News:


  • November 30, 2020, 10:03:47 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Profile Stunter  (Read 1908 times)

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Profile Stunter
« on: May 03, 2020, 07:28:06 AM »
I love a profile airplane. To me they are a simple, easy to build and modify, stripped down flying machines.  My very first control line airplane was a Sig Twister and it was fun. I love the Fancherized Twister even better. I wanting to build more profile planes but I don't know which one. What's your favorite airplane and why? I need some ideas..


Advertise Here

Offline Dave Hull

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1146
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2020, 08:04:19 PM »
You didn't narrow it down much, eh?

Be sure you at least look at the Williams Bearcat and also the Shameless. Of course, if you want to go small(er), that's a whole different list.

My nickel,  (there's been inflation....)

The Divot

Online 944_Jim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2020, 08:39:49 PM »
Mosquito. Why? Twin! My next one will be the Frog Mosquito at 36".

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2020, 09:42:28 PM »
I pick a modern plane because I know it'll fly good. Then I reduce it down to 575 sq in wing and make it a profile. Here's my 92% Thundergazer Profile, my best flying plane.

Motorman 8)
Remove victim to fresh air

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2020, 05:17:45 AM »
Motoman, that is a nice looking plane. What engine set up are you running on it?

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2020, 08:51:15 AM »
I tried several engines I had at the time but none had enough power so I converted to electric. I think an LA 46 would fly it ok with a high end prop.

Another really good profile that comes in a kit is the Brodak Tanager if you put some reinforcement on the aft fuselage. Basically the old PowWow design with some updates. LA 46 flys that great with a plastic 11-4.5 TT prop.

Motorman 8)
Remove victim to fresh air

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2020, 09:36:11 AM »
I kinda looked in to the Tanager. I liked it. Another engine option is the magnum 53. It has the same mounting holes as the 46 but more power.

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 11890
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2020, 09:47:07 AM »
I haven't flown it, but by reputation -- the Imitation.  Big, versatile, lots of "wow" from people who should know.

Or read Ted Fancher's original article on Fancherization -- his point wasn't to make the Fancherized Twister (he did that just to illustrate his point).  His point was that you can take any old profile kit and give it "modern" numbers and it'll fly better; then you can give it the side profile you want and it'll look better.  When I Fancherized my Twister, I also made it look like a Genesis from the side -- and even though it's porky (due to my building skills at the time), it flies great.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2020, 10:42:57 AM »
That's funny you said that Tim. I'm actually reading Ted's article as we speak on the Fancherized Twister. I have all 3 of the magazines..lol

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2922
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2020, 11:51:52 AM »
I haven't flown it, but by reputation -- the Imitation.  Big, versatile, lots of "wow" from people who should know.

Or read Ted Fancher's original article on Fancherization -- his point wasn't to make the Fancherized Twister (he did that just to illustrate his point).  His point was that you can take any old profile kit and give it "modern" numbers and it'll fly better; then you can give it the side profile you want and it'll look better.  When I Fancherized my Twister, I also made it look like a Genesis from the side -- and even though it's porky (due to my building skills at the time), it flies great.
It is worth noting that Ted did not pick the Yak-9 or a Ringmaster to prove his point.  He picked a plane that was quality pattern capable out of the box and made it better.  The twister begged to be Fancherized, teh others begged to stay on the kit rack..  Losing my Twister in our fire was probably the worst thing that I lost.  Sure the PA ships hurt but the Twister was like an old pair of shoes.  No matter what the circumstances I knew I was going to have fun if I had my Twister with me.  Thanks Mike for designing it and Thanks Ted for making it better.  Sorry to digress but the lockdown has me going a bit batty since I have nothing to fly and no place to build.  I think several civil rights groups would consider this torture.

