stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Tim Wescott on May 28, 2012, 07:06:11 PM
-
Is the LA 25 plenty-o-motor for a Fancherized Twister, assuming that one only replaces the balsa with the grain running the wrong way, but not any of the mislabeled teak that somehow made it into the "this is balsa" pile?
I went looking for motors for the Twister, but didn't find much specific information. I did find some, the LA-25 was mentioned. I have a couple of LA-25s, but it seems kinda small to me. Would the engine really work in that plane, with plenty of margin for wind and the sort of weight gain that comes from actually using the wood that comes with the kit? Would it be OK if I built the kit but obsessively cut weight by replacing half or more of the wood? Or should I be thinking of something bigger?
It seems like the two most common engines used by the bottom-feeders like me are the LA-25 and the LA-46 -- but I assume that the 46 would just be too big? Are there any other engines out there that are a good fit that won't give me fits, and won't cost an arm and a leg?
RC engines that just need a venturi are no problem -- I have a lathe and the competence to turn out a venturi.
-
Tim, IMHO, the LA 46 has a couple advantages,, if you do end up a touch heavy,, its got power,, its available, its easy to run, its versitile in most anything up to about 600 inches, there is a ton of info, they are cheap, so,, is it to big,, well its more than you need, but you can tame it with pitch,, to control speed. I would consider if you have a kit, perhaps you could add a few inches to the wing( sometimes the spars and LE TE stock is longer than needed so cutting a couple extra full ribs it would help. Extend the tail length as suggested by Fancher.. My first flapped plane was a Fancherized twister with an FP 40, but they are a BIT less friendly to run than the LA. also a bit tougher to come by. Used to be there was an advantage to the 40 because line size was tied to displacement for stunt, now with that not the case, there really isnt a great reason not to.
there are other engines,, the original was designed around a fox 35, I suggest you not go that way however, it requires different fuel than your other engines,, its also IMHO not the best option for situation,, Steve helmick has a 36 myabe a Magnum, or a thundertiger,, not sure,, but it works well also
dont over think it, do what Fancher says,, build it straight( replace wood as needed from the kit) light, and make it servicable,, like as in, shrink wrap covering,, The wing will take an amazing amount of abuse without failing,, WITH ultracote,, Not with Silkspan,,
my two cents worth
-
Os 35 FP would be my first choice, but then I have them. I would rather have more power than the LAS 25.
-
An LA .25 would be a bit weak for the Twister. You could maybe get away with it if the model comes out as an absolute featherweight.
A smooth running .35 to .40 would be ideal. y1
-
C'mon buddy - go electric! #^
-
C'mon buddy - go electric! #^
That may happen, particularly if I make it through the next few contests without crashing. I think a full-bore whap into asphalt may be more expensive with an electric plane than with a slime-powered one.
I have all I need except the batteries and a timer, so my initial expense may be less than a new motor if I get cheap batteries.
-
There's a fellow in the CL club we have here in Albuquerque, he had a regular Twister out at one of our flyin's about a month ago, he flew the entire Old time stunt pattern with a OS .40 LA. I loved it, decide there on the spot to build one after my Ringmaster build is done, I have a brand new .40 LA in the box and I downloaded the plan's for the Fancherized version. Just need to order a kit. (Or just buy some balsa and cut my own).
-
Tim, I have a slightly spare timer,, if you truly are interested,, we should talk.
-
(Or just buy some balsa and cut my own).
I have to say that I was surprised and disappointed at some of the wood in the kit. It's been a long time since I've built a Sig kit, and I remember the wood selection as being quite -- competent, I guess is the right word. Not superlative all-contest-balsa, but no wood that I would consider to be defective.
This kit has some wood in it that looks like it came out of a crotch in a balsa tree. Not only does the grain run diagonally to the length of the piece, but the density, color, and type varies across the piece -- it goes from mixed grain to 'C' grain and back to mixed, and the darker regions have so many (and so distinct) pores that I would almost take it for another species altogether if it weren't attached cheek to jowl to some recognizable balsa. It's not even poorly selected for the job (which is normal for a kit where everything is just run straight from the sawmill to the die cutting shop) but it is just flat defective wood.
Sorry for the rant -- I used to love Sig, so every week that goes by without them making good on their orders from my local hobby shop is hurting, and seeing this in a box with their name on it is just another poke with a stick.
-
Tim, I have a slightly spare timer,, if you truly are interested,, we should talk.
KR?
-
Tim
Randy Smith from Aero Products has a great line of Enya's for sale .30 / .32 / .40's all great prices.
You should check him out. D>K
-
KR?
