Dr. Sandy Frank <  > contributed:

Y2K Nats...I will be attending... especially the DAKOTA gathering...would someone that has or does DAKOTA Plans please bring with them a few extras. [That's me, and I will. JW]

Indoor FF & R/C club and site information for the BEDFORD Boys' Ranch group in Texas is at: < http://www.ama-dist-8.org/SandysTravels/Jan.6.00/index.html >.

I'm seeking a GOOD muffling system for Cox style .049 engines. Because of its light weight I'd still rather use .049 power, but for schoolyard stuff the ELECTRICS are the way to be a good neighbor...

I am seeking the power of an .049 with the silence of electric, but without the wing loading of electric!!!

Is there ANY way ????? Sandy

Ron Boucke' <  > wrote:

I want to take the time here to thank everybody who contributed valuable advice on running and starting my PAW 55 engine. I got a lot of responses both on and off the SMALLnet. A personal thanks to you, Joe W. I started from ground zero by finding the flash point on the compression screw setting, with no fuel other than prime. We'll continue from there, Thanks again :-]

I also wish to inform everyone that Dick Gleason has a wonderful plans service. I E-mailed him a while back with a request for an old C/L model of a racer, called "Ole Slippery". This was published in Air Trails many moons ago. This was a childhood dream of: "I want to build that someday" kinda thing, you know.

Well, Dick found the plan lickety-split and sent it to me in a matter of days. He's a nice guy to deal with on plans and magazine articles. That's it for now.

Regards, Ron

David Williams <  > asks:

Does anyone know a source of U-180 props, as used on Union turbo motor/gearbox units? They may be known as Nikko 180...

Dave Segal <  > wonders:

I have always that assumed that it was wise to encase receivers and battery packs in foam to protect them from the vibration of piston engines. I have only omitted the foam when installing gear in electric-powered models. But in re-reading Norm Rosenstock's construction article for his scaled-down Miss America (for a .10 glow engine) in the July, 1994 issue of Model Aviation, I see that he shows a floor in the cabin with a Velcro strip to hold the radio gear.

What is the general opinion as to the wisdom of this method of installation?

Dave Segal

Al Lidberg <  > divulges:

In one of the other model airplane forums <  > wrote: "As a manufacturer myself for a time, it was my goal to motivate people to want to purchase my product as soon as they were exposed to it. ... I expect to be able to buy any advertised product RIGHT NOW."

As a long-time model cottage-industry source for plans and kits, I am reluctant to begin advertising for a new product until the plane is very nearly ready to ship -- by that I mean just a few days off.

Kit production is really just an extremely expanded version of 'When are you going to finish that %$*& plane?' anyhow -- so, here's my sequence:

• the prototype model is completed;
  
• photographs are taken;
  
• the prototype is flown;
  
• changes are made in incidence, thrustline offsets, structure, power, balance, whatever -- to make the thing fly or stay together as I think it should;
  
• plans are finalized, reflecting those changes;
  
• the parts layouts are developed and silk screens for printing the kit parts are made;
  
• sticky-back decals are readied;
  
• vacuform molds, if required, are readied -- and proved to work! -- it ain't all that easy when you need to make more than one piece!
  

One thing I will personally guarantee to all of you: you will not see a product listed/advertised from me that has not flown well before it is produced for sale. (There have been a few that couldn't live up to that and so were dropped after considerable development/ testing time had been invested.)

AL: A. A. Lidberg model plan service, Tempe, Arizona; website on-line catalog @ < http://members.aol.com/aalmps >

BTW: 'Reading' the model market is difficult at best. I've done models that weren't very successful commercially. The Garami 1940 Skylark mini-XL OT R/C (first model you see on my website), is a case in point. I had thought this concept -- 30" scaled-down Old Timers for FAC electric replica FF competition, or small electric R/C -- might be attractive as a park flyer. Yet orders have lagged behind those for similar previous projects, and for numerous AALmps scaled-down Old-Timers. Another scaled OT is about ready to announce, but I won't hold my breath about its acceptability.

(It's done and photographed; looking very nice and probably flyable, but the rest of the sequence remains to be accomplished.) Yet another OT rubber-model-for electric-R/C is also about ready to be offered as a plan, in this case built by someone else from my plan, but needing the 'how-to-put-it-together' text prepared, plus some plans modifications. Comments on this particular approach are encouraged -- and I do recognize that these are models that require 'building', another concept that seems currently less acceptable.

BTW, Someone recently talked about small model plan providers/ manufacturers being of 'independent means'. Yup, I have a 'day' job, and I'll stay with that, of necessity. AL

Richard C De Angelis <  > wrote:

50 years ago I flew gas FF -- had Atoms and lots of 1/2A's -- even two diesels. Some ran well -- some poorly -- but there were times when none would run!! I left modeling in 1968 -- had three sons and none was interested in planes -- had to build railroads.

