SMALLnet post400

In this "400th" SMALLnet Posting it seems apropos to repeat some earlier information that newcomers to this forum may have missed. "Randolph N. Wagner" is not a real person. It's a pen name that represents the team of Randy Randolph and Joe Wagner. (We had to use this "synthetic identity" for SMALLnet e-mail because Juno only accepts "personal" accounts -- none from businesses or clubs.)

...In the past week there have been repeated attempts to infect SMALLnet with a virus. Some were accidental; others were on purpose (obvious from the "subject line"). But all these efforts failed; and future ones will continue to fail. That's because SMALLnet is a text-only service -- and I WILL NOT OPEN ANY "ATTACHMENTS" to submissions.

...In the previous Posting I answered a query about Andy Clancy's Ladybug design. The information I gave was accurate, except for the web site -- as several SMALLsters notified me. The Clancy Aviation web site is down. Rumors that Andy had gone out of business surfaced, and I became worried personally because when my wife & I tried calling him at his home, we received an "out of service" message.

However, further investigation provided the new Clancy telephone number. We had a long conversation and cleared up the confusion. Here's a follow-up letter from Andy to me, which clarifies the situation nicely:

Andy Clancy < > wrote:

Dear Joe,

It was sure great talking to you and Joan today!

I wanted to explain to you how this deal with Hobby People/ Global is really the best thing for me and my family right now. It's getting harder and harder to make a living selling kits direct.

Hobby People will be selling and marketing my kits exclusively. The kits will still be made by me, and they will be the same as ever. Because Hobby People will be purchasing them in large quantities, and I will no longer have to deal with advertising, order-taking, shipping, etc. I will be able to produce them more cheaply. So a Lazy Bee kit will be the same old Lazy Bee kit, using the same wood supplier we've always used, but probably cost a bit less. I am hoping that this deal will make my kits less expensive and more accessible to more modelers than ever.

Hobby People can do the jobs that THEY are good at -- marketing, distribution, customer service, shipping, etc., and I can focus on the jobs that *I* am good at -- designing planes.

I DREAM of having more time to design planes. I have so MANY things I want to produce. This deal will give me some of that time.

Hobby People will be producing ARFs of all my planes, too. This will take some time to achieve, but they are working on the Yard Bee right now. Unlike any other deal I have made, it is part of my contract that I will be reviewing each ARF before it is produced. The guys at Hobby People seem to have a lot of respect for me and for my opinion. They are very interested in doing this RIGHT, and I feel confident that these will be the best ARFs I've been involved with.

I just couldn't DO this if I didn't feel sure of that. In the past 2 years I have passed on other opportunities (coulda used the money!!) because I could tell that the end product would not be something that I would be PROUD of.

One thing is for certain -- if I'm to make a living in this business, ARFs have to be part of the plan.

Hobby People is interested in selling and/or producing ALL of my planes. Not just the Lazy Bee, not just the Yard Bee, but EVERYTHING that Clancy Aviation has done, and everything that we were just ABOUT to do (such as the Turbo Bee and the Stits Sky Baby), and everything that we WILL do. They are really excited about seeing my newest ideas. They want me to design as many planes as possible.

How can I resist that, Joe?

I have agreed to make myself available for customer questions at given times (because I feel strongly about helping people who are building my kits) but overall I will be on the phone a LOT less. And though that will give me more designing time, too -- I admit, I will miss the constant contact with my customers. They really are like family to me. SO this is a big change for me.

Anyway, I wanted to tell you more about what's going on. Please feel free to ask me any questions, now and at any time.

Your friend, Andy

...Here's a little more information. Andy's "Hobby People Deal" just started a few days ago. For the time being, SMALLsters can still obtain kits etc. directly from Andy. See the next submission for more details on this. [JW]

First, as this is my first submission, I'd just like to say Hi and thanks to you for SMALLnet.

Just another word to Dean Owen about Andy Clancy's designs smaller than the Lazy Bee.

I just got a laser cut kit of the Lady Bug from Andy the last time I was in Mesa. The kit is quite complete and the cutting and wood are excellent (lots of sticks in the Clancy tradition). The new CAD plans are beautiful too. I'm hoping to build this guy soon after I finish rebuilding a Lady Bug that I rescued not long ago.

Andy designed an even smaller plane in the image of the Lazy Bee called The Little Plane That Could. It is of close architecture to the Lady Bug and the Bee, with a wing span of either 9" or 10" and just over an 8" fuselage. Recommended engine is the C*x .010. The plans are on three 8.5" by 11" sheets, and though not redrawn since 1996, there is a hand-written note added to lengthen the fuselage 1" aft of the wing for more stability.

About six months ago, I doubled the size of the plans to see how a Depron airframe with a Speed 280 to 400 would do. It's still on the waiting list, but not far from the top.

