Future Classic Build?

[Brian Massey]

I'm looking down the road a bit wondering what my next build should be for Classic legal. I'm in the "narrowing the choices" part of my decision process, thinking between the Shark 45 (I think by brother will be building one) and the Thunderbird, the upright engine style . . . always loved the looks of that plane. I'm wondering if either one of them has any inherent flight characteristics advantage over the other given equal build/trim considerations. Forget that I'm trying to win in Classic as that will never happen; just want to fly a nice airplane and hopefully be somewhat competitive . . . at least dodge last place.

Power choices aren't set as yet; perhaps a Saito .62 for the shark, and maybe an LA46 in the T-bird.

Brian

[peabody]

The Shark has better "numbers", but I think the T-bird is OTS legal also?

Have fun!

[Mike Keville]

. . . I think the T-bird is OTS legal also?

Have fun!

==========================================

Nope.  Smoothie, yes....T-Bird, no.

[peabody]

Thanks....I thought the upright was somehow....

[Clint Ormosen]

Brian, given those two choices, the Shark is going to be an easier plane to trim out. It's far closer to a modern plane than the T-Bird. The 'Bird can be a great flyer too, but it has a few "issues" that usually take time to trim out. But I'm with you on the looks of the first version of the T-Bird. I love the upright engine/cabin canopy look.

[Mike Scholtes]

Your question is amply answered by Pat Johnston's 9-21-11 post in the Classics section: Shark 35 with an LA46. If you want to use the Saito then you are looking at the Shark 45, but there are better engine choices. I am putting an Enya 61 CXS into my Shark 45. The RSM kit is authentic and very high quality.

Of course if you mainly want a nice looking classic that flys well but maybe not as well as the Shark then the T-Bird of any variety will be great. Maybe we can get a  genuine T-Bird expert like Larry Fernandez to chime in. If you see his in person or even pictures you will want one, I guarantee it.

[Derek Barry]

I favor the T-Bird......

Derek

[Larry Fernandez]

Your question is amply answered by Pat Johnston's 9-21-11 post in the Classics section: Shark 35 with an LA46. If you want to use the Saito then you are looking at the Shark 45, but there are better engine choices. I am putting an Enya 61 CXS into my Shark 45. The RSM kit is authentic and very high quality.

Of course if you mainly want a nice looking classic that flys well but maybe not as well as the Shark then the T-Bird of any variety will be great. Maybe we can get a  genuine T-Bird expert like Larry Fernandez to chime in. If you see his in person or even pictures you will want one, I guarantee it.

The T-Bird is my all time favorite classic plane. It does have its faults though. There is about 2 inches of asymetry (inboard panel is two inches longer than the inboard panel) which mean the inboard flap is WAY two big. I am building my third one right now and plan to use differential flaps BUT opposite
of how Mr. Palmer used them. The Veco Differential flaps were set up for more/quicker travel on the inboard flap which make things worse. The two T-Birds that I have previously built had a bit of an outward roll in all corners. Made for good line tension but the corners had no gracefull flow to them. On my new one I plan to use the differential flaps to decrease/slow the inboard flap travel to compensate for the larger flap.

I flew the first one with a Brodak K&B .40 ABC and the second with a Brodak .40. The planes flew great with either motor but the K&B was a bit heavy.

I judged Pete Cunha flying his AeroTiger Olympic a few weeks ago and decided then and there that my new Thunderbird was going to get an AeroTiger .36 stuffed in it. This should be a killer combo.

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[Brian Massey]

The T-Bird is my all time favorite classic plane. It does have its faults though. There is about 2 inches of asymetry (inboard panel is two inches longer than the inboard panel) which mean the inboard flap is WAY two big. I am building my third one right now and plan to use differential flaps BUT opposite
of how Mr. Palmer used them. The Veco Differential flaps were set up for more/quicker travel on the inboard flap which make things worse. The two T-Birds that I have previously built had a bit of an outward roll in all corners. Made for good line tension but the corners had no gracefull flow to them. On my new one I plan to use the differential flaps to decrease/slow the inboard flap travel to compensate for the larger flap.

I flew the first one with a Brodak K&B .40 ABC and the second with a Brodak .40. The planes flew great with either motor but the K&B was a bit heavy.

I judge Pete Cunha flying his AeroTiger Olympic a few weeks ago and decided then and there that my new Thunderbird was going to get an AeroTiger .36 stuffed in it. This should be a killer combo.

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

How much, if any, can you modify a "Classic" and still enter it in classic events?? If you were to build a T-bird with equal wing panels, have you gone to far??

Brian

[Larry Fernandez]

How much, if any, can you modify a "Classic" and still enter it in classic events?? If you were to build a T-bird with equal wing panels, have you gone to far??

Brian

You can get many different answers on this one.
I myself believe in the spirit of the event. No matter what anyone else might do, I want my plane to look like it was built back in the day. Which is why I use paint schemes from that era. Also wheels , spinners props and so on. I even painted the head of my Brodak .40 green, just to give it that fifties look. I don't care to see panel lines on these planes since that was not done back then.

I think you can make changes, but take a hit on appearance/fidelity points as the C/D and judges see fit. I doubt that they would prohibit you from flying.

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[Brian Massey]

You can get many different answers on this one. I myself believe in the spirit of the event.
Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

I would have to agree with "the spirit of the event". If I do build one and make changes; I'd not enter it in Classic. I'm currently building a Sig Super Chipmonk with many of Dave Fitz changes. It will not be entered into Classic events; too many changes.

Brian

[Clint Ormosen]

I would have to agree with "the spirit of the event". If I do build one and make changes; I'd not enter it in Classic. I'm currently building a Sig Super Chipmonk with many of Dave Fitz changes. It will not be entered into Classic events; too many changes.

Brian

Brian, the Sig "Super" Chipmunk would never be Classic legal anyway. Only the their first kitted version that was more like Jim Vanloo's original would be.

Minor changes to the Thunderbird wouldn't disqualify it for Classic, but as mentioned, you might take a hit on fidelity points. I'd listen to Larry if you want a good flying T-Bird.
 

[Brian Massey]

That's right; the "Super" is not. Well, I wasn't planning on it anyway 

Brian

[Balsa Butcher]

If you just gotta have a Shark, consider the RSM Shark 35. Excellent kit, much easier to build than the Shark 45, LA- 46 would be a perfect engine for it and it will fit inside your car. Hope to have mine ready soon. AND if you want a Thunderbird that's not a Thunderbird check out Tom Dixon's "Phoenix" published in Model Aviation in 1983. Best flying "Thunderbird" that I have built. Of course, not Classic legal but a nice design none the less.