Ken

AMA 15382
If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline john e. holliday

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 21280
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2020, 11:53:15 AM »
My favorite is the Primary Force with an OS LA .25 on 015 X 60"(center of handle to center of plane).  Prop is a 10 X 4 or 5 depending on weather and 10% nitro fuel with 22% oil(1/2 syn and half castor0.  Need to recover after my demented poodle did her little dance on it after my last flight with it.  Guess she didn't like my pattern that day.  Usually she turns her back on me. D>K
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Online Crist Rigotti

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 3416
  • Electric - The future of Old Time Stunt
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2020, 11:59:54 AM »
Check out the Sakitumi.
Crist
AMA 482497
Waxahachie, TX
Electric - The Future of Old Time Stunt

Offline John Hammonds

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 516
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2020, 12:03:06 PM »
How about a Mo'Best?

Never flown, built, or even seen one in the flesh but it looks stunning.

TTFN
John.
I started out with nothing and still have most of it left.....
Fast, Cheap, Reliable - Choose any 2!
BMFA 165249

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2922
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2020, 01:11:02 PM »
Check out the Sakitumi.
Here they fly great but they look like somebody "Socked it to em"  LL~

If you can't get a Twister then Motorman's plan is great.  Just remember that it will be a profile and it will do something weird every now and then just because it can.

Ken

AMA 15382
If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 11890
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2020, 02:32:45 PM »
It is worth noting that Ted did not pick the Yak-9 or a Ringmaster to prove his point.

Pat Johnston has picked up that gauntlet, though: https://stunthanger.com/smf/gettin-all-amp'ed-up!/list-your-set-up/msg305342/#msg305342
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Howard Rush

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7085
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2020, 03:20:30 PM »
Gordan Delaney's Pathfinder Two (or is it Too?). 
The Jive Combat Team
Making combat and stunt great again

Online Dan McEntee

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4216
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2020, 07:32:07 PM »
  The world is your oyster when it comes to profiles. Pick one the trips your trigger and then make it your own. When you get the first one finished, start on it's replacement, but make it better.
   Type at you later,
  Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2020, 11:22:25 AM »
I definitely like the magician. What do you think about a profile nobler?

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2922
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2020, 11:51:38 AM »
I definitely like the magician. What do you think about a profile nobler?
Nothing wrong with it.  I learned most of the pattern on one built around a Blue Box wing and Tail.  (Nobler fuselages don't last long at the beginner level.)
I wouldn't do one today unless I had the wing already.  If you do, do the Gieseke, it has a better airfoil.  Make the fuselage strong around the wing TE.  There is a lot of mass behind the wing to wiggle as a profile.

Ken
AMA 15382
If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Joe Ed Pederson

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 299
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2020, 12:09:52 PM »
My favorite is the Primary Force with an OS LA .25 on 015 X 60"(center of handle to center of plane). D>K

John,

Thanks for specifying "(center of handle to center of plane)."   When I was a kid I just called lines "sixty foot lines" because that's what the Sullivan packaging said they were.  I've since learned there are two ways to measure line length, a) center of handle to center of the plane, and b) the length of the lines by themselves and unless a person specifies which way he measured when he gives the line length, I won't know for sure what he means.

Now, if someone says they are using 70 foot lines, it means they are measuring from center of the handle to the center of the center of the plane or else they are over the 70 foot line rule (as I understand the rules).

Also, I inherited a Primary Force which was an ARF.  This one has a LA .40 with stock OS 3030 muffler.  So, I imagine it balances further forward than one with a LA .25.  Do you have an ARF or do you have a set of plans that shows where the Center of Gravity should be?  If yours is an ARF would you mind checking where it balances and let me know.  Thanks, John.

Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO

Online Geoff Goodworth

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2020, 06:12:05 PM »
If you want something semi-scale, Pat Johnston and I both drew profile Shoestring fuselages around a Brodak profile P40 wing.

Subsequently, I made the wing plan view scale as well.

Mine turned out a bit porky but flew well with an LA 46. I know that other lighter examples have flown well with an FP 40.

