stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Vincent Corwell on April 01, 2009, 01:19:31 AM
-
Anybody got a copy of the magazine article of
George Aldrichs flapped Peacemaker MAN plan
No.6003 also in Aeromodeller February 1958
need to view on line or Email if possible
Vincent
-
Here's a scan of the plan from Tony Elmores site, taken from the Aeromodeler:
http://www.the.elmores.btinternet.co.uk/articles/cwdata/peacemaker2.html
I have the magazine some where.. plus I believe it was in American Aircraft Modeler..
Jim
(http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dc/user_files/5691.jpg)
(http://www.the.elmores.btinternet.co.uk/articles/peacemaker1.jpg)
(http://www.the.elmores.btinternet.co.uk/articles/peacemaker2.jpg)
(http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dc/user_files/19828.jpg)
-
There are two Aldrich Peacemakers. Here is a link to the full fuse one that was in MAN. Note that you can still buy the plans from MAN. The Peacemaker is midway down the page--near to the Oriental Plans. I don't recall if this one has moveable flaps.
https://secure.rcstore.com/pcd/eServCart?iServ=MDY3QUo0NjYzMSZpUGFnZUlkPTc4NDQ3JmlDb250UGFnZT0x
-
I have the full sized plans and article of the Full Body version designed for the Oliver Tiger diesel, from Aviation Modleler International. Jan 1997. Ian Peacock. This plan was first published in May 1960 MAN. The "flaps are 1/2 flaps similar to those on the Dolphin (wonder where Lew got that idea) ..
Jim
-
Anybody got a copy of the magazine article of George Aldrichs flapped Peacemaker MAN plan No.6003 also in Aeromodeller February 1958? Need to view on line or Email if possible
Vincent
Yup. Need to put it on separate pages because of the size.
George
-
Second page
-
Part 3.
-
George-
Thanks much for the article. This is one I've wanted, but never collected. The plan scan is really good and prints out well!
Edit: This appears to be a large (46.5" - 48") span plane for that .15 to pull around. Has anyone out there powered one of these with a modern .20 or .25? It doesn't seem that these glow engines would be too large.
SK
-
George-
Thanks much for the article. This is one I've wanted, but never collected. The plan scan is really good and prints out well!
SK
Serge,
The scans came out larger than allowed to post. For example, the original scan of the plans is 1.52 meg if you need it.
George
-
Edit: It's not worth contributing. Thanks!
-
But the airfoil is thin... about 1" thick...
(clip)
Andrew,
I measured from the MAN article and plans. That airfoil at the root is more like 1.5 inches. That gives an airfoil at the root, without the flap of almost 20% and with flaps at the root a section that is just over 14%. Not bad by "current standards".
Keith
-
The plans I have from Aviation Modleler International. Jan 1997 is the same as Kieth reports..
I have flown a Flite Streak with a 19.. and it flew fine.. you just have to go to shorter lines.. in fact almost all the "35" sized planes we all flew said; "for .19 to .35 engines" on the box.
I would bet this plane just about right for the old Fox or McCoy 29..
Jim
-
If you read the first page, GMA recommended up to a .29 glow. Of course those were baffle engines at the time.
George
-
Edit: Trostle knows more then I do, ask him.
-
I have to admit it's been two weeks since I last looked at the plans. My point isn't that the airfoil is dated, but rather that it's much thinner then say a normal Flite Streak, or a Twister, etc.
(clip)
I am not trying to nit pic here, BUT----
Andrew, you even admit that you have not looked at the plans for two weeks. We are talking about the flapped, full bodied Peacemaker here that Aldrich published in Model Airplane New as shown in the post above by George Bain. Suggest you at least look at the drawing that has been posted. Even without measuring, which can be done fairly accurately from the plans posted above, that airfoil is not "thin" by any standard.
With the flaps, the airfoil thickness calculates to about 14% at the root and increases to about 20% at the tips. That is not thin by most standards. My point is that any decision to not consider this design for construction and flying should not be based on some inaccurate and ill advised statement that the airfoil is too thin, when it is not. The shape is reasonable as well with a nicly rounded leading edge. George knew what he was doing when he designed this little jewel.
Keith
-
Vincent and George
Nice little plane. Thank you for the Articale and Drawings.
-
edit: Nevermind.
-
(clip)
I never said not to build it because the airfoil is too thin. I didn't make any comments about how it would fly, or suggest that it needs to be thicker. All I was relating is that the wing span makes the plane sound larger then it really is.
(clip)
I don't know where you're getting that I was saying anything bad about the design, but you clearly missed my point. This kind of thing is the reason I don't post more often. Far too often people try to misinterpret what's being said and turn everything into some kind of debate.
Gee Andrew, nice sidestep, I do not think I mininterpretted anything you said and I did not write that you were "saying anything bad about the design". But here is what you wrote about the airfoil thickness:
"But the airfoil is thin... about 1" thick..."
"My point isn't that the airfoil is dated, but rather that it's much thinner then say a normal Flite Streak, or a Twister, etc. The span seems a bit much, but it's a thinner wing then most that size."
Indeed, you did not say not to build this design, but you did suggest that for some reason that the airfoil was thin when it is not thin by any normal standard. Whatever your reasons were about discussing this airfoil as too thin is not based on reality and could be misread by a casual observer.
I was not criticising you for whatever your observations are regarding the wingspan being somehow unsuitable for whatever engine some might recommend to use for this model. I will admit that I do not understand your comment that "The span seems a bit much but it's a thinner wing than most that size". So, the airfoil is really not all that thin. And the span works out to be about 48 inches. How is that span a "bit much"? How is it "a thinner wing than most that size"? Are you talking about airfoil thickness here which is in the context of what you previously wrote or are you talking about its aspect ratio? The aspect ratio of this Peacemaker is roughly 4.5 which is definitely not on the high aspect ratio scale for our CL stunt models.
It was not my intent to turn this into a debate. All I have been doing is reading what you wrote and trying to put it into perspective. Regarding the Peacemaker, the airfoil is not thin. There is a good bit of area in that 48 inch wing with an aspect ratio of 4.5 which would be a wing with something around 500 square inches of area. A good .15 might be anough. A diesel 15 would be enough as shown by George Aldrich. A modern 25 like a Brodak or OS LA or Enya would be a good fit for that area.
Keith
-
It's not worth the trouble. Have fun!
-
If I didn't have so many planes now I would consider the "Peacemaker" as I have an Oliver Tigre 2.5 that was obtained from Dave Platt years ago. The little four stroke I have would go great in it as the "Cardinette" that Bob Zambelli designed is about the same size. Having fun, DOC Holliday
PS:I wish I knew as much about stunt as a few people do on this forum. jeh
-
BTW, the old Top Flight kit of the Peacemaker used formed (molded) fuselage sides and the wings had a formed LE.
George
-
Many thanks friends
for all the replies,
have all I need now
Vincent