The Best Flying Hi Johnson Stunt Plane?

[Dave Hull]

What is the best flying stunt plane designed by Hi Johnson?  Do any of them perform as well as a Nobler? Smoothie?

Is there a list of all of these designs?  I tried searching but have only come up with a few. I'm thinking Kenhi:

    Panther:  .19-.35 engine, 48" wingspan, 500 sq. in., flaps. Semi-elliptical                        [Kenhi kit]
    Panther:    [Midwest kit]
    Cougar (1):   .19-.35 engine, 54" wingspan, 550 sq. in., full span flaps, thicker airfoil       [pre-1952, Kenhi kit?]   
    Cougar (2):    [1953, Kenhi kit?]
    Cougar (3):    [date, Midwest kit]]
    Bobcat:   .19-.35 engine, 37" wingspan, 324 sq. in., no flaps? Trainer                             [Kenhi kit]
    Wildcat:   .19-.35 engine, 37" wingspan, 330 sq. in., full span flaps                                [Kenhi kit]
    Mustang:  .19-.35 engine, 37" wingspan, 260 sq. in., "exact scale" F-51H                        [Kenhi kit, ~1958]
    Mustang:   .35-.50 engine, 48" wingspan, 456 sq. in., flaps                                             [Kenhi kit] (RSM short kit)
    Stuka:   .45-.46 engine, 58" wingspan, polywog airfoil, no flaps (per info from Dixon plans website for MAN 1960 annual version), 1958   [Not originally kitted]
    Stuka:    .29--.35 engine, 59" wingspan, 580 sq. in., polywog airfoil, no flaps                   [MAN 1960 Annual?]
    Spitfire:   57-1/2" wingspan, 584 sq. in., no flaps       (Baxter plan list says 627 sq.         [Plans 3/25/1959]
    VECO Chief (1)  .29-.35 engine, 51" wingspan, flaps, polywog airfoil, wide fuse                [1949 version, Palmer design, Johnson drafting--ref Ty Marcucci plans]
    VECO Chief (2)   .29 -.31 engine, 52" wingspan, flaps, 595 sq. in., flaps                          [VECO kit 1951] [Palmer design??]
    VECO Chief (3)  ??          [Palmer design??]

And would the best of these be handicapped by installing a Johnson 33 "s"?

I believe that Ted F. flew a Panther(?) at VSC one year, perhaps with a Johnson engine?  (edit:  It was a VECO Chief, per Ted)

How does the 33 "s" compare to the Fox .35 in terms of power?

Has anyone run a 33 with a muffler? If so, how did it run?

Thanks in advance for any info,

Dave


Edit: added the Mustang to the list. Need to confirm the numbers....
Edit: added some Stuka numbers....
Edit: revised using ad for Kenhi in 10/1955 FM.  But that has conflicts with other prior sources....
Edit: revised and added to versions of Chief. Still missing info or misunderstand how many versions existed
Edit: revised and added multiple versions of the Cougar. Still need info on differences
Edit: added Spitfire info from plans owned by Roger Greene
Edit: added Midwest kit versions

[Tony Drago]

 There is the Hi Johnson Spitfire & Stuka not kitted by KenHi--Two size F-51s and the very first version Cougar There were 3 designs of the Cougar. The first Cougar  is OTS legal. Also I think the F-51s might be OTS legal. All above kitted by  KenHi kits. Except the Spit & Stuka. The company lasted about two years. How these fly. I for one can't answer.
 Some of the older 51-52 magazines should have an ad or two. I've seen the ads but can not remember in which magazine they were in.

[Dave Hull]

Thanks, Tony.

I found an ad for Kenhi and I put in the specs for those four planes. (Cougar, Panther, Wildcat, Bobcat)  Now to find info on the ones that you listed.....  Anyone?

So far, my assumption is that the Cougar is the best flying of the bunch, just based on size. But the one that I have seen, hanging in a hobby shop, was said to have had issues due to lack of wing torsional stiffness. It was covered in silk and dope, so that should have worked if anything would.

Dave

[builditright]

There is the Hi Johnson Spitfire & Stuka not kitted by KenHi--Two size F-51s and the very first version Cougar There were 3 designs of the Cougar. The first Cougar  is OTS legal. Also I think the F-51s might be OTS legal. All above kitted by  KenHi kits. Except the Spit & Stuka. The company lasted about two years. How these fly. I for one can't answer.
 Some of the older 51-52 magazines should have an ad or two. I've seen the ads but can not remember in which magazine they were in.