PM me if you want the drawings as full size PDFs.

Offline gene poremba

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 222
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2020, 04:54:29 AM »
 Im partial to the Twister. Easy to build, flies great, easy to repair. Here are a few of mine...Gene

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2020, 06:05:03 AM »
Here are a couple of shots of my new E-Bug Lite (the name is a long story...). It is essentially a restyled profile version of Bob Baron's Humbug, but it was designed and built to be an easy to build, inexpensive practice model or a model with which a Beginner or Intermediate flier could compete without fear of losing a large investment in time and materials.

It was built using what I call the Lost-Sheeting method. The following is an excerpt from a short treatise I'm writing about this model and also about the fully built up wing and fuselage version I call the Enlightening Bug. Not sure when that piece will be done, so if there is any interest here I'll post what I have written to date.

The pictured model has 500 square inches of wing area and weighs 22 ounces without the battery, prop, ESC and timer. The projected flying weight is 31 ounces with a 2200 mAh battery. At that weight it can legally be flown on .012 cables or on .010 solids, which is how I intend to fly it. I should have it ready for social distance test flying this week.

Here's the excerpt...

I have been receiving a lot of requests for a kit/plan of the Joe Nall Cadet of late. The Cadet is a model that a group of us gang-built to take to the Joe Nall fly- in a few years back. The Cadet is a profile model that has no flaps, and is built using what I’ve come to call the “Lost-Sheeting” method of building.

For several years the CL Combat community has been making models that have foam cores that are inletted on the top and bottom for 1/8 x 3/8-inch basswood surface spars. Before the spars are installed, a few shear webs are installed that go vertically all the way through the core. They sit flush with the bottom of the spar slot on either side. When the core halves are joined around a control system, and the spars are glued into thew slots, the shear webs are in turn glued to the spars, preventing the wing from racking. That’s a technical term which means that the top spar cannot move in opposition to the bottom spar under G loads. For instance, during inside maneuvers the top spar wants to compress and the bottom spar wants to stretch. That is the movement of opposition, and without something to prevent that from happening, the wing would probably fold.

The Combat guys then routinely cover the raw foam core with an iron-on film that makes the wing fuel proof and adds a bit of strength. I reasoned that since the Cadet would be electric powered and didn’t require a covering that was fuel proof, .2 ounce/cubic foot carbon mat could be substituted for the plastic film, and it could be attached to the raw form core using water-thinned Titebond II glue. The Joe Nall Cadets (five of them, built in one week by a very dedicated group!) were the first models to get this treatment.

After the carbon was applied with the Titebond II glue and allowed to dry, I sanded the surface smooth using #320 grit sandpaper. The result was a wing that was extremely stiff and rigid. They flew great, too, and quite a few people who had graduated from the beginner model on hand at the fly-in learned to do simple maneuvers with the Cadets. Three of the five Cadets survived the fly-in and at least one of them has been successfully campaigned in Intermediate contests over the past few years.


Again, the above was posted to explain the Lost-Sheeting method of covering a foam core. Note: this process only works for an electric powered model as the glow fuel residue would soon soak through the carbon and Titebond glue.

I will soon be making a manual available (for free) that will explain this method in detail and with lots of photos.

I'm also attaching one photo of the Joe Nall Cadet which was mentioned in the excerpt above.

Slight edit/addition here: The one really bad thing about almost all profile models - especially stunt models - is the fact that the fuselage does not contribute enough torsional rigidity. Simply put, they twist a lot! This is never good on a stunt model. The twin support booms on the E-Bug Lite will eliminate that problem. Some may not like the looks of the booms, and that is understandable, but they do solve the twisting problem.