I came back to flying R/C airplanes ten years ago -- I fly exclu- sively electric. The latest technology allows for 12-minute flights (without thermalling) in planes that weigh under 20 ounces.

Reading all the discussion on the PAW diesels merely reinforced my decision to fly electric. My wife does not miss the smell, slimy planes, and fire hazard. The trunk of my car is clean and .... my motors always start -- in any weather -- with the flip of a switch.

I advise you guys need to check into this format -- the neighbors of your flying field will love you too!!! RCD

Bob Bremm <  > comments:

I have been reading all the recent comments on the Diesels. I have been into model diesel engines since 1949 when I got my first diesel from Italy. It was a long-stroke that looked like a Deezil. I forgot the name of it. I have many Diesels in my collection. One is a Mite.

R.J.L. makes diesel heads for Cox engines, and I fly a lot of Cox converted diesels. These heads also fit the Norvel .061. I have one on a test stand now and with the R.J.L. head and Red Max fuel, it is really a sweet runner. I have used a 1/2A starter since they came out and always had good luck. Broke one crank on a Cox, and that was because the cylinder had come loose, and I screwed the compression down to compensate. When I discovered the cylinder was loose and tightened it, I didn't back off the compression -- and BANG !

Bob Bremm, Louisville, Kentucky

Sam Brauer <  > reports:

Recently I've purchased an MVVS motor (a .40 -- outside the SMALL class I fear) from a small shop, "Just Engines": < http://www.justengines.unseen.org/ > in the UK, which specializes in engines -- like the name says. Anyhow, this is clearly one of the bonuses of the Internet, that it makes doing business with merchants in other countries much easier.

All you need is a credit card (most small businesses outside the US don't seem to take US checks) -- and a modem.

The motor took a week or so to arrive using airmail. We shouldn't complain too loudly about mail service in this country -- the British mail system nicked me over 7 pounds for shipping. I wouldn't bother sending this to SMALLnet unless "Just Engines" carried motors relevant to our uses. The MVVS line has some small diesels (I think 09s) and glow motors including 0.12, 0.15, 0.21, etc.

The motor I bought seems to be well made, but I'm no engine guru. They also carry CO2 motors. Since I live in the Northeast and we've finally gotten some snow, I suspect that I will be building, rather than flying for the next few months so running the motor is going to have to wait. If the 40 runs well, I may try some of their smaller motors. The claims for the MVVS motors include easy handling and low noise, plus the ability to swing a relatively large prop.

"Just Engines" also has a large selection of mufflers, and they came up with a B.C.M. muffler for this engine that's made in Canada. The muffler appears to be very well done.

Prices from Just Engines appear to be reasonable. Let's face it, a cheap Chinese motor from Hobby Shack is going to be less expensive, but I'm in this hobby for enjoyment, not aggravation. I'd rather spend a couple of bucks more for a reliable, easy to handle motor that will last a while, rather than an engine that will be a pain in the butt. Coupled with the good advice I received and the service, I can recommend that others take a look at this shop.

Sam Brauer, Norwalk, Connecticut

Gary Seckel <  > advises:

Anyone who wanted to build his own CO2 motor wouldn't waste his time looking through Bert Pond's Compressed Air book. [Hannan's Runway may still have some left for sale, priced at around $30. JW]

I have wanted to build compressed air motors for years. You could move on to CO2 after getting experience in compressed air. The machining skills are the same. [There's some CO2 information in Bert's book. JW]

Years ago, I taught a fellow to fly R/C with a Kadet Junior. I scratch built a Kadet Junior from his plans, as a lightweight taildragger. I had suspected that most trainers had too much lift and so reduced the height of the airfoil by 3/16". What a difference that made! The reduced thickness really smoothed out the plane. I was able to switch wings back and forth for direct comparisons in different wind conditions.

What I found was that with the reduced weight of my scratchbuilt model, I could fly much slower than the heavy kit built plane, even with the reduced thickness airfoil. The thinner airfoil was also much smoother in windy weather. In calm conditions, the heavy plane of course flew faster on the thinner wing. However the lighter plane still flew slower due to less weight. Airspeed differences noted were very large.

The outcome of the experiment was proven by the finding that there was no reason to ever want to fly the thick wing on the light plane. Feel free to increase chords and throws of rudder and elevator for slow speed work.

The light plane had an OS 0.10 baffle-piston engine. The heavy one had an OS 0.15, but I do not remember if it was Schnuerle ported or not. For a slow flyer, the project was well worth the effort. I reduced dihedral and pulled in the nose to reduce drag, always preferring 3-channels and flat-bottomed airfoils. An experienced slow flyer would not be wasting his time on a project like this.

Gary