Tony would know because here is the one that he acquired the plans for and then had me build for him back in 2001.
It now resides on my son's wall in Fla.

[Tony Drago]

Plans for the Hi Johnson Spitfire are available from Tom Dixon.
 Also the Kenhi 1st version Cougar. I believe the plans of the Cougar are not full size. Buy you also get copies of the part tracings.

[Scott Richlen]

Didn't Sterling make a Spitfire?  It looked a lot like the one pictured (I know: "well, duh!")

I think I have one of the Fruitland Florida kits of the Cougar (or Panther, I'd have to dig it out - anyway, the one with the elliptical wing)

Never built it as it looks sort of marginal stunt-wise.

[Tony Drago]

Yes Sterling did do a Spit.But it was the bubble canopy version With wing flaps.
 The Johnson Spit is a totally different animal. Plus it is a difficult plane to build.
  That's why i had Walter build it for me. That way i knew it would be built right.
 

[Chuck_Smith]

I've flown both the Hi Johnson Spitfire and Cougar and the Spitfire was one of the most delightful handling ships of it's day in my opinion. Patterns were almost effortless. It just had that "feel" to it and loved to fly square eights. IIRC, I flew mine at the T&D and either won or placed with it. The Cougar is a nice plane but I never put it in the same class of the Spitfire. As I remember them, the Cougar loved power whereas the Spitfire was happy gliding along with an OS. I still have that Spitfire around here somewhere. I should go dig it out of Mount Stuntmore in the barn.

Chuck

[Chuck_Smith]

Thanks, Tony.

I found an ad for Kenhi and I put in the specs for those four planes. (Cougar, Panther, Wildcat, Bobcat)  Now to find info on the ones that you listed.....  Anyone?

So far, my assumption is that the Cougar is the best flying of the bunch, just based on size. But the one that I have seen, hanging in a hobby shop, was said to have had issues due to lack of wing torsional stiffness. It was covered in silk and dope, so that should have worked if anything would.

Dave

Hey, that Cougar didn't happen to be white with red trim did it?

Chuck

[Mike Keville]

. . . I believe that Ted F. flew a Panther(?) at VSC one year, perhaps with a Johnson engine?
========================================================
Actually, that was Bob Whitely, who won Classic with a Panther at the first VSC.
In later years, Ted flew a very nice first-version Veco Chief with a Johnson engine.

[Dave Hull]

I can see the Cougar taking some horsepower to maintain airspeed thru, say, square 8's.  It looks pretty big for a Fox stunt. Does the Fox provide more power than the Johnson 33? Anyone run these side by side?

The cougar that I have seen was by Tony Nacarrato, and it is hanging in Smith Bros Hobbies in Northridge, CA. I think it is mostly orange(?).

The Spit is not really one of my favorites (I know, sacrilege!) So for the complexity of the wing, I think I'd build something else. No disputing its flying qualities.

Any other stunt planes to add to the list, guys?

The thinking on all this is that our club holds a Hi Johnson Memorial contest each Fall. I figure that at least one plane ought to fly in it that he designed, and powered by an engine his company built. One of our guys used to work for Hi, and I think there is another local that did as well. But since I build so dang slow (too many distractions) I would like to build something that I would like to fly all year long....

Dave

[Balsa Butcher]

Hi Dave: I'm familiar with the Cougar you are referring to. Tony told me that he thinks the reason the wing is weak is that he omitted an internal rear spar that is shown on the plans. He thought it was there just to aid in rib alignment during building...Wrong! as he found out. At any rate, it is easy to add stiffness to a C-tube wing just by boxing in the main spars and/or the trailing edge sheeting. Plane is too big for your 33. This one begs for a ST or LA-46. It is kitted by RSM.

The Panther is more Johnson 33 sized. Around here Arlie Prezler made one complete with hand painted "Pink Panther" decoration. I don't think it was ever flown in competition as his health was failing at the time but it was a nice flying airplane.  No kit  available that I know of (except an original) but I'm sure plans are available.

The Stuka was mentioned, it is kitted by BMJR Models and would be about right for the Johnson. No flaps but  way cool! You may want to check it out. 

[Dave Hull]

Good info, Pete. Thanks.

Divot McSlow

[wwwarbird]

  That's why i had Walter build it for me. That way i knew it would be built right.
 

 Ha! 

[Balsa Butcher]

FWIW; I was at the VSC when Ted had the Johnson in the Chief. I seem to remember the crankshaft broke on it and the prop flew off. Gotta love those old engines.