Stay safe - Bob Hunt

« Last Edit: May 18, 2020, 10:30:25 AM by Bob Hunt »

Online Dan McEntee

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4216
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2020, 10:34:47 AM »
   Hi Bob;
    I like the E-Bug. I always wanted to do a model of some version of the Humbug and I think I have some plans in my collection. As far as the carbon over the foam using Titebond water based glue, you are in the same realm as some earlier foam wing free flight models I remember reading about, just can't jog the designer's name out of my noggin! He used silk span instead, and some times used cheap gift wrap if I'm remembering correctly. At the point that you have taken it, I think one could cover it safely with an iron on covering for further fuel proofing, or maybe even dope if one more thin coat of glue is put on and sanded off to keep solvents from getting to the foam. With some care I think weights could be kept in a respectable range. Like the late, great Walt Mooney said, "So many airplanes and so little time!"
   Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2020, 11:15:45 AM »
Hi Dan:

Glad you like the E-Bug. As for any kind of solvent release material going over the carbon/Titebond II glue method, well, forget it. Don't ask me how I know...  n~

The low-temp MonoKote might be an option, but it would add weight. Perhaps just do as the Combat guys do and use a clear film over the core. Hey, this method is not intended to produce - or support - a contest stunt finish. It is best suited to sport, trainer, test-bed models.

Later - Bob

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 11272
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2020, 12:15:41 PM »
I reasoned that since the Cadet would be electric powered and didn’t require a covering that was fuel proof, .2 ounce/cubic foot carbon mat could be substituted for the plastic film, and it could be attached to the raw form core using water-thinned Titebond II glue. The Joe Nall Cadets (five of them, built in one week by a very dedicated group!) were the first models to get this treatment.

After the carbon was applied with the Titebond II glue and allowed to dry, I sanded the surface smooth using #320 grit sandpaper. The result was a wing that was extremely stiff and rigid. They flew great, too, and quite a few people who had graduated from the beginner model on hand at the fly-in learned to do simple maneuvers with the Cadets. Three of the five Cadets survived the fly-in and at least one of them has been successfully campaigned in Intermediate contests over the past few years.


Again, the above was posted to explain the Lost-Sheeting method of covering a foam core. Note: this process only works for an electric powered model as the glow fuel residue would soon soak through the carbon and Titebond glue.\

   Just like Ron St Jean, except for carbon fiber instead of silkspan! Neat idea, it has real potential.

     St. Jean found that adding Knox gelatin to the glue/water sealed it well enough to put dope over it, in at least small quantities. I tried that and it mostly "worked", but with some pinholes (with predictable effects) here and there. It was more-or-less acceptable to me at the time. I made several airplanes and other like devices like a foam flying saucer, turned from 1 LB foam on a faceplate lathe*. I used the glue/water/Knox gelatin to isolate the laminations  (5 layers of 1" foam) from the Weldwood contact cement I had to use to hold it together. That stuff is a universal solvent for foam, but the gelatin made it acceptable. I tried it without the gelatin, just glue/water and the foam just disappeared.

    Worth a try, at least.

    Brett

   * this made an amazing mess of foam beads that we never got rid of for the next year and a half we lived there. At one point it was a little mountain up to my knees. Try to vacuum it up, OK for a while, it got most of it, but we spent the next year chasing individual beads around. That was 45 years ago, and I guarantee that if you go into the garage at 1410 Lenore Drive in Benton, AR, and look in the corners, there will be some foam beads.

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2020, 02:09:01 PM »
Hi Brett:

Yeah, I tried the silkspan route many years ago with results similar to yours. The carbon is very easy to work with and accepts the thinned Titebond II glue very well. Obviously the carbon mat is more expensive than silk span (although I've heard horror stories about how much a sheet of silkspan is going for online...), but you won't need to take out a mortgage to get enough to do several wings.

This route is also great for fast prototyping (test beds). Attached are a few photos of my test bed twin that was done in this manner.

Later - Bob


 

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2020, 02:12:03 PM »
Here are a few more photos of the test bed twin that was done with the Lost-Sheeting method...

