Author Topic: I NEED SOME HELP ON A DESIGN (Read 4782 times)

LARRY RICE · « **on:** July 03, 2011, 07:05:45 PM »

This model was designed by Walt Musciano in 1972 (or before). It seemed that he never named it. Black Hawk Models is looking to produce this model in kit form. I have never flown a serious stunt model so I am hoping that some of you will make some suggestions to bring this model up to date. Walt has sent me the full size plans and a full size scale drawing of the model. He has authorized me to make whatever changes are necessary.
We can go to a bubble canopy to make it easier to build, add adjustable line guides or whatever is needed. The kit will have complete hardware so tell me what hardware you want in it. Anything you suggest will be considered, please be sure that everything is available today.
We also will need a name. As a working name (so we know what model we are talking about) we are calling it "Champ".

Thank You for your assistance.
Larry

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #1 on:** July 03, 2011, 07:08:23 PM »

Second Pic

Douglas Ames · « **Reply #2 on:** July 03, 2011, 07:41:32 PM »

You could call it the "Musciano Special"

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #3 on:** July 03, 2011, 10:23:05 PM »

From "Building and Flying Model Airplanes", Walt Musciano, Funk & Wagnalls, 1972? Pp 106, 108 & 109? Did it ever fly, or did he just do the design?

I think it had to have been built to be classic legal, and if it were you'd want to retain the original airfoil and shape. Otherwise modify as necessary.

I'd put in adjustable lead-outs, weight boxes in the tip and tail, make a canopy (and think out a nice cockpit), and leave the rest alone.

Wynn Robins · « **Reply #4 on:** July 03, 2011, 11:05:23 PM »

I've seen that plan before somewhere ........
dont change the shape - ESPECIALLY the canopy - it looks cool just as it is

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #5 on:** July 03, 2011, 11:14:41 PM »

This may be hard to believe but Walt told me that he had to test fly every design that he made and that lead to several up dates in the finished product. I like the suggestions so far, thanks and please keep the good work.

Larry

wwwarbird · « **Reply #6 on:** July 03, 2011, 11:17:16 PM »

Quote from: Wynn Robins on July 03, 2011, 11:05:23 PM

dont change the shape - ESPECIALLY the canopy - it looks cool just as it is

I very much agree with Wynn's comment. I feel that if it's done at all it should stay true to the original look. If not, then it's not Walt's design anymore, it becomes just another airplane.

I like the "Musciano Special" name too.

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #7 on:** July 03, 2011, 11:22:31 PM »

Wynn....looks a lot like the smaller "Challenger" which Larry already kits. It is cute. I am not sure everybody would be up to the spine and stringer fuselage.

Tim....if you can prove that it was designed during the Classic era, it's a legal Classic, whether it was built or flown after that or not. From the given info, it looks like N30.

Larry...while mods are allowed for Classic and N30, I think it's better to leave them up to the builder. Reduced wing asymmetry would be a better mod than the bubble canopy, for instance...maybe could show both on the plans?

Steve

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #8 on:** July 03, 2011, 11:38:18 PM »

Okay we keep the original design. I am thinking that the center crutch could be eliminated and the fuselage structure altered for easier building.

John Hammonds · « **Reply #9 on:** July 04, 2011, 05:22:15 AM »

How about calling it a "Muscstunt"

Hmm perhaps not...

john e. holliday · « **Reply #10 on:** July 04, 2011, 07:29:38 AM »

Don't change a thing and I like the name, "Musciano Special". Yes the leading edge is sharp, but how many planes from that era flew great with that type airfoil. Put, the old DOC on the list for one as I like the looks of it and it is about the right size for me.

Garf · « **Reply #11 on:** July 04, 2011, 05:45:49 PM »

This resembles the Casburn Miss Behave.

Wynn Robins · « **Reply #12 on:** July 04, 2011, 06:23:46 PM »

Quote from: Steve Helmick on July 03, 2011, 11:22:31 PM

Wynn....looks a lot like the smaller "Challenger" which Larry already kits. It is cute. I am not sure everybody would be up to the spine and stringer fuselage.

Steve

I have over 20,000 plans on file - I am sure I have this one somewhere.......

Douglas Ames · « **Reply #13 on:** July 04, 2011, 06:25:46 PM »

Quote from: John Hammonds on July 04, 2011, 05:22:15 AM

How about calling it a "Muscstunt" Hmm perhaps not...

Al Rabe designed a model called the "Mustunt IV"...

The canopy could be made real easy from a teardrop style, just chop off the back 2/3rds.

ChrisSarnowski · « **Reply #14 on:** July 04, 2011, 07:10:02 PM »

Champ is a good name but how about calling it "Super Stunt Champ"?

Walt already has a Custom Special and Giant Stunt Master so I'd avoid another special or master.

-Chris

John Hammonds · « **Reply #15 on:** July 05, 2011, 03:30:56 PM »

Quote from: Douglas Ames

Quote from: John Hammonds
How about calling it a "Muscstunt" Hmm perhaps not...

Al Rabe designed a model called the "Mustunt IV"...

.

I know I have the plans, also the (I think) original profile Mustunt with the upright engine. That was where I got the idea from. It was an attempt at English humour.

TTFN
John.

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #16 on:** July 05, 2011, 05:01:46 PM »

For all of you Americand that do not speak English english TTFN stands for "TA TA FOR NOW"

Larry

t michael jennings · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2011, 10:43:17 AM »

Mr. Rice,

What is the Wing Span and Wing Area of the Musciano 1972 designed aircraft?

Thanks,

T Michael Jennings
Knoxville, TN.