No its actually the ztron,, ( zgras,,hmm now I dont remember,, ) its the one that Mike Palko uses,, I have two,, It uses binary dip switches to program,, knowing you, it would be a lot easier for you to use this timer than some other people,, It took me a few tries to wrap my head around, but its a solid piece,,
I just went with Hubin mostly because of the programing box,, so this one is now surplus ,, slightly,, ;)
-
My brother had a fair bit of success with a Tower 40 in his Twister.
-
I flew a Fancherized Twister with an FP 40. It was great till I whacked it.
-Chris
-
Leester, I sent ya' a private message, thanks Bootlegger
-
I have flown them with O.S. .35S, MAX .40H, FP .40, LA 40 and .46. I like the LA .46 best, plenty of power, nice needle range, and economical on fuel.
I think a .25 would be on the small side, might work as a basic trainer, but for much beyond wing overs and maybe a loop or 2, you will be happier with more power rather than less.
-
Sorry to jump in here Tim with this but if you need an F.Twister I offer a kit
for nitro or electric version
-
I agree with Mark; an LA 46 would be a safer bet for most intermediates. People have been successful with an .25 on a Fancherrized version, but they were all expert builders. Your kit may not contained 6 lb AAA balsa. I seen a lot of Fancherized version that came out tail heavy and with a .25 engine you will need to built it < 36oz.
-
Sorry to jump in here Tim with this but if you need an F.Twister I offer a kit
for nitro or electric version
Nah, there's enough good in this Sig kit that it's worth making up the rest from the pile-o-wood.
-
I agree with Mark; an LA 46 would be a safer bet for most intermediates. People have been successful with an .25 on a Fancherrized version, but they were all expert builders. Your kit may not contained 6 lb AAA balsa. I seen a lot of Fancherized version that came out tail heavy and with a .25 engine you will need to built it < 36oz.
I figured that I could move heaven and earth and get the weight down, but not with the wood in the kit, and then how would the plane handle in the wind?
-
Tim, the biggest single advantage I see with the LA 46, is that it is easily translated to other designs,, and offers the oppurtunity to move up in size as you outgrow,, ( or heaven forbid,, stuff) the Ftwister,,
-
( or heaven forbid,, stuff) the Ftwister,,
Ftwister? Fwister? Fanchister?
I'm kinda wondering if I shouldn't just build two airframes, as I was planning on doing with the SkyRay before I got such a public and pointed suggestion that I move to a flapped plane.
-
Consider the Evo 36. The 46 LA is a good choice. The Fancherized Twister that I have (bought from another modeler) was really tail heavy. It required the stock muffler and a lead slug in the backplate to be even close.
-
thats what I did Tim,, they are almost as simple as a skyray,,
However, I think the skyray is still a good way to go,, then the twister is the step up,,
-
I'm thinking that the 25 would fly the Twister, but neither it nor the airplane would be happy. I believe you would be at the upper limit for a good 25 in good conditions. My Medic does fine with the LA 25 and the Medic is about the size of a Twister and weighs in at 36 ounces, BUT there are no flaps to increase drag in corners. Go with an engine that will happily turn an 11 inch prop and you will be happier. Then your Twister can come in at 42 or 44 ounces and still fly just fine.
-
Twisters are great transition planes. Excellent way to start learning about a flapped stunter. Simple, basic construction. If you build the plane light, use light wood wherever possible and structurally appropriate, sure, an LA 25 on something like 57', .012 lines might work. Finish in dope and silkspan, 1/16" doublers, light stiff straight fues wood (good luck finding that), fly on the left coast in a moderate prevailing unidirectional breeze, knock yourself out. The Fancherize Twister plan I have shows an LA25. ARF Flite Streaks are an excellent match to an LA25. The hollow fues wonders are usually under 30 ounces, probably around 26. Saw one fly at our home field this weekend. Reminded me how sweet the combo could be. The LA 25 running a steady 2-stroke, the Streak flying easily. Not a high point pattern. But an easy run through the pattern. The combo looked balanced. Components well matched. Twisters weigh more, also there is the extra drag of flaps and a longer wing. It would be a challenge to build a 34 or 36 ounce Twister. More likely you bill be running to 38 ounces and above. Which means an LA 25 is lugging considerably more load.