[EddyR]

I used the early Johnson 35 to win ots at the KOI 5 years in a row. BillLitttle now has that motor. It was two years in a AASr and three years in a plane by a guy named Rambo. Can’t remember the name of the plane
EddyR

[RandySmith]

What is the best flying stunt plane designed by Hi Johnson?  Do any of them perform as well as a Nobler? Smoothie?

Is there a list of all of these designs?  I tried searching but have only come up with a few. I'm thinking Kenhi:

    Panther:  .29-.35 engine, 48" wingspan, 500 sq. in., flaps. Semi-elliptical
    Cougar:   .29-.35 engine, 54" wingspan, 550 sq. in., flaps
    Bobcat:   .19-.35 engine, 37" wingspan, 324 sq. in., no flaps?
    Wildcat:   .19-.35 engine, 37" wingspan, 330 sq. in., no flaps?
    Stuka ...?
    Spitfire ...?


Dave

Spitfire   Cougar  and  Panther  are  great flyers and the best of the lot, all  , especially the Cougar needs to be built light,  I would  use  a  OS 35S  in the Cougar Panther  or  an Aero Tiger in  any of the 3,  A FOX ceramic 35 would work too

Randy

[Randy Cuberly]

I built and flew a Cougar around about 1958.  I used a K&B Greenhead 35 with some mods by one of the KC Flying eagles by the name of Pappy Merriwether!
Not really extensive mods according to him! 

It flew very well for the time, probably better than most of the other Stunters of that era.

I will also add that it needs to be built light because it uses a relatively thin airfoil with a very small radius leading edge  It has a good layout however with good proportions for the Stab flaps and Elevator. 

I also flew one built by someone else about 1960 with a very good running Fox 35 in it that really worked quite well and wasn't the least bit underpowered.

Both airplanes were lightly built...I would guess about 44 to 45oz.

If I was going to build one today I would aim for 40 oz with a good ST35S.

I never cared for the Panther.  Don't be fooled by Bob Whitely's success with the Panther.  Back in those early days of VSC Bob could have won flying a Mac Truck.

As to whether any of these airplanes fly as well as a Nobler?  The answer is "Not unless they are being flown by someone like Bob Whitely or Ted Fancher or Paul Walker"....uhhhh you get the idea!

Randy Cuberly

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Man, I love those Kenhi designs!  Great appearance, superb kits, and the kits were ridiculously cheap considering the relative quality compared to other kits of the day.  I've seen many of them fly over the years (I'm old!) and have personally owned the Bobcat, Wildcat and Panther.

But - and speaking only from my experience, your results may vary -

1) The airfoil is ridiculously thin.  Pick the Midwest Cougar or Panther over the Kenhi design any day.

2) Silk might almost weigh more than the structure; the wings are apt to warp no matter what you cover them with.  Johnson seemed to be aiming for absolutely minimal weight.  I would personally place vertical spars at or near the high point and again near the trailing edge of the wing, rather than rely on several top & bottom spars at the front of the wing.  Again, refer to the Midwest version - thicker wing, planked leading edge.

3) I believe they need to be flown fast to fly reasonably well - see #1 above.  My Panther literally flopped around in the air when I tried to slow it down.

I've been told by some who flew them in the day the Cougar was the best flyer.  I fell in love with the looks of the Panther the day my mentor showed up at the field with one way back in yesteryear,  And Hi Johnson's Mustang is beautiful too, but who among us can't love a Mustang?

Ah, the memories!

Dennis

[Bob Whitely]

I am familiar with the Panther as I had built about four of them way back when. I liked their looks. As for the best flyer of them I have to say
that the Stuka was the best if built light. My son built one in the late eighties and did a really nice job on it. Power was a Johnson .32S that
was an excellent running engine and was called for  on the plans. All up weight ready to go was 39oz! My son is an excellent modeler and the plane
turned out great. Painted in the dragon trim scheme. I flew it about four times and found it to be a real delight. Sadly it was lost on its' second
attempt at the Nat's.  If you are a capable builder I would absolutely do one from plans not the BMJR version as it is not even close to the original.
Keep it light and straight and you are good to go! RJ

[billbyles]

I am familiar with the Panther as I had built about four of them way back when. I liked their looks. As for the best flyer of them I have to say
that the Stuka was the best if built light. My son built one in the late eighties and did a really nice job on it. Power was a Johnson .32S that
was an excellent running engine and was called for  on the plans. All up weight ready to go was 39oz! My son is an excellent modeler and the plane
turned out great. Painted in the dragon trim scheme. I flew it about four times and found it to be a real delight. Sadly it was lost on its' second
attempt at the Nat's.  If you are a capable builder I would absolutely do one from plans not the BMJR version as it is not even close to the original.
Keep it light and straight and you are good to go! RJ

I was standing at the circle when Bob's son was flying the Stuka and saw it go in.  It exploded into many pieces and Bob's son got two big paper grocery shopping bags and put the remains in them.  Everybody who saw the airplane fly was really interested in the design and when one guy came around he asked Sean (sp?) does it come in a kit or what.  Sean replied with a straight face "In a bag".  I was a beautiful airplane and he had done a first-class job of building and finishing it.

[Dave Hull]

Thanks for the new info, guys. I added some numbers for the Stuka, but it seems like it must be different than the one that RJ is describing. My info came from the Tom Dixon plans website, where he lists it as 58" and for a .45-.46 taken from the 1960 Model Airplane News annual. That makes it sound like a bigger plane than Bob was describing, given the engine size used. Are there two Hi Johnson versions?

Dave

PS--Looking at the photos of the Stuka that Dane is building tells me you need some good jigs if you want it built straight....

[Ted Fancher]

Hi Dave,

If that Johnson is the small case "S" (would be stamped "s" on the bypass) it is, IMHO, much superior to the Fox .35.  The plane I few it in at VSC that year was a Veco Chief, however.  A Bob Palmer design.  It would have won that VSC Classic event if the engine hadn't been hard to start at the high altitude of Tucson and ran overtime as a result.  Somebody (maybe Randy Cuberly), as I was approaching the three minute start time limit ran out with a squirt of nitro which got it running but the resulting run exceeded eight minutes with the obligatory loss of landing and pattern points.  Finished second as I recall to Bob Baron but would have had by a bit with a decent landing and the pattern points.  Alas...would'a, could'a, should'a.

My understanding was that the "S" (.33) was a simple combination of parts (a crankshaft swap) of the .29 and .35 engines and the shorter stroke resulted in the lower displacement accompanied by a quite a low compression ratio (I think I still have the Johnson instruction sheet down in the shop and if I've erred I'll post a revised assessment). The resulting engine run provided a very soft break which allowed it to be run in a brisker four stroke yet still give that pleasant oomph in maneuvers.  Another plus was the lack of any run-stop- run in outside corners as was a sure bet for a blind man that a Fox was in the airplane he was listening to!

In response to your other question I never ran the engine with a muffler as I didn't want to destroy the totally stock engine by filing the exhaust "square" to eliminate the angled stock stack.

I'll try to come back with the stats on the engine later today in case they'd be of interest to you.

Ted

[Dave Hull]

Ted,

Thanks for the info and the help.

Yes, my technical advisor on this escapade went thru all the different Johnson versions and emphatically told me to find a .33 "s". This has the smaller case which is noticeable at the front end (smaller than the prop driver, rather than the same size) and as you wrote here on the 'Hanger that it uses the .35 piston/cylinder and the 29 crank in the 29 case. According to notes handed down from Tom Lay, the combination reduced the compression ratio and just seemed to hit the spot for stunt. But people have varying opinions of how much grunt it puts out. Thus, part of my question was which plane was best with this power level?

The one I have has the hand stamped "s" and seems to be in good condition. Probably part of a collection these last 50 years?

I think I can work up a tongue muffler to sit on the angled stack. It will just need a shoulder to register on to keep it from sliding backwards.

Dave


Tom Lay notes on the Johnson .33 "s":

"The .33 "S" was built at the factory, and was designed by Hi Johnson, and George Aldrich who did a lot of the experimentation to convert the high power Johnson into a more docile, Stunt motor. It was a Johnson .35 top end, machined onto a Johnson .29 bottom end, with compression reduced to 6.5:1 compression, for an excellent 2-4 break. The 1st 500 of these production engines, had the "S" hand stamped onto the c/case. Then Hi Johnson reworked the mold, for the second 500 to Emboss the "S" onto the casting, as this one is. The box stamped STUNT (probably more rare than the motor), is in very nice condition, but doesn't have the small box insert. The copied Johnson Operating Instructions shows the bore, stroke, and comp. ratio, and most of the Johnson Instructions did not show the .33S. The motor appears to have been started once in Hi Johnsons engine room. It was then cleaned, and was Never Mounted, or flown! It displays as NEW with no washer marks on the c/case, and no scratches, or dings anywhere, and all parts are pristine. Ted Fancher won the VSC Championship (Vintage Stunt Championships) at Tucson several years back using a Johnson .33S in his Veco Chief, Stunt Ship. These motors have an excellent, Stunt, 2-4 break!  "

[gene poremba]

 Well after reading this thread I have been enlightened about some of the Hi Johnson planes. This year at one of our model events a gentleman approached me to see if I was interested in buying some old control line kits he had. I said sure and took a look at what he had. One of the kits was a Hi Johnson Panther. I asked what he wanted for the 4 kits he had and he told me if I was interested in building them I could have them. Well, I asked him if he would take $100 for the lot of kits, he agreed. I brought the kits home and figured mayby some day i'd get around to building them. After reading some of the comments posted above about the Panther it made me smile and i may just shuffle it up on my bucket list of models to build.....Gene

[Dave Hull]

Gene,

That is a great anecdote. You figure that the guy always dreamed of building them, and he was willing to part with them--as long as they would be built. Kind of like passing along the dream. Hope you can get to it soon.  Which designs did you end up with? Any other Hi Johnson kits besides the Panther?

Dave

[gene poremba]

 Dave, the other kits are a Top Flite Dura plane with "jig Time" construction, A Jetco Sabre Stunt, and a Top Flite- Flight Streak. I build and fly mostly vintage models and figure this is why I was approached in the first place. I'm 61 yrs old, so hopefully there is still time to get around to building them.....Gene

[Dave Hull]

Very cool, Gene.

I got a very used Jetco Sabre Stunt in a trade for something or other back when I was in junior high school. A friend of mine got it--in lieu of being paid--for helping clean out a junk store. I built it, but never had the money to cover it or buy paint. It was scrapped when my parents moved and I was in college. I often think of building another one of them---and finishing it.

On the Sabre, I thought the main gear was a bit "wobbly" and I had to learn some patience in sanding a crisp taper into the strip planking to avoid gaps and all the filler that would have been required. But it was a "big" airplane, and that was what really counted!

Dave

[john e. holliday]

I had the Panther way back when.  Great flying plane and made me look good.  Still have the plans and may build another one.  But at my age, who knows.

[Terrence Durrill]

I had the Panther way back when.  Great flying plane and made me look good.  Still have the plans and may build another one.  But at my age, who knows.

                    Hey John, ............. I know  .........  I was going to build another Smoothie "some day".  Somehow, at 78 years of age, it looks more doubtful each year.   The Smoothie was my first big stunter ..... Fox .35 stunt, of course.  I don't currently have a Smoothie kit, but do have plenty of "big stunter" kits......  among them.....2 Sig Chipmunks, 1 Oriental, 1 Ares, 1 All American Senior, 1 Fancy Pants, ! Magician 35, 1 Tutor, 1 Veco Chief.  The list is much longer than this but when you run out of years.............that Smoothie looks a long may off.  .....        

[john e. holliday]

Only 78!   You need to keep busy, as Grandma Sigmond used to tell me.  She was a neighbor lady I used to take care of her yard.   She made it into her 90's and I think she would have made it further if her kids hadn't moved her into assisted living home.   Of course I should talk as there were days I didn't go fly even if would have had a vehicle.   But with the forums and constructing planes in the shop I hope to keep breaking my record.   Any way hope every one has a great New Year.

By the way finishing up Flite Streak, Combat Streak and two Nose Cones for fun flying.

[EddyR]

  In the mid 1950's I had two Cougar's given to me. Both had been crashed. I repaired both and one was very light and flew very well. I liked it better than my 1952 MAN scratch built Nobler. The other one was heavy and the Fox 35 motors I was using at that time was not up to pulling it.  The thin wing fly's OK if kept light. It was a big plane for me back in those days.  I later put a K&B 45 in it and it was one of the best flying stunt models I had  at that time. I believe I still have the motor.
EddyR

[Dave Hull]

Still updating the listing in the original post. Now I can't seem to get the story straight about all the different versions of the Chief. Can anyone clarify?

Dave

[FLOYD CARTER]

There is still some controversy, or misunderstanding on the origin of the "Chief".  It is credited to Bob Palmer.  Hi Johnson was a partner in the Veco (formerly "HECO") company.  As such, Johnson's name appeared on those kit plans as either "drawn by", or "engineered by".  Subsequent versions of Chief begin to get complicated.  The several versions of Chief have been claimed by Hi Johnson, Joe Wagner, George Aldrich, and (maybe others).