Offline Bill Hummel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2020, 03:08:38 PM »
Gosh, Bob, I was hoping you’d suggest a Prowler!
ama 72090

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 11272
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2020, 03:14:31 PM »
Hi Brett:

Yeah, I tried the silkspan route many years ago with results similar to yours. The carbon is very easy to work with and accepts the thinned Titebond II glue very well. Obviously the carbon mat is more expensive than silk span (although I've heard horror stories about how much a sheet of silkspan is going for online...), but you won't need to take out a mortgage to get enough to do several wings.

   Try the gelatin thing, see if it makes it reasonably non-porous. If it was me, I would put on a skim/pinhole filler of thinned Timbermate wood filler, to get the last few holes.  But try it on scrap!

   Carbon is going to be easier to find and cheaper soon enough, if you don't already have lifetime supplies.

    Brett

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #30 on: May 18, 2020, 03:49:02 PM »
Very Nice Bob!  Looking forward to your full write-up on this new plane.  Very cool method.
 
I'm working on a 660+sq, 61" span plane using your lost sheeting foam wing method.  It will use 16mmx15mm carbon tubes for the profile fuselage construction.  I had some wing panels cut last week locally using a friends cnc hotwire setup.  I'll cover the wings with the carbon veil/titebond method and will also cover it with very thin 1.2mil clear lamination film to protect the wings from greasy hands at the field.  Most of my flying pals fly glow only.

Different method, yes.  Fun to experiment with something unconventional.  It has been very been fun making fuselage assembly fixtures and little jigs to accurately cut the "fishmouth" tubing notches for the trusses in the aft fuselage. 
« Last Edit: May 18, 2020, 08:51:53 PM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #31 on: May 18, 2020, 05:09:13 PM »
Bob,

Question about bellcrank mounting on your new plane.  Did you use a center rib to hold the bellcrank or did you install the bellcrank in the center spar?

Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #32 on: May 18, 2020, 05:56:45 PM »
Hi Brent:

I used a 3/8-inch thick balsa center rib and attached the bellcrank to that and then put the cores back in their cradles and captured the rib between them accurately, Easy peasey...

Later - Bob

Online Dan McEntee

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4216
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2020, 11:54:31 PM »
   Just like Ron St Jean, except for carbon fiber instead of silkspan! Neat idea, it has real potential.

    Worth a try, at least.

    Brett

    That is who I was trying to remember, Ron St. Jean. He was a top free flight power guy at that time, and maybe even did some stunt?? I read that article with great interest as a kid, I just liked the smell of balsa more I guess!! At that time, (late 60's or early 70's??) foam was just making the scene and I imagine might have been more difficult to find in sizes and weights like they can now? Working with what I had while still living at home was difficult enough at times and not wanting to branch out to new areas was probably a deciding factor. I forgot about about the gelatin part of the article also. I can just see the look on my Mom's face if I had asked her for some gelatin to build a model airplane with!
  Type at you later,
  Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #34 on: May 19, 2020, 06:10:14 AM »
Hi again, Brent:

Here are a couple of photos of the internals of the Joe Nall Cadet wing that show the bellcrank mount on the center rib. I did it a bit differently on the E-Bug Lite, but forgot to take photos of the control system installation before finishing the wing. My bad; I'll build another one and take detailed photos as I go. In the E-Bug Lite I made two plywood plates that fit into the root rib and allowed me to suspend the bellcrank pretty much in the same manner that I do on my regular foam wing models.

Note: The attached photos do not depict the outboard side of the center rib. The plywood bellcrank mount has "ears" that extend and inch or so either side of the slot that allows the center portion of the mount to protrude through the rib.

Later - Bob

Offline Craig Beck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #35 on: May 19, 2020, 07:51:20 PM »
Gene, love the Twisters. I just finished my Twister wing tonight. They are so much fun to build...

Offline gene poremba

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 222
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #36 on: May 20, 2020, 02:58:42 AM »
Gene, love the Twisters. I just finished my Twister wing tonight. They are so much fun to build...