LA 46s weigh approximately the same as FP40s, Tower 40s and LA40s. They are for the money great stunt engines. Powerful, easy to tune, available new and used. Trouble is they turn a big prop. 11.5 to 12.25. At least that's how we run them in my club. A prop that size might cause some issues on a comparatively small plane like a Twister. For that reason I'd probably run a 40. For FP40s and Tower 40s, I'd start with 2 or 3 head gaskets, an Enya#3 plug, a .265 venturi, tongue muffler with a lot of holes, powermaster 22%(50/50), 5%, 10.5x4.5 APC. I'd build the front end rigid, 5 ply 1/8" doublers, carbon fiber sandwich, close up the back end of the nose (side opposite the engine) with 1/8" 5 ply. Gluing it all together with quality epoxy, making sure everything fit without gaps, weighting the nose sandwich down as it dried and so forth. Careful building always a positive.
-
Tim: Couple suggestions: #1.) I'd seriously consider the LA46 for the reasons suggested in the posts here; #2.)I'm writing a three part article for CLW covering the "F/A TWISTER" (that's Fancherized/Allenized TWISTER) for competition flying. Both aircraft were built from kits. You will benefit from the articles and as such I'm taking the liberty of sending you part I...no cost or obligation by you. My compliments. The second part is due out in three weeks; #3.)The plan set for this TWISTER version are available from Leonard Neumann of Stuka Stunt...2 full size sheets which allows you all the specs for this F/A version; Hope this helps you. Bill Allen; allen.wm42@Yahoo.com
-
Thanks Bill.
-
I'm surprised no one mentioned the Brodak .40. :-\ ??? That would be an excellent engine for the F.Twister. Enya .30, .35 would also be excellent.
-Dan
-
WELL 2 cents. I fly my F.Twister with a FP-25.......
LA-40
FP-35
RE-Worked FP-40
Fox 35
Tim.....I don't know what engines you have....Let me know as I may be able to help
Scott Riese
-
well thats all good Scott, but you have a bit more finesse than some of us other laypeople,, so the FP 25 works for you,, LOL,,
Me ,, well I need a bit of reserve power for my yank in panic corners LOL HB~>
-
I've got enough reed valve 049s to make up 0.4 cubic inches, but I don't really want to go there.
OS 25S
FP 20
LA 25
Fox 35 stunt
Fox 40 RC (with Schnuerle porting)
I've got two of the Fox 40's, one of which is a strong runner when that really strange carburetor is clean-clean-clean. I'm thinking that if I put a plain old venturi on there it may work well, even if it's kind of a weirdo choice. (I'm considering using it in a way that lets me yank it out and use some other motor if it doesn't work).
-
well thats all good Scott, but you have a bit more finesse than some of us other laypeople,, so the FP 25 works for you,, LOL,,
Me ,, well I need a bit of reserve power for my yank in panic corners LOL HB~>
I was kinda thinking that.
-
Hi Tim,
Go ahead and get the LA .46. It will do great on the FTwister and you will need one for the planes you build down the road.
BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM
-
All the engines mentioned here would be good choices for the F. Twister. However having used several LA 25's in the past and having seen several others used I would simply say that I believe most folks here are understimating the power and ability of this engine.
The LA 25 is way more than the equal of any Fox 35 and there have been a lot of Twisters in the past flown with that engine very succesfully. The LA 25 will easily turn a 10 X 4 APC prop at 10,000 + RPM and generate much more HP than the venerable Fox (and it won't BURP and vibrate) and will fly most any profile in the 38 to 42 oz range. It is relatively easy to build a profile like the F Twister in this range.
That said...my personal choice would go along with Mark Scarborough on the LA 46 but if I wanted to be a bit different I certainly would not be afraid to use the LA 25.
One plus is flying the pattern on about three oz or less of fuel (even 15% Nitro).
Randy Cuberly
-
What prop, venturi, fuel, extra head gasket or not, on an LA46 to power a Twister? (Addressed to folks who recommend this power.) How would you characterize the desirable run? Wet 2 stroke, 4 stroke, or...
-
well there is lots on here about the LA 46,, basically the 12.25 x 3.75 , a .272 venturi, a ST or Randy smith needle valve assembly. 10% nitro 22 % oil,, ( half and half synth , castor) rpm 9800
The twister is a bit small for this engine,, however with enough vertical stab area I would not be afraid of it. however some success has been had with the 11.5 x 4 APC,, My personal experience has been with this prop that the needle is a bit sensitive.
the issue noted is that when you needle it a hundred or two hundred rpm either way, it can go several minutes longer, or shorter,, even though the rpm is not that far off. This went away with the use of the 12.25
-
While I'm sure Mark's set up probably works well. I would much prefer a .280 venturi with the ST or Randy Smith needle and a 11.5 X 4 APC prop at 9400 launch RPM. Same fuel! This setup gives more reserve power by operating in a stronger portion of the power curve in my opinion. It does use a little more fuel but keeps the engine happier in a fast strong four cycle.