I've been lurking for a while and picking up tons of good information. Thanks. I am trying to get hold of some more serious modeling materials and design than Guillow, Sterling, and Dumas kits can provide. I have read that Diels Engineering, Campbell Kits, Blue Ridge Kits and Golden Age are fine makers of top quality kits, and am trying to track them down.

I must be looking in the wrong place, since I can scarcely find more than mentions of their names on the Internet, with the exception of Diels. I assume either they're no longer producing kits, or just very small insider-type operations. Can anybody give me contact details for these makers?

Also, as long as I'm writing, I just won a Thimbledrome Cox .020 PeeWee on eBay last night that I'm super excited about. It's the circa 1957 model in the blue blister pack. Does anybody have experience with these -- is it worth breaking the seal and putting this in the air, or is it best left in the pack for posterity? Are these rare, not so rare, or better quality than today's stock Pee Wee?

I'm dying to know how I'll start this thing since it has no spring... If I do fly it, it'll go on a Guillow Nieuport 2-channel R/C conversion.

...Sean, I've flown several R/C models powered by Pee Wees. I've always started mine by hand-flipping. Because they're reed-valvers, they CAN start backwards, and the starter spring provides protection against that. I have a few extra Pee Wee starter springs -- send me your postal address & I'll snailmail you one.

The Pee Wees made in the 1950's were FAR more consistent in quality than those from the last several years. I especially dislike the later fuel tank vent: a mere notch at the back edge of the tank. That makes for oil-soaked fuselage noses -- and in a cowled installation, excessive overflow spillage.

For Pee Wee powered R/C, be sure to use a big enough prop. The Nieuport's large cowl will block practically all the slipstream from the typical 4 1/2" or 5" props that Pee Wees are usually equipped with.

I flew my 1960 half-size Miss America free flight with a 7-2 Tornado Plasticote prop on its Pee Wee. That was an over- powered airplane that required considerable adjusting to conquer its fierce desire to loop under power! The 1/2-size Miss America (published in MAN in March or April 1960) wasn't a tiny airplane, either: 42" span, working wing area about 225 square inches.

I used the same type of prop, trimmed to 6 1/2" diameter, on my pod-and-boom Storm Petrel 1-channel R/C gull-wing "powered glider". That has about the same wing area as the Miss America.

Another Pee-Wee-powered 1-channel R/C plane that I've flown hundreds of times is my 165 square-inch Starling. That performs best with a 6-3 plain nylon Top Flite prop.

Pee Wees won't scream with big propellers on them -- but they will deliver powerful, reliable thrust for their size. [JW]

I've often wondered how those Cox reed-valve engines got enough air and fuel past the reed. Now I know it's all done with sub-piston induction.

I've got an Olympic .15 that is a screamer. And it has a huge reed compared to the .049's. If anyone knows of a source for replacement Olympic reeds, please let me know about it.

...Nic, draftsman's mylar makes good Cox reeds. Just be careful to keep the material flat, and avoid letting any distortion occur during the cutting process. [JW]

Anyone have parts lists for Webra engines they can forward, or know of a web site where I'll find them? Thanks! Dennis

Can anyone help me with some dimensions for a connecting rod for a Frog 149 Diesel? I have what looks like an unused engine but no compression. Go Figure! I found no connecting rod also. I have metalworking equipment and would like to make the rod.

Can anyone sketch me the part with some dimensions, or give me an idea how I can get back in business with this old fellow?

For the gentleman who said "Ugh" about the ARF version of Sig's new R/C version of the Rascal design -- The Sig 2001/2002 catalog lists this model in kit form as well as an ARF. And the price reflects the difference. I share his dislike of ARF's, yet this is the fastest growing segment of the hobby.

I have seen more than a few comments on the Sig Rascal posted here, and have seen a few show up at the local flying field. My flying buddy Ron decided he needed one but wanted something lighter than the Sig kit and not as costly.

He took a set of the old Top Flite Rascal plans (about 27") and scaled it up about 1.5 times (about a 41" span) and proceeded to "stick-build" a Rascal. The plane has turned out to be one of the nicest flying models we have ever flown.

Span about 41", flying weight about 10 to 11 ounces; uses a Titanic Airlines geared Speed 280 at 3 to 1 using 7 400 mAh Panasonic nicads (similar in size and weight to Sanyo 350's). Covered in Ultracoat Lite, it is a real looker and a great flyer. We get 8 to 10 minutes of pure fun each time we take it out. Need to try an 8-cell 600 mAh NiMH pack one of these days.

I have built two of those. One was Monokoted, light, and flew okay with an O.S. 25 two-stroke. I would have to say that it was overpowered, and the faster it went, the worse it flew. A .15 would have been better. Really a mild-mannered model, and not an acrobat.