 Thanks Graig. The only one of the Twisters in my photo that is built stock is the red one. All the others were modified in some way or another. It allows me to compare the changes made to the stock airframe. It takes me about two days to put one together from start to finish, so more time to fly....Gene

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #37 on: May 21, 2020, 05:56:15 AM »
Gosh, Bob, I was hoping you’d suggest a Prowler!

Hi Bill:

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. As far as profiles go, the Prowler is about as good as any of them. As you know they are/were very prevalent at contests on the East Coast.

The actual story behind the designing of the Prowler is interesting.

Scott Smith (who, I am sad to report, passed away recently) came down to my shop in Newton, New Jersey from his home near Albany New York with Steve Buso in the summer of 1988. I had not yet met Scott, but I had heard that he was serious about getting into the modeling business. At that point I was the Editor of Flying Models magazine, and was in the process of purchasing a new home. Scott had made overtures about purchasing my foam cutting business, and he wanted to have a meeting with me in person to see if that was viable for both of us. As he walked through the door of my shop I held held out my hand to shake with him, and he did the same. But. just before the shake could take place he turned and pointed at a fuselage that was hanging on a pegboard and said these exact words: "I'm going to kit that!" I said, "Well, its nice to meet you too."

The fuselage in question was the one for the first RD-1, the model that my son flew in competition for a while a few years later. The RD-1 was a constant chord wing model that was actually built around a foam version of the Sig Twister wing. It was published in Flying Models in 1991 as memory serves. It was, and still is a great flying design for training purposes and even for profile and Intermediate competition. I told Scott (with whom I finally got to shake hands...) that a slightly larger, tapered wing version of that model might be more aesthetically pleasing, and he asked me if I would design one for him. He was a very decisive person!

I did design a new profile model around the fuselage shape of the RD-1, and supplied the pencil drawings to Steve Buso - who is a draftsman extroadinaire - and he produced a beautiful set of inked plans to go into the kit, and even named the plane the Prowler. Now, no one had yet built a Prowler... How would it fly? Well, the record shows that it was a great flying little ship, and Scott sold a lot of kits for it through his Aerosmith Aviation company. Many of them were campaigned on the East Coast competition circuit, and also in many places around the country.

The kit is no longer available, but I do still have the plans for it that Steve drew, and would be happy to make copies of them available to anyone who might be interested in building one. I can also make foam wings or foam cores available through Robin's View Productions.

I have often thought about making a full-fuselage version of the Prowler, and with this Covid thing keeping me in the shop all day, every day, I may just draw one up.

And now you know the story behind the Prowler!

Later - Bob Hunt

Offline Bill Hummel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #38 on: May 21, 2020, 05:23:36 PM »
Hi Bob!  Thanks for the Prowler info. Scotty was incredibly helpful to everyone.  Sad to lose another “good guy”. Please keep me in mind if you draw up a full fuse Prowler; that sounds like an outstanding project!
ama 72090

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #39 on: May 21, 2020, 10:01:16 PM »
Please keep me in mind if you draw up a full fuse Prowler; that sounds like an outstanding project!
Pardon the thread detour.  Allen Brickhaus made a cool looking full body plane called the Scepter 500 based on the Prowler.  Flying Models November 2010 FM Plans # CD406

https://store.flying-models.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=322
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 01:01:34 AM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2020, 06:18:10 AM »
I forgot about the Scepter, Brent! That's exactly what I was thinking of for a Prowler II! I think many have forgotten just how much fun it is to fly a smaller plane. They don't pull as hard as the large ones, and they "fit" into the pattern much easier, in my most humble opinion. They are easy and inexpensive to build, and they are easy to transport in one piece to the field.