I think the 12.25 diameter prop limits corner especially on a smaller airplane like the Twister.
Randy Cuberly
-
Which is why an Enya 30SS is a better choice for that plane
Light powerful, and last and last
Randy
-
You can lead a horse to water....However, it easier to ride it.
Far from me to help...BUT K.I.S.S
Fox 40.....too much
LA-46...Too MUCH
Fox .35...Good
Enya 30...Good
LA-25...Good
25 VF ....&^%$#)&)!@......lol
WHY we say that......The tank weight/volume is one. And there are many more.
-
While I'm sure Mark's set up probably works well. I would much prefer a .280 venturi with the ST or Randy Smith needle and a 11.5 X 4 APC prop at 9400 launch RPM. Same fuel! This setup gives more reserve power by operating in a stronger portion of the power curve in my opinion. It does use a little more fuel but keeps the engine happier in a fast strong four cycle.
I think the 12.25 diameter prop limits corner especially on a smaller airplane like the Twister.
Randy Cuberly
That's cuz you're at 2500 feet.
Chris...
-
well there is lots on here about the LA 46,, basically the 12.25 x 3.75 , a .272 venturi, a ST or Randy smith needle valve assembly. 10% nitro 22 % oil,, ( half and half synth , castor) rpm 9800
The twister is a bit small for this engine,, however with enough vertical stab area I would not be afraid of it. however some success has been had with the 11.5 x 4 APC,, My personal experience has been with this prop that the needle is a bit sensitive.
the issue noted is that when you needle it a hundred or two hundred rpm either way, it can go several minutes longer, or shorter,, even though the rpm is not that far off. This went away with the use of the 12.25
That's cuz you're at sea level.
Chris...
-
That's cuz you're at sea level.
Chris...
So, in Death Valley the LA 25 will work fine?
-
Yep........even without Boraxo LL~
-
You can lead a horse to water....However, it easier to ride it.
Far from me to help...BUT K.I.S.S
Fox 40.....too much
LA-46...Too MUCH
Fox .35...Good
Enya 30...Good
LA-25...Good
You are keeping in mind that I am by no means an expert flyer, and that I'm not going to be tossing out 70% of the wood to replace it with contest-grade. Yes?
-
That's cuz you're at sea level.
Chris...
actually I live and fly at 2500 feet,, my contests are at 400 feet,, just sayin ;)
-
Might have to go with shorter lines with the LA .25. H^^
-
Tim, over the years since SIG first came out with the Twister I have built 13 of them. The last 3 or 4 were powered by Irving.25's which are a much more powerful engine than the vererable Fox.35 the Twister was designed around. My current Twister has over 300 flights on it and it will fly much better than my meager attempts, and really does not need anthing bigger. Just a thought. Also, are you really having any fun at all? Sometimes your threads seem to be less than happy. Just a thought in passing.
Joe
-
Five years ago I built a "Fancherized Twister" which is still being flown by Steve Helmick. It has a Magnum .36 on it and I never considered it to be over powered, in fact I thought a little more wouldn't hurt. I sure Tim is having fun, he's just trying to learn and sometimes a seemingly simple question can become overwhelming with so many different answers. I have and engine that I have offered Tim which will work fine if it is a true F Twister.
A couple of years ago one of the local fliers asked me: "Do you ever go flying just for fun?" The answer was that I always go flying because it is fun! It seems that he doesn't care if his airplane doesn't fly well and isn't interested in improving them and couldn't understand why I and the other competitive fliers around here are always messing with our set ups.
Truth is, in my opinion, a .25 even an LA would haul a Twister around but more power will definitely help Tim's progress. And he will have fun if he can get some help with trim.
-
Also, are you really having any fun at all? Sometimes your threads seem to be less than happy.
I'm not sure why they come across that way, but I am having lots of fun. Perhaps it's because I'm trained as a design engineer -- there's a (mostly correct) rule of thumb for design engineering that an error that isn't caught at a particular step in a process costs 10 times to fix in the subsequent step, 100 times in the one after that, etc. This leads you to really think things through (and yes, sometimes to overthink), so my tendency is to start thinking (and asking questions) about things early. Then when I do get some time in the shop or the field I can use it to greatest effect.
Richard Entwistle watched me fly my Fright Streak at the last Fireballs meeting. He made the comment that I may not be getting much practice in, but that I obviously think about the pattern a lot. He's perceptive: when I'm home, and it's dark, and I need to be upstairs helping to herd kids, I can often be found in the family room practicing the pattern, using the overhead track lights as a reference for wingovers, overhead eights, and cloverleafs (I think they're going to get a crossbar for the cloverleafs, although I'll probably get in trouble if I just use a black felt pen and a ruler to make it).
