile Road Runner", "Profile Cavalier"

While the straight wings are easier to build, the improved performance of tapered wings is much more desirable.

For double and/or triple duty from Beginner through Intermediate, I like the profile Roadrunner.

For double duty, I still think the profile Cardinal is the "gold standard" for profiles.

For built up planes, I would have to stick with the Noblers - any one of them works great. My favorite is still the Green Box version.

If you really want to be competitive in PAMPA stunt, you need a bigger plane, so I would opt for the Shark 45, Quasar, or Colossus.

Just my druthers.

Ron

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #24 on:** July 17, 2006, 05:56:39 PM »

For flying PAMPA and Classic almost any of the "mainstream" classic planes are a good choice, with the Shark, and Scarinzi's Blue Angel at the top of the list (larger airplanes).

Either of the Nobler's will work well. The later versions of the Ares like Bill W. and Bob Mcdonald fly for classic give up nothing under most circumstances. The Vum is also an excellent choice for modern and classic also and is a little bigger for "presentation"(if that really matters). The Nakke should also be a stron consideration as well as the Thinderbird II.
Any of the classic airplanes mentioned if well trimmed with a good motor like the PA40 Lite, the RO Jett 40 BS, or the Aerotiger or Magnum 36. Can win modern at local contests in the right hands.
Bob Whitely's "Vulcan", designed around Shark numbers is not only capable but beautiful and probably as good as any modern stunter. From what I hear Bob just proved that at the NAT's.

The list goes on...

If profile is included with the other two the list becomes very, very short. The profile Cavalier is about the only thing I would consider.

Charlie Pate · « **Reply #25 on:** July 18, 2006, 08:38:02 AM »

I would get an ARF and lobby to get Bom and appearance points thown out at all
levels; I would do anything to gain an avantage and public notieriety.
I would not worry about the future of stunt ,as we used to know it. Trophies
are Everything!and I want all I can get.
I will even grease your your sun deck again to take you out, or get even with you for running over me with the mule cart.
Seriously, hope you are on the mend and will see you soon

Bill Little · « **Reply #26 on:** July 18, 2006, 12:14:40 PM »

Quote from: Charlie Pate on July 18, 2006, 08:38:02 AM

I would get an ARF and lobby to get Bom and appearance points thown out at all
levels; I would do anything to gain an avantage and public notieriety.
I would not worry about the future of stunt ,as we used to know it. Trophies
are Everything!and I want all I can get.
I will even grease your your sun deck again to take you out, or get even with you for running over me with the mule cart.
Seriously, hope you are on the mend and will see you soon

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look out Dude, I think I need to get another Mule..........
finally got the cart loaded!!!!!!!

With my new $1200 (plus) brace, I can leap tall buildings with a single bound, again! (if they are in 1/144th scale)

No MCL left, torn ACL, but the infection is under control!!

Thanks, Buddy
Bill <><

TeamTigerPaw · « **Reply #27 on:** July 18, 2006, 08:07:59 PM »

Thanks bill for posting a great question.

I,m getting back too control line flying after a long detour in R/C (My son and flying buddy/1994 Jr. Nat's champ in 1/2A combat and Mouse 1/ went to collage in 98.) Just not the same when you cant feel your airplane. I,v been flying C/L since I was 12 and just cant get it out of my blood.

I'm looking for just what your post is about here. IE= a good stunt trainer that is also a good compeditor. Thank's too all of you who have replayed and keep it up because I,ll bet there are a lot of us newbes to stunt flying that may not reply to these post,s but learn a great deal from them.

Joe Ed

Author Topic: Question (Read 5009 times)

Eric Viglione