The other was covered with 21st Century fabric, and at first would not fly, with a PAW 19. Switched to an O.S. 26 four-stroke, and it will fly, but it tip stalls horribly. A hangar queen.

I do not have the weights handy, but a general gist would be that the Great Lakes does not tolerate porkiness very well. I gave the Monokoted one to a buddy, and he covered it with fabric, painted it, and put in a Saito 45. Flew terribly.

I also think the incidence is critical: pay attention to it. And...the plans are VERY unclear as to the correct balancing point. I can't remember where the CG is supposed to be for proper flight, but it is NOT where it shows on the plans.

I am a Flyline fanatic, built most of them, and the Great Lakes is one of my favorites. But so far, I have not had the same fun flying mine that I have had from other Flyline kits.

One more thing: build it right according to the plans. Do not "improve" on the designer's strut attachment and such: he knew what he was doing. Find yourself some ball-point pen springs for the oleos!

Re Biplanes: My buddy built a 40" D.H.9 with an old .03 Dart diesel and Ace radio, and took it out to a "funfly" where the hotshots were punching 60-size holes in the sky. He set up, got his peg, and did his takeoff run into the wind, across the runway, and landed the same way.

During the flight, NO ONE else flew. They were all mesmerised by the incredible SCALE flight characteristics that only 12 mph can produce.

More power? How silly! Loops? As scale as could be imagined, with NO elevator... A day to remember, and we were not invited back.

Speaking of Ace, the hide & seek game is still going on, ain't it? I am in the midst of using up my last set on a PAW80-powered Barracuda. Where are they available again?

Also, I took apart my Ace Pulse transmitter, and found that the gimbal was gibbled; any suggestions re replacement or reinvention?

...Terry, I once rebuilt an Ace Pulse Commander transmitter's stick assembly with a home-made replacement stick, using a hardwood "craft store" bead on a length of aluminum tubing. Luckily the plastic "ball housing" etc. was essentially OK -- but I could probably have rebuilt that too had it been necessary. I think I'd have molded micro-balloon-filled epoxy around an expendable form made from wax and a well- waxed duplicate of the wooden bead I used on the stick... [JW]

David Felin asked where to get Ace Mini Foam wings. As I understand it, they have finally started production up again, and are distributing them to the retailers.

Go to: < http://www.quantummodels.com >; type in "Ace Foam" in the SEARCH box, and the Wing stock number and price come up: $6.99 for a set of Constant Chord wings.

Another note, in addition to Ace's New Scooter, and Sparky, they have re-released the Whizard, the Grasshopper, and the Alpha. (I think they are $34.99 each.)

I have a sweet spot for the Whizard. I learned to really "FLY" with a Whizard, using a Cox .049 Black Widow with a control line firewall backplate mount, an SS-1 1-ounce fuel tank, 2 Futaba S133 sub micro servos and a 270 mAh battery pack. I did my first outside loop with that plane, and it spins wonderfully (when set up with a rearward CG)! Leave the landing gear off unless you are using a .10 size engine or larger. I have one with landing gear and a TT .07, and let's just say it is powered in a "scale" manner.

...Today the mailman brought me Allen Hunt's new model plans catalog. Allen carries something like 2500 model plans now, including classic "model magazine plans" such as the Earl Stahl, Sidney Struhl, and Bill Winter flying scale rubber models from MAN in the 1930's and '40's; Megow, Ace Whitman, and Comet kit models; plus PLENTY MORE. There's free flight, control-line (examples: George Harris's "Sassy Saucer", a 1/2-size version of Bob Palmer's "Smoothie", and Walt Schroder's 1949 "FM Stunt Trainer") --- and R/C.

Allen included a few sample prints. These are both blueline and blackline types, clean and clear.

One I particularly appreciated adding to my plans collection was one of the late, great Keith Laumer's many cutie-pie 1/2A sport free flight designs; this one the "Buttons". (It'd be a nice challenge to convert this to R/C, because it has a dihedralled stabilizer and twin rudders.)

Another unusual design that Allen sent me plans for is a 3-foot span scaled-down version of Ray Heit's 1938 cabin gas model, SCRAM. John Pond liked the looks of this short-nosed craft so much, he built and flew at least three in Old-Timer Free Flight meets in the 1960's. (I chased one of those for John at a SAM meet at Sepulveda in 1964 -- and that same day gave up smoking forever. Guess why.)

There's no price given on this 67-page 8 1/2" X 11" catalog of Allen's, but he has a web site now which probably provides this information. Contact:

Allen Hunt, 140 Asbury Road, Nitro, West Virginia 25143 Phone (304) 759-2222 Fax (304) 755-6142 e-mail < > web site < http://www.modelairplaneplans.net >

* * * * * * E N D * * * * * *

SMALLnet Posting post400