There are plenty of good running, small glow engines, and there are several really great electric formulas for a plane that size. Electric is how I will go with my built-up fuse Prowler. In fact, here's a challenge to use a Prowler wing (either foam or built-up) and design a model around it and build it. It would be interesting to see the types of designs that would emerge. Imagine a Stiletto shaped Prowler, or a mini USA-1. Food for thought. Again, I can provide Prowler plans at the cost of copying and postage (no profit), or you could obtain a set of Scepter plans for Flying Models plans service (search the Internet...) and work from them.

It's time to have some fun; and this size/type plane can provide that. Just sayin'.

It seems we have once again hijacked a thread, and I apologize for that. If there is interest we can start a new "Prowler Challenge" thread and show the progress of our projects there. Any takers?

Later - Bob Hunt


Offline Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4073
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2020, 01:12:53 PM »
Found a ' North Sails ' 1/2 x 3/8 in. yacht sail batten . Maybe 1/8 wall . Good for a longitudeinal stiffener, as theres a few tons load on say a 30 foot yacht sail .
Used part of it on a Goodyear . A bit weighty , but should stand the catches o.k.



Most of the later p[ommy goodyears have laminated fuselages , 1/2 square strips & 1/2 x 1/8 spruce strips .
If you want something pretty tough , might be the go . . .

Splits at wing centerline , so easy to set up straight & true .
Though once there was superb naturally grown SOLARBO timber , where you could find the odd sheet of really stiff hard light wood , or more even .
Current Balsa is no generally fit for evn boats . Or fence pailings . Incompetant rackateers appear to know ZILCH about growwing & milling it .
Some absolute trash about , and WAY OVERPRICED in Aus . About $ 4 for a sheet of 3 x 36 1/16th sheet , and it mostly rubbish .

Offline Joe Ed Pederson

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 299
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2020, 05:09:45 PM »
Since Gene showed his Sig Twisters and Brent pointed out Allen Brickhaus' Scepter, I was reminded of Allen Brickhaus' Tornado.  He designed a basic full fuselage for the Sig Twister.  The Tornado isn't as pretty as the Scepter, but if you've got a Twister kit lying around you're part way there.  Ted Fancherized the Twister in 1987 and Allen did the Tornado in 1991, but if I remember the article correctly, Allen didn't mention that he had stretched the fuselage to "Fancherize" it.  Easy enough to do, if Allen didn't stretch the Tornado fuselage. 

Edit: I found my magazine.  In the third paragraph, p. 50: "Basically, they could begin with the same wing, flaps, stab, elevator and rudder of the Twister, keep the same moments, use the same motor and build a better Twister."

https://store.flying-models.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=215

I know I've got the Flying Models magazine the article was in (November 1991), but I couldn't find it just now.


Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 07:03:53 PM by Joe Ed Pederson »

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 11890
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2020, 08:16:27 PM »
Hi again, Brent:

Here are a couple of photos of the internals of the Joe Nall Cadet wing that show the bellcrank mount on the center rib...

For what Brent wants, that's probably perfect.

For real beginners, if you put the bellcrank on the outside of a combat foam wing then you end up with something as easy to build, maintain, and repair as an all-sheet plane.  The plane in this picture was post-holed over a dozen times before I retired it, often with one or both wing panels falling off completely; repairs usually only took minutes.

AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2020, 10:23:58 PM »
Don't forget the Sig Banshee. Good windy weather flier with a Brodak 40.

Motorman 8)
Remove victim to fresh air

Offline Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4073
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2020, 11:01:21 PM »
OOps , forgot the ' Carbon Fibre ' in the referance ! .



Like the one in the uddle . Hollow, Black .

https://www.rbsbattens.com/battens/

Maybe findem in the scrap bin / skip . Dunno if they ever snap them , cant rememb er where I found mine .
Maybe the weights about the same as 5/32 wire - per length . But far stiffer .