I sure Tim is having fun, he's just trying to learn and sometimes a seemingly simple question can become overwhelming with so many different answers.
It can be a challenge to sort through everything, but I like to hear reasons along with the recommendations I get (even if they're "I don't know, that just works for me"). My Inner Demon is joggling my elbow, telling me to say that the nice thing about getting so many contradictory opinions is that it frees me up to do what I wanted to in the first place -- but that's more humorous than true.
I have an engine that I have offered Tim which will work fine if it is a true F Twister.
Yes, and I'm thinking that I should name the plane "Gratitude". I appreciate all the help I'm getting from guys in this community.
A couple of years ago one of the local fliers asked me: "Do you ever go flying just for fun?" The answer was that I always go flying because it is fun! It seems that he doesn't care if his airplane doesn't fly well and isn't interested in improving them and couldn't understand why I and the other competitive fliers around here are always messing with our set ups.
I get a great deal of satisfaction with making a change in a plane and having it fly better -- even just having it fly different, or even worse, because I know I just learned something. And I certainly enjoy flying the pattern in practice.
So I must also be one of those "yes, but this is fun" crew.
At my level I'm not going to contests to win, or even to "compete", per se -- I'm going to fly in front of people, have experts like Mike judge my performance, and meet all the other folks that are doing the same thing. My big goal right now is just to perform as well at contests as I do in practice; winning out over other people comes in a distant second or third place to that.
Truth is, in my opinion, a .25 even an LA would haul a Twister around but more power will definitely help Tim's progress. And he will have fun if he can get some help with trim.
My impression from reading the posts in this thread is that if I built it light I could get away with using an LA 25 or a Fox 35 -- but then I'd be spending my time learning how to work around an airplane with barely enough power, instead of how to fly the pattern. So (with apologies to Scott, who we all know flies way better than me) I think a bigger engine is probably right for me.
-
Quit messing around and go with an ST .60
-
Five years ago I built a "Fancherized Twister" which is still being flown by Steve Helmick. It has a Magnum .36 on it and I never considered it to be over powered, in fact I thought a little more wouldn't hurt. I sure Tim is having fun, he's just trying to learn and sometimes a seemingly simple question can become overwhelming with so many different answers. I have and engine that I have offered Tim which will work fine if it is a true F Twister.
A lot of us build a particular model because it brings us back to our youth. I have a particular affinity to the Sig Banshee because that it what I learned to stunt on. I have a new Banshee kit on my work bench that I what to put an LA25 into for our local .25 Stunt event. When I first meet Paul Pomposo, he was flying a Sig Banshee with only a .19 engine. It was a Fancharized Banshee built by Ted himself and probable only weighed 30oz. I am thinking about doing the same thing without chopping off the nose or changing the design, so I can use it in Classic, P40, 25 Stunt, Profile, etc.
(http://aeromaniacs.com/images/Paulp2.JPG)
-
Being a glutton for punishment I'll chip in and say that if I were interested in a Fancherized Twister--and I am not, the Wimpact being much more to my tastes in a flapped profile stunt model--it would be built from really good wood and powered by a 20FP with BB T-U.
But the motor would be mounted on pads.
Should the first-choice power not haul the mail I'd switch to a piped 25FP.
If this didn't work out as planned I'd switch to a Magnum 36 with tongue muffler.
The 46LA is a pretty neat stunt motor, agreed. I don't actually own one but it just seems like way too much motor for this project.
Ah, but my real advice is set to these ruminations aside. Instead, get that Flite Streak working to your satisfaction. Then put most of your effort into the Skyray 35 instead of needlessly complicating things with the proper trimming of a flapped model. Especially as flapped models are not a cure-all for any performance-related shortcomings of which I am aware, most certainly none in the skill-level classes of Intermediate and, yes, even Advanced.
Dan
An edit: While I don't want to shred the preceding, not finding that approach very honest, after some reflection I have to wonder if a 20FP w/BB T-U is a completely viable option for the model under discussion. Yes, it would work. I know that even I could get it to work. My first Wimpact, while built with all the stuff and the intentions to power it with a piped motor, was initially flown with a Brett-spec 20FP. Just to see if it could be done.
And it could, even if the model couldn't be said to fly with authority, particularly when powering up and over the top of the reverse wingover. (That particular Wimpact was 425 inches and around 35-36 ounces.) I pretty much fixed this issue with 25% fuel but as the real goal was a piped 25FP it didn't take long to fit a pipe. The 450-inch Wimpact and the W500 have never been flown on anything but a piped 25FP.
Bottom Line: I cannot advise anyone with 4 or 5 models under their belt building a Twister--with Ted's mods or not--and especially from an unmolested kit and then powering it with a box-stock 20FP. Too many opportunities to go slightly wrong...
Dan
-
I flew a Modified Twister all the way through Intermediate to the middle of Advanced then for a couple more years in Profile. Started with an OS 35S, too much vibration, then a choked down FP-40, not enough power for Oklahoma wind then a Saito 30, set up wrong but managed to place at Brodaks that year and finally a Saito 40A that brought home a bunch of hardware and stayed on it and till I retired the airplane.
Wouldn't think of putting a 25 on one, at least not for the conditions we have to fly in.. If I were to build another it would have a Saito 40 from day-1.
-
Ah, but my real advice is set to these ruminations aside.
Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.
Hmm.
-
That's cuz you're at 2500 feet.
Chris...
Well Chris there is something to what you say about the altitude, however I've flown this setup in a couple of different airplanes here in Tucson 2500 Ft and in LA a couple hundred ft above sea level and other than a slight needle setting change and a little more nitro here, it works very well there also (maybe even better than here). It's a sweet spot setup on the LA46...and I've tried a lot of different setups including a bunch that didn't work very well. (Port timing and head volume changes).
That said on a smaller airplane like the Twister even a weak setup would probably work fine as long as it gave a steady run.
My airplanes were all 620 to 650 sq in 53 to 56 oz range. The more powerful setup would be necessary for that especially here in Tucson at 100+ degrees and 6000 to 7000 ft density altitude. That's where the real test begins as you well know!
Randy Cuberly
-
Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.
Hmm.
Yes, and it is also accurate to say that with proper trimming and a few decent practice sessions your ARF Flite Streak would net you scores 50 points higher.
Take the information gained with that model applied to the Skyray 35 and your scores would surely improve again.
All, please note, without a summer building effort and dealing with the complications of a flapped model.
Don't you or anyone else make me do it (!) but I have quite the story about one of my own Skyray 35s and flying it in Expert PA. The story has been told before. Nobody wants to hear it again. Trust me.
Dan
-
You are keeping in mind that I am by no means an expert flyer, and that I'm not going to be tossing out 70% of the wood to replace it with contest-grade. Yes?
WHY???????
Nothing wrong with the kit. My kit planes came out at 35 oz. The wing loading with a twister with handle it.
-
Just hours after the closest person I have to a local coach said "you could increase your score by 20 points with a better plane" the NW Regionals management said "you could do better with a different plane" and gave me a Twister kit.
Hmm.
OK WRONG.....The regional Management had NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR "GIFT"........"I did"
I was asked to give out the TWISTER to someone that could USE a kit, to build to help, improve in OVERALL STUNT. YOU where the logical choice. Hence..........Beginner Stunt....ONE ELECTRIC and ONE Carbon based.....Easy to discertain WHO WILL RECIEVE the "GIFT" We as Stunt flyer's want to help YOU and Others to improve. IF the Twister is NOT up to your standards I have a Brodak P-51 B that I can give you. If you need an engine I have many OS-40 FP reworked by me for you also.....FREE. I want you to have fun!!! Just remember one thing.....DON'T RE-INVENT THE WHEEL.
Your Friend
Scott
-
OK WRONG.....The regional Management had NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR "GIFT"........"I did"
I misunderstood then -- did I miss part of the announcement?
I was asked to give out the TWISTER to someone that could USE a kit, to build to help, improve in OVERALL STUNT. YOU where the logical choice. Hence..........Beginner Stunt....ONE ELECTRIC and ONE Carbon based.....Easy to discertain WHO WILL RECIEVE the "GIFT" We as Stunt flyer's want to help YOU and Others to improve. IF the Twister is NOT up to your standards I have a Brodak P-51 B that I can give you. If you need an engine I have many OS-40 FP reworked by me for you also.....FREE. I want you to have fun!!! Just remember one thing.....DON'T RE-INVENT THE WHEEL.
It's getting built with stuff from the kit box, with wood replacements only where things are truly atrocious (I'll show you the pieces -- they're bad), to the Fancherized twister plans. I'm sure it'll be plenty good.
-
I Think so......Mike Coner gave the kit to John Thompson to give to someone that IS DISERVING of a good and reliant plane. John had so much to do I was asked to help........So Sorry for the confusion
-
Round and round. Our CL discussions often go like that.
