Y'all said it would not work.....

[Fred Shattuck]

We flew the super modified Super Chipmunk this morning, 47 degrees and windy. Yep, this is the one with the larger non-flapped wing and Super Tigre 61 and tank too far back in the wing.  This is the one that was modified because the turning radius was just not to my liking, seeing as how my modified Ringmaster with a Super Tigre 51 could fly circles around it.      It started on the first try. It took off smooth and predictable, it hesitated some on quick verticals, but was ALMOST as responsive as the Ringmaster.........  Doesn't glide in as well, but I figured the thick wing would react that way, and it tends to slow it just a tad. Did not have a working camera til my wife brought one to the field. So I will post a picture soon for those interested, although the exhaust being above the outboard wing did dirty it up some (The engine is now upright, instead of inverted) Thanks to all giving input to me with this project, as now I have a Chipmunk that is more like a Flying Squirrel. Huge plane, Huge success.        FRED

[Wynn Robins]

good work Fred - although comparing it to a Ringmaster leaves a little to be desired 

[Bill Gruby]

 Fred;

  It's always nice to see someone beat the odds. congratulations.

 Wynn;

  It woud seem there are a few who would disagree with your statement. 

  "Billy G"

[Just One-eye]

 Wynn;

  It wouLd seem there are a few who would disagree with your statement.

Not including yours truly.  I've seen 35-40 or more terrible Ringmasters up close, including several I've owned, and fewer than a half dozen "decent" ones, over the past 54 years (since seeing and being appalled by the combined poor flying ability, plus the (IMO) ugliness  of the first one that I saw).  That's better than 80 % that ended up as crap out of more than three dozen, perhaps up to nearly four dozen. 

Not to pick a fight, but the average kitted CG Shoestring, Guillow Galaxy, SIG Skyray 35, and TF Streak, built by the ordinary modeler, almost always ended up far, FAR, FAR better than when said average, ordinary modeler tried to get as good a plane from Sterling's awful kit. 

[Wynn Robins]

my point was, that the ringmaster is OLD technology and to take a modern(ish) design and change it back to the Old style seems pointless - but different strokes for different folks I guess

[Bill Gruby]

 Never said anything to the contrary. You are correct "Different Strokes for Different Folks" The venerable "Old Ringmaster" in the right hands can still fly a 500 + pattern in OTS. The picture by the way is from the "2008 Ringmaster Round Up" in Houston Texas.
 With that said.before this goes too far, Fred, you can have your thread back. You still did an admirable job beating the odds.

 "Billy G"

[Bill Gruby]

 Hi Ty;

  I see you are on the ball as usual.     My mistake, most of the numbers are worn off this old keyboard, but I have no excuse, it should have eead 275, not 500. My thoughts were somewhere else on this one. Sometimes I have very big fingers and a bad case of CRS. How are you feeling these days? Better I hope.

  "Billy G"

[john e. holliday]

Yep I know quite a few guys and ladies that can fly really good patterns with the old "Ringmaster".  Like any design it has to be trimmed and powered right.  Later, DOC Holliday

[Scott Hartford]

my point was, that the ringmaster is OLD technology and to take a modern(ish) design and change it back to the Old style seems pointless - but different strokes for different folks I guess

A Fox 35 is "OLD" technology, but some people are able to put them to good use. For all the nay-sayers, I would challenge them to pick up a RSM kit, build a light Ringmaster that comes in under 25 oz. with a Brodak 25, fly it on 58' .012s and see how it works. I went to the Round-up this year and a lot of the flying(except mine!) was very impressive! I saw Ringmasters do things I didn't know they could do. If your flying skills far exceed what a Ringmaster is capable of,I'm impressed. If not,they are a lot of fun! Different strokes for different folks is the name of the game isn't it? I personally fly 2 four stroke Ringmasters that are a blast to fly.As long as you're having fun, right?

[Fred Shattuck]

All Right. Y'all.  I did not mean to start a debate. MY Ringmaster has five additional rib bays and hardwood spars top and bottom with front of the wings sheeted for strength and rib caps and T.E. caps to smoot everything out. Some extra tweaking, but I build all my planes pretty much this way. I could care less if it is LEGAL by standards I don't go by.      This plane, overpowered and all turns the tightest turns I have personally seen except by a full combat voodoo.  I have never considered the wing popping off. I am not interested in flying a pattern set forth by unknowns in unknown areas. I fly my own set of patterns trying each time to bobble less and establish a good low base line to enter and exit from and to generally be sharp and consistant. The newly modified Chipmuck was rebuilt to rid it of the inability to turn a radius bigger than Dallas. Oh, sure, it looks cool and steady and makes beautiful take offs and landings, but if I was to do a simple loop I had better gain a LOT of altitude.  NOW it zips around ALMOST as good as the (modified) Ringmaster. I fly it. I love it. I am not competing with it.  I do have a slight problem with the quick vertical engine hesitation, but am reluctant to seek further advice on this forum...  I do not believe my brother and I are the only ones left in America that really really really enjoys flying the way we do. It only seems like the natural progression from the little .049 to .61. Bigger, faster, more powerful, more manueverable and more trustworthy.      AND we also use an electric starter for the sake of convenience and ease, and an extendo stick to keep our fingers from the prop while tuning.   ANYWAY, I do appreciate any help I get, even though I don't belong to any elite group.      Thanks FRED

[Fred Shattuck]

Thanks    I needed that.   FRED

[Paul Smith]

Not including yours truly.  I've seen 35-40 or more terrible Ringmasters up close, including several I've owned, and fewer than a half dozen "decent" ones, over the past 54 years (since seeing and being appalled by the combined poor flying ability, plus the (IMO) ugliness  of the first one that I saw).  That's better than 80 % that ended up as crap out of more than three dozen, perhaps up to nearly four dozen. 

Not to pick a fight, but the average kitted CG Shoestring, Guillow Galaxy, SIG Skyray 35, and TF Streak, built by the ordinary modeler, almost always ended up far, FAR, FAR better than when said average, ordinary modeler tried to get as good a plane from Sterling's awful kit. 

VERY TRUE !!

The "great" Ringmasters touted here are never built from Sterling kits and always enhanced with premium wood and much-needed design corrections.

On the other hand, a Top Flite kit Flite Streak is a reaaaallyy  grrrrrrr-ate airplane.

[Mike Spiess]

WOW Fred I applaud you on you and your brothers fun. Thats what its about whatever makes you happy. You fly different than me but your having fun. I'd love to fly with you cause fun can be contagious.

[Fred Shattuck]

Thanks and I applaud Y'all in your techniques and adherance to a set of standards, both in the skill of flying and the art of building. Not to mention the willingness to share your knowledge and experience with me. I would be thrilled to have any of the pros fly with us.     FRED