By Golly Gum .

http://www.carbon-tube.com/


Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2020, 12:09:39 PM »
What's the wing area on that Joe Nall Cadet?
Remove victim to fresh air

Offline phil c

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2178
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #47 on: May 26, 2020, 01:16:40 PM »
............
After the carbon was applied with the Titebond II glue and allowed to dry, I sanded the surface smooth using #320 grit sandpaper. The result was a wing that was extremely stiff and rigid. They flew great, too, and quite a few people who had graduated from the beginner model on hand at the fly-in learned to do simple maneuvers with the Cadets. Three of the five Cadets survived the fly-in and at least one of them has been successfully campaigned in Intermediate contests over the past few years.......

Stay safe - Bob Hunt

There are lots of variation of this style of construction.  Carpenter's glue such as Tite-Bond or white glue are not water proof.  Don't let the plane get caught outside in a rain storm!
Using water-based polyurethane varnish thinned with 10-50% with alcohol will be completely waterproof.  2 coats should completely fill a light weight matte.  The resins in the varnish stiffen the matte more than the soft polymers in carpenter's glue.

One problem with skipping the film someplace between layers is that a matte such as silkspan or carbon fiber is very subject to punctures from sharp objects.  An iron on film underlayer or top layer protects the finish a lot!.

Phil Cartier(in virus heaven)

Just a related aside- silkspan over foam can be covered with a light weigh film, and then painted as needed.  If it gets a final light coat of autobody clear the finish will weigh about the same as any contest grade finish.
phil Cartier

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #48 on: May 27, 2020, 04:53:23 AM »
Hi Phil:

Yeah, flying these in the rain might be a bit of a problem! Just after I applied the carbon to the E-Bug Lite that thought hit me. I did an experiment on a scrap piece of foam. I applied the carbon using the thinned Titebond II glue, and then when that was dry I sanded it a bit, and applied a coat of Polycrylic. When that dried I sanded the surface very smooth. I'm not sure how much weight that would add to an entire wing, but I'm certain it would not be enough to make it prohibitive.

Once I test fly the E-Bug Lite (when me field is open for business...) and  see what the performance is, then I might apply a coat of Polycrylic.

Later - Bob   

Online Joseph Daly

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 168
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #49 on: May 28, 2020, 06:44:39 PM »
Speaking of the Prowler, here are a few shots of my son Joe’s Prowler. It was a really good flying plane and it was one of those that right out of the box was good.

Bobby sure knows how to design a good flying ship

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #50 on: May 30, 2020, 01:07:36 PM »
That's a nice plane, any idea of the wing area, will an LA 25 pull it ok?


Thanks,
Motorman 8)
Remove victim to fresh air

Online Joseph Daly

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 168
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #51 on: May 31, 2020, 01:44:15 PM »
Not sure of the area. The wing I think is 48” long? The plane is a little small then a Nobler. We had. Cobra 2826 in it, but only for the nose weight. 2820 could easily fly it and maybe even a 2814. His was not super light it was about 44 ozs. I think an LA 25 would have no problem pulling it. I have many that had 40 size engines on them.

Online Bob Hunt

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2080
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #52 on: June 01, 2020, 03:10:37 PM »
I posted a couple of photos of the E-Bug Lite here a while back. Over this past weekend I had a chance to finish up the electric system installation. Attached is a photo of the "business side" of the E-Bug Lite's nose.

Steve Millet sent me a spool of .010 solid wire (he got this from his dad's music store; it's guitar e-string music wire!) Since the E-Bug is under 40 ounces all up (32.5 actually with battery on board) I can fly it legally on either .012 cables or .010 solids. Can't wait for the maiden voyage!

Bob Hunt

 
« Last Edit: June 01, 2020, 04:00:16 PM by Bob Hunt »

Online Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5959
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Profile Stunter
« Reply #53 on: June 08, 2020, 12:44:28 PM »
That's an interesting project Bob. I like the smaller planes. I can't seem to fly the big ones that pull so hard. I think there's a sweet spot for electric that's right around a 575 Sq. In. wing.


Motorman 8)   
Remove victim to fresh air


Advertise Here
Tags: