stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Gary Dowler on June 11, 2017, 12:25:21 AM
-
Started back in the hobby last year after a near 30 year layoff. Built 3 and started a 4th last year, which I recently completed. Had a Flying Fool kit I was going to do. Wood was awful. Terrible wood, very heavy, parts were more crushed out than cut out. Eventually decided to scale it up 25%, extended the top wing a further rib on each side, added flaps, 3 line throttle, etc. Completed weight with a Thunder Tiger 46RC with expansion muffler came in at 50.5oz. Traditional silkspan covering/dope finish. Im old school. 2 flights on it at this point, very conservative flights. Its over powered and at max power is clearly faster than my 29oz Shoestring Stunter with a Fox 35. A more in depth flight test coming next week.
A Bones shot. This was with my original struts. Top wing was closer to Fuselage than it should have been due to some distortion in the pattern I was working from.
(http://i63.tinypic.com/vgr42t.jpg)
Almost done (still had to complete lead outs
(http://i65.tinypic.com/14vi6wi.jpg)
(http://i63.tinypic.com/oksflx.jpg)
(http://i68.tinypic.com/2agj0k4.jpg)
The cowl is made from a cut down plastic bowl I got at the dollar store! Note that the lower flaps really act as actuators for the upper flaps. Havent explored stunts yet, but this thing is so stable in level flight its like its on rails. Found a site called Tinypic that I was able to upload pics with. Im calling it the Super Fool. Painted it after a Navy PT-17 trainer.
Every piece of wood weighed less than its original counterpart, despite being larger and in many cases a bit thicker. The struts I made as laminates, 3/32 balsa cores glued between 1/64th ply. They were a third lighter than the original solid 1/8" ply struts.
Completed!
(http://i63.tinypic.com/t895s4.jpg)
(http://i65.tinypic.com/nvz0r5.jpg)
-
Very nice! Let us know once you start stunting with it how it performs. I like the looks of it.....Gene
-
Very Cool.
I always like the FlyingFool.
-
Gary,
Welcome back to the hobby and the Forum.
I see you solved your photo issues. Great!
You did an excellent job on your scratch built model. H^^
Nicely finished and all.
I'm guessing, is that a metal cowling?
I'm old school also in many ways, but I don't use colored dope.
Hats off to anyone that works with colored dope and does it well. H^^
CB
-
The Tupperware cowl
(http://i63.tinypic.com/5arj1k.jpg)
Trimmed the rim off
(http://i63.tinypic.com/2jcy83c.jpg)
test fit
(http://i67.tinypic.com/2aeqkw.jpg)
Cut to fit engine
(http://i63.tinypic.com/2m501h0.jpg)
After this it was just surface prep so dope would stick to it and paint.
-
Gary,
I see your photos. Photo two shows a bowl that is flared, larger at the opening. The bowl on the cowling is different in shape, the opening is the same size as the front.
How did you manage that?
CB
-
You know, I don't know exactly how to explain that. There is some taper to it, but I think the first pics somehow exaggerated the degree of taper. It really isn't tapered anything close to that amount.
-
Neat plane, what did the overall wingspan come out to?
-
wwwarbird, its right at 45"
-
Ok new question for the more learned members here. As this is my biggest aircraft ever I was working somewhat in the dark in a few areas. My main concern is regarding my choice of engine. As the original post explains it's an enlarged Flying Fool. 45" wing, 540 sq in, 50 oz with Thunder Tiger 46 rc with expansion muffler.
It's apparent that this engine possesses more power than this plane needs. It seems to fly pretty well at about 2/3 throttle, going right up through wingovers without a hitch.
The question before the court is this, given its size/weight what might be an appropriate size engine to replace the 46? I can likely simply limit the throttle I suppose, but then it's just lugging around extra weight.
Thoughts??
-
A strong 35 or a mild 40 would work fine. The original Flying Fool liked to lose the top wing, so be careful about hard landings.
-
A strong 35 or a mild 40 would work fine. The original Flying Fool liked to lose the top wing, so be careful about hard landings.
I took, shall we say, precautions regarding potential loss of the top wing during construction. So something like a OS 35 might do it?
-
I would say a bone stock O.S. .40 LA or FP would be perfect for this model.
-
I appreciate the input guys! I have a K&B 40 that might work, or I'll look for another engine. It will help with weight as well, that Thunder Tiger 46 is a pretty heavy motor.