-
Tim,,
I have flown Scotts reworked FP,even the one done by coleman lantern, on a picnic bench in McMinnville after how many beers Scott?? LOL( and some done by me as well just for the record H^^), run them the way he says and its a perfect match for the twister,, thats what mine flew on,,,
BONUS ROUND,, Scott is offering an engine sans financial commitment,, sounds like to me that you are in fat city dude,,
This is the kind of generousity that makes me love stunt guys,,
that said,, I still think that if you were to just once,, set the flight streak up exactly as recomended,, and fly it that way,, it would be a learning experience for you.
There is a lot to be said for flapless airplanes,, my recomendation would be to build the twister,, but fly out your stable of flapless airplanes bringing the twister in to the picture at some time later,, That way you can enjoy the finishing process, and it wont go for naught,, ( if it meets terra firma at the wrong moment,, )
-
that said,, I still think that if you were to just once,, set the flight streak up exactly as recomended,, and fly it that way,, it would be a learning experience for you.
There is a lot to be said for flapless airplanes,, my recomendation would be to build the twister,, but fly out your stable of flapless airplanes bringing the twister in to the picture at some time later,, That way you can enjoy the finishing process, and it wont go for naught,, ( if it meets terra firma at the wrong moment,, )
That's certainly my intent -- both of those. It's summer crashingflying season, and I (oh thank heavens) have almost more paying work than I can handle, so I figure that if I start the Twister now it'll be ready for covering when the rains start.
-
Is the LA 25 plenty-o-motor for a Fancherized Twister, assuming that o
The best-flying Fancherized Twisters I have ever flown were powered with 25FPs. The new version of the 25LA would have no problem with this airplane up to about the mid 30s, if not more. They were routinely flown with Veco 19s in WAM A Stunt by the Fitzgerald and McClellan clans and flew generally better than 35-sized airplanes of the era (early-mid 70's).
Brett
-
Veco 19s can haul. They were for years the preferred power for many in Clown Racing at Brodak. Acquitting themselves well against more race dedicated engines. There was a Nats winning stunt flier from the East Coast who flew a Humbug, I believe, with a Veco 19. He didn't win with this particular combo, but placed high enough to raise controversy. Since this comparatively small power plant hung on a flapless long winged plane was defiantly unlike the orthodox. Looking at Eric Rule's cite, I see the Humbug spanned 58" and weighed in at 44 ounces. I have seen many speed limited combat planes ripping fast with LA 25s up front. These planes are not small. Pull out the venturi, stick on a bladder, needle until the LA 25 hits a teeth drilling screech. We've tacked these engines at 20 thousand and above. Since they pull these foamies with biggish wings near eighty miles an hour, I have to agree, yes, there's plenty of power to do a Twister through the pattern. How different in approach tho to the sweet flying, docile, ARF Flite Streak I saw last weekend, using the self same LA 25 to power a fairly light shorter winged stunt/trainer at speeds (and with a level of responsiveness) friendly to pilots new to stunt.
This evening I was talking with a friend who builds race cars, hot rods and the like. A man having built countless fast and REAL FAST engines by this time. My newest Twister sized profile on the dining room table (a flapped Magician powered by a Tower 40 with.... head gaskets... and...). Contrasting this plane with the inverted mounted engines on a few full bodied planes nearby, he thinking that the inverted engine would feed better and so forth. Then I said, well no, not necessarily since the engines are subject to so many different and constantly changing forces. Then I started to explain a usuable/ideal stunt run. How these SIMPLISTIC engines can be tuned to increase power in this part of the maneuver, reduce power in that part of the maneuver, switching off and on in modes, how altering the compression, fuel, venturi size, prop, tank type, tank height,(and... and.. and...) how these tuning methods can be after much guesstimation recipeed (sp) to work on a given field at given temperatures... to deliver a near optimum stunt run...
It's 4:30 am on the right coast time for delusions and insights. Here's my thinking at the moment. Our 2 stroke power plants are comparatively simple in design. We are attempting to make these simple engines do very complex things. Up power, lower power in micro seconds, responding in specific ways to big differences in loads, a wide variety of loads, ridiculous challenge. Impossible. Certainly in the abstract. What would the vector analysis look like if we tried to make an accurate diagram of all forces that actually act on an engine/fuel delivery system in, let's say, a loop. Arrows, every which way. Then add the indeterminacy of a given days barometric pressure, relationship to sea level, temperature, humidity, fuel mix. On and on.
So. What's up. What do we do. How do we handle the near impossible complexity of simple, pragmatic technologies. Like throwing rocks. Or boomerangs. Or designing dug out canoes. Or designing sailing ships to go up the Nile. Or. Seems to me we do what we've always done. Trial and error, educated guessing, in other words experience as teacher. Which means, some of us will turn out to have a better feel, a better intuition, a better way to balance out this complexity, so that a workable, doable, effective solution is derived. An effective solution is not the same, in fact it often is contrary to, a philosophical debate of abstractions.