BYU · « **Reply #18 on:** July 14, 2011, 11:17:41 AM »

Quote from: LARRY RICE on July 05, 2011, 05:01:46 PM

For all of you Americand that do not speak English english TTFN stands for "TA TA FOR NOW"

Larry

What does Ta Ta Mean?

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #19 on:** July 14, 2011, 12:25:47 PM »

SPAN 45" AREA 540 SQ INCHES

LARRY

Garf · « **Reply #20 on:** July 14, 2011, 06:23:51 PM »

Quote from: EliottScott on July 14, 2011, 11:17:41 AM

What does Ta Ta Mean?

Bye.

dennis lipsett · « **Reply #21 on:** July 14, 2011, 06:30:09 PM »

I'd rather call it Musciano's magic.

Dennis

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #22 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:49:41 AM »

A cute little airplane.
The only thing that is obvious to me is that I would extend the flaps closer to the fuselage to give a shorter connecting wire on the control horn. Long wire like that would require gives much less torsion control between the flaps and can be a real problem for trimming.
One other thing to consider (just consider) is extending the tail moment a couple of inches to compensate for today's somewhat heavier engines. This would likely avert having to add tail weight for a respectable CG location.

Randy Cuberly

john e. holliday · « **Reply #23 on:** July 16, 2011, 09:00:55 AM »

Looking at the plans again, there is not that much of a gap between the end of the flaps and the fuselage. Leave the plans as is so it looks the same externally. Too many or any changes makes a different airplane. By the way planking is not that hard. It takes time an patiance.

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #24 on:** July 16, 2011, 12:12:46 PM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on July 16, 2011, 09:00:55 AM

Looking at the plans again, there is not that much of a gap between the end of the flaps and the fuselage. Leave the plans as is so it looks the same externally. Too many or any changes makes a different airplane. By the way planking is not that hard. It takes time an patiance.

Hey Doc...
I think you'd better take another look at the plan form picture. There is a fair gap that would make the horn wire at least twice as long as flaps ends that are close to the fuselage.
A torsion rod that is twice as long flexes (in torsion) roughly three times as much as the shorter one.

Randy C.

PatRobinson · « **Reply #25 on:** July 16, 2011, 05:06:34 PM »

Hi Larry,

I guess the fundamental question to first answer is what you intend this kit to be?

1. If your goal is to provide a new Nostalgia 30 competition kit then kit the plane per the plans. (only modify to increase strength as needed) Are Nostalgia 30 competitors your intended market?

2. If it is your goal to offer a modern "sport" stunt model with a nostalgia look and a nostalgia pedigree then I would agree you should:
1. you should add the 1-2 inches in rear fuselage length
2. I would add 2 inches to each wingtip and add leading edge sweep. adjust things so you can retain
a similar wing area. ( this give's you a lot of engine selections)
3. I would cutoff the flap tips and glue them to the wing. I am not fond of "toothpick" wide flap tips.
So, are sport flyers as well as others who would just want a different kit to build your intended market?

Larry I guess how you answer the questions might point how you should proceed. I wish you the best.
Pat Robinson

Brett Buck · « **Reply #26 on:** July 16, 2011, 05:48:35 PM »

Quote from: PatRobinson on July 16, 2011, 05:06:34 PM

2. If it is your goal to offer a modern "sport" stunt model with a nostalgia look and a nostalgia pedigree then I would agree you should:
1. you should add the 1-2 inches in rear fuselage length
2. I would add 2 inches to each wingtip and add leading edge sweep. adjust things so you can retain
a similar wing area. ( this give's you a lot of engine selections)
3. I would cutoff the flap tips and glue them to the wing. I am not fond of "toothpick" wide flap tips.

Or. alternately, kit any of the hundreds of other designs that look a lot like that. I am sure that the modifications would make it fly better, but it's effectively designing a new airplane very similar to many others. And there's no way it would be competitive in Nostalgia 30 against any of the good designs from that era, like the USA-1, Juno, Genesis, or even less the Imitation (which, if you check, is not a lot different aerodynamically from the WC and NATs winning Thunder Gazer).

I would suggest kitting it as designed with only modifications to ensure you can use standard parts (like a 2" tank and available hardware). It would make a nice sport plane. Whether there is a market for such a thing is another story but that's a business decision.

Brett

john e. holliday · « **Reply #27 on:** July 17, 2011, 07:34:59 AM »

I think(which is scary at times) that is why Veco kits were so popular at the time. The Thunderbird and Chief were the all out stunt planes of the time. The rest were sport or introduction type planes to aerobatics. They were very basic and easy to build. They also flew pretty decent when constructed per plans/instructions. I still have my Tom Tom that needs a little TLC that flies decently. I have copied/printed off the plans of the MS and would like to try the construction technique. I know it has been done before on different planes, but I have not done a stringered plane since the rubber power days. Forgot the Sterling kits. If not a full kit I would go for a laser cut short kit of the ribs and fuselage formers. Myself I am at the age that I will enter a contest just to fly and support the club hosting it.

LARRY RICE · « **Reply #28 on:** July 17, 2011, 08:59:17 AM »

Thanks for all of your help and after all of your input and some from friends, I think that making it as close as designed is the best decision. Black Hawk Models does not believe in partial kits but offers complete kits at reasonable prices.

Dave Adamisin · « **Reply #29 on:** July 17, 2011, 09:17:16 AM »

It has a "Cleveland" edge to it's look. (large in front, tapering to the rear in all directions) A name following on the Ares, Argus lineage with some precious metal for an adjective...

Author Topic: I NEED SOME HELP ON A DESIGN (Read 4782 times)

ChrisSarnowski

Dave Adamisin