Hi Johnson's name also appears on the JC Yates Madman plan.  He was an accomplished draftsman.

Just like Nobler, the Chief has had many authors.

[Dave Hull]

That helps, guys. Was the first Chief in '49 or '50 as was stated on the Baxter listing?

Dave

[Tony Drago]

That helps, guys. Was the first Chief in '49 or '50 as was stated on the Baxter listing?

Dave

 Dave,keep in mind that there were 3 versions of the  Couagr.
 The first Kenhi Cougar kit came out before 1952. Which is Old Time Stunt Legal and had a thicker air foil, then the later ones. Then the revised 2nd Cougar some time in 1953.

[RogerGreene]

FYI,

I purchased a set of the Spitfire plans from Hi Johnson in 1960 and they are dated March 25, 1959. The set, fuselage and wing plan, is a true 'Blue Print'. The wing plan is shown only on the inboard side with the center lines for both inboard and outboard panels. The inboard side is 29 3/4" and the outboard side is 27 3/4" which makes it 57 1/2" span.

I never built it, but now I am. It will make a good winter project.

Roger

The plane in my little photo is my own design `Arion'

[Dave Hull]

Great info, Roger!  Does the Johnson Spitfire wing have flaps? Is there a "claimed" wing area? Recommended engine/size?

Dave

PS--I was always impressed with your profile Spitfire plan for a Fox 35. Read that article a million times. I liked the wing jigging, which seemed like a very doable way to build one straight. Good stuff!

[Tony Drago]

No wing flaps on the Spitfire

[Dennis Leonhardi]

FYI,

I purchased a set of the Spitfire plans from Hi Johnson in 1960 and they are dated March 25, 1959. The set, fuselage and wing plan, is a true 'Blue Print'. The wing plan is shown only on the inboard side with the center lines for both inboard and outboard panels. The inboard side is 29 3/4" and the outboard side is 27 3/4" which makes it 57 1/2" span.

I never built it, but now I am. It will make a good winter project.

Roger

That's a beauty!  Thanks for the photo, Tony!

Any chance you could make copies of the plans, Roger?  I'd surely buy a set.

Food for thought, though - is the nose a bit long by current standards/thought?  Not that it would make a difference if I were the pilot …

Dennis

The plane in my little photo is my own design `Arion'

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Good old Kenhi ads & review …


Dennis

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Surely not the best flying, a rare kit is the early and more scale Mustang.  I acquired one about '58 and have regretted parting with that more than any other kit.  As I recall it was designed around the Fox .19 or .25 of the '50s, and I had both (new).

I believe the construction was more typical - and more rugged - than the stunters, but then I'm often wrong.

Oh, the memories!

Dennis

[Dennis Leonhardi]

PS: Specifications -

Kenhi themselves listed so many different wingspans and areas for some of their kits you could get dizzy trying to document them.  (I can document this, LOL.)

No matter, they were beautiful airplanes and awesome kits in my book, and I'm sticking to that story!


Dennis

[Tony Drago]

Dennis.
  Thanks for posting.  The first ad and the last. The the first version Cougar looks some what different. Kenhi's next Cougar really went through a major design change.

[Dave Hull]

I made some more corrections to the table of Hi Johnson planes based on the great input from you guys. I didn't think that it was going to get this complicated, though!

I can agree with MinneyBoy that the numbers are not all consistent, but it sure seems like I have yet to capture the different versions of the Cougar. The numbers may be accurate, but for the different versions....

I kind of did a double-take reading the post about the Midwest Cougar and Panther being better fliers. Did Midwest take over the designs, revise them, and go back into production? About what year? Never heard this story before.

Some good airplane stories here, too. Enjoying the reading....

Dave

Edit:  Well, it sure looks like the same designs now in a Midwest box. Was the wing or anything else changed?

[Dennis Leonhardi]

Yes, Midwest kitted the "designs", but with significant structural improvements and a thicker wing.  I would guess in the late '60s or early '70s, but that's only a guess.

I'm pretty certain this Cougar and Panther are from Midwest kits.


Dennis

[Dave Hull]

Now there are two really nice looking airplanes!

Thanks for showing us....

Dave

[RogerGreene]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the compliment on my Spitfire. Hi Johnson's Spitfire wing area is 584 sq in.


Roger