My conclusion. Find a mentor who makes the sh-t work. This is different from taking advice from someone who SOUNDS convincing. Often the folks who make SH-T work may or may not be able to explain why the SH-T works. In fact they may be dead wrong in their explanations... But they have a feel, an intuition, an internal math(?) physics(?) brilliance(?). Listen to them. Try their approach. Then try their approach again.
My thought for the person who started the thread. Sounds like you've got some mentors around who know their SH-T...
-
That may happen, particularly if I make it through the next few contests without crashing. I think a full-bore whap into asphalt may be more expensive with an electric plane than with a slime-powered one.
I have all I need except the batteries and a timer, so my initial expense may be less than a new motor if I get cheap batteries.
What motor (what is the KV, suggested prop, WATTs, etc) and controller do you have? If it is right for the Twister, you can complete the setup for < $50.
-
What motor (what is the KV, suggested prop, WATTs, etc) and controller do you have? If it is right for the Twister, you can complete the setup for < $50.
I've got a Phoenix 45 and an eFlight 15, kv = 950 (or so), max power = 425. I can't remember the recommended prop, but the numbers say that it'll do just fine if I can keep the weight down to 38 ounces.
So I really just need a couple of 4-cell batteries of around 2500mAh, and a timer.
-
Cheap motors. Cheap batteries. Not recommended by my e-mentor.
-
eflight and castle are not cheap just for the record
-
I wouldn't think of using el-cheapo batteries if I didn't crash all the time.
-
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.
-
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.
Doug is trying to talk me into electric. I almost certainly won't go there with this plane, although I might with the next one I build.
-
Got it. If were going to use electric while all this inquiry about engines? I guess you just changed your mind. Frankly, I don't like to waste my time.
Y'know, I had to think about why I find this response interesting.
So far there have been 19 different powerplants suggested in this thread (21 if you count "piped FP 25" and "modified FP 40" as different from 'regular old'). At no point in the discussion have you suddenly announced that I'm wasting your time until the second or third time that electric power is brought up.
So -- which of the other 18 (or 20) powerplants would you have said were "wasting your time" if I were to seriously consider them? I'm curious. Can I only choose something that you have mentioned if I want to avoid offending you? If that's the rule for everyone I've got to build a whole lotta planes to keep everyone happy!
-
If that's the rule for everyone I've got to build a whole lotta planes to keep everyone happy!
Tim, you gotta build a whole lotta planes just to have a fleet to survive the summer dude,, LOL H^^
-
Tim, you gotta build a whole lotta planes just to have a fleet to survive the summer dude,, LOL H^^
Well, yes.
-
Tim, I suggested that you use whatever the folks around you make work. Doesn't sound to me like I needed or expected you to do what I do. Good luck. Have fun.
-
Well...have the aforementioned F.Twister with a Magnum XLS .36 at 50 oz or so, and had a 38 oz Skyray with a .25LA (both with .272" venturi, OBTW). I'd say that a 30 oz F.Twister would do ok with the .25. The sweet ol' Magnum .36 (probably 16 gallons through it by now, and as many as 13 one-flip starts in a row) would appreciate a 38 oz load to pull. If I was building an F.Twister for a .46LA, I'd stretch the wing a rib bay on each tip, and shoot for 40 oz. Otherwise, keep it simple to keep it light. H^^ Steve
-
Tim. I've been there. Get it. There are, oddly enough, so many solutions and possibilities in our old time hobby, CL stunt. Bench flying (?), weighing these alternative approaches, thinking them through, thinking them through differently, part of the fun. Best.
-
What is the wingspan of the F/Twister and the standard Twister. And a normal, finished weight,(for both). Just curious. BTW ,I finished an extended Mercury Cobra-45" (flapped) instead of 40.5" came out at 34oz with an Enya ss30. 4.3 sec laps -55ft lines
Phil
-
Tim, you need to change your mind set. I have to once in a while. Why are you crashing? It can't be the plane design as there are people flying the design without crashing. At a stunt clinic, was told that we need to work on certain things in stunt. Sure I can fly the whole pattern and make it look reasonable. My problem is consistency in level flight and bottoms. The easiest maneuvers is what we usually give up the most points on. The reverse wing over is what sets the pattern in most judges eyes, is what I was told. Was told that at a practice session do several reverse wing overs before starting the pattern. Don't worry about the four leaf clover until you get the RW right. But, quit thinking about crashing. From what I have read you do a decent pattern. Just need to quit thinking about crashing. VD~