SMALLnet post403

Chris Rose needed information on the Goldberg Electra and Great Planes Spectra. My recommendation would be for him to point his browser to < http://www.ezonemag.com >, locate the "Discussion" link on the upper left of the Home Page, and follow the directions for the Search function.

Please don't search both aircraft on the same search. There's a LOT of reading material for each search. I would also advise that Chris look into Horizon Hobbies' "Aspire". I've seen a couple of them fly -- an interesting, more modern design.

Francis S. Person needs to know if Solar Film Lite would work on an .061-powered Biplane. My reading indicates that while it would work in this application, it might be just a little light- weight for 1/2A work. This covering is intended for the very light structures being used in under 8 oz. electric slow-flyers, where rough duty and puncture resistance is not a real issue.

Finally, I have to applaud Joe's statements on the real origin of Park Flying. Having been one of those fortunate enough to have survived my days of flying Cub .049's (mine was a VERY well worn .049B, and an .074. Even fought the .075 diesel!) on many A-J Firebabys, Berkeley Super Yanks, etc. Well-said, Joe. I just knew all those bloody fingers were for something!!

Here's wishing all of our SMALL flyers a VERY Happy Holiday season, and a safe, healthy New Year...

In answer to C. Rose's query on the Goldberg Electra: that was my first electric model. Its performance is marginal on the recommended battery and motor/prop combination, but it flies like a champ if you put it on a geared 05 motor and get an ESC that will handle ten cells.

It is also an easy build, but the hatch holding the battery in the glider needs reinforcement. Both mine and the only other one I saw fly had the hatch come open in one of the early flights, and we searched an hour to find the battery -- found in both cases.

|Plans, Electricus| Chris Rose was looking for an e-powered sailplane and mentioned a pair of kits. I think neither of these are very good models. A far better-flying airplane -- and cheaper, too; being plans- built (Chris mentioned being a starving student) is Larry Jolly's Electricus. Plans are available from Bill Northrop's Plan Service.

A very nice, simple six-foot powered sailplane for direct drive (mine used a car motor and a Graupner folding propeller/spinner, intentionally selected to experiment with how decent 'cheap' could be -- very decent indeed).

Engine for Sale: If anyone is interested in an un-run and shiny- new OK Cub .049B, I'd be glad to provide him with mine. I've been trying to peddle it for some months ($35). JW plugged this one nicely in Post #402. Peter

...Peter, the OK Cub .049's that I "plugged" were the original- model .049's; and more specifically the long-stroke version. The Cubs that have been assembled and sold in recent years are QUITE variable in quality. The needle assemblies in particular seem to have been put together with little if any care. [JW]

The PAW muffler does tend to leak a little, but this should not be excessive, nor a real problem for the user. The upper and lower seals must be pierced with a length of sharpened wire no more than 1.5mm in diameter to ensure a satisfactory seal around the screws.

Re the OK Cub 049 sales. Undoubtedly this was a popular little engine. However, even spreading the 15 million sales over a 10-year period would require a production rate of some 29,000 engines per week, 52 weeks per year!

Assuming one person could wash, assemble and pack 12 engines per hour and worked a 40-hour week with no breaks, some 60 people would be required to do this task alone! I shudder to think what even a small delay in the delivery of instruction sheets would mean, let alone the numerous hazards of model engine production.

...David, you may be right -- but don't lose sight of the fact that the model airplane "industry" in the decade after V-J Day was FAR different than it is now. I was part of it, and I can hardly believe the difference between "then" and "now".

In the Good Old Days, mass-production was normal. For kits, at Veco our shortest production runs were 1000. That was for our most expensive kit: all of $7.50 (retail) for the 51" span, 600 square inch "Chief". We ran our 1/2A kits 5000 at a time.

But Veco wasn't anywhere in the same league for mass production as the Eastern model kit makers: Comet, Monogram, Sterling, Top Flite, Scientific, Megow, Berkeley... All of those had extensive model kit lines. Comet made their cheaper kits -- rubber-powered scale models mainly -- in batches of ten thousand.

At that time, manufacturing facilities went begging. Factory floor space was CHEAP: wartime aircraft contracts had been cancelled; jet airplane production was still in its infancy; and MANY skilled people were desperately looking for work, including a flood of returning servicemen.

Average wage rate in the model business then was around 70 cents an hour!

At that time there were 3700 "full-service" hobby shops in America, plus more than that many "hobby departments" in paint & glass stores, radio shops, art supply dealers, and even "Five and Tens".

That was one reason that at Veco we made initial kit runs of 5000 units. It took that many just to "fill up the pipelines".

But I digress; back to OK Cubs. The "15 Million Cubs" number was well-believed in the industry. It MAY have included other Cub sizes: .039, .074, etc. (And now that I think about it, I recall a ploy that Mel Anderson told me that he'd employed in his "Spitzy" engines, to make it appear that production numbers were considerably larger than they really were.)

But I do believe that OK manufactured around fifteen million Cubs. They weren't made entirely at the OK plant at Herkimer, New York. Many parts were subcontracted -- ALL the model engine companies did that, with the possible exception of Ohlsson & Rice.

Plenty of Cubs were sold outside the USA, too. [JW]

I have not been all that active lately in modeling. But I got this inquiry, and had hopes that one of you might live near enough to help this guy out. He and his 12-year-old have been trying to find someone in their area who can help them in learning to fly model airplanes. If I were closer, I would do so !

His letter said, in part: "There seems to be no club locally to get more information; and what information we can find looks to be beyond our budget..."

"There's an ad in the Dec '01 'catalog' RC Modeler magazine for TD .010s fitted with a throttle [!]. If they can advertise, they must have a supply -- suggesting: (1) that they have found a stash of new old-stock .010s, or, (2) that Estes made a special run for them. At a retail price of about US $80, that suggests a without- throttle price of about $50 -- I'm wondering if it's worth contacting the vendor?

If these engines are new old-stock, they'd be worth having/ using; if they are new Estes production, I wonder if it's worth bothering."

I called this company, and neither the throttled engine nor the neat kit they offered was actually available yet.

I am pessimistic. They had not even sent the kit to be cut yet. I got the feeling that they would not be able to deliver on their promises of the engines by December and the kits by January. Just a feeling. Too bad, looked like neat stuff. The fact that it was being advertised before being actually made definitely turns me off.

In response to Francis Person RE covering the Biplane: The wings are amply strong, and should not require the covering to serve as a strengthening agent for structural reasons. My only worry would be that the Solar Film Lite might have less than desirable puncture/ handling characteristics for an aircraft of this size and speed.

The advertising for Solar Film Lite states: "This covering is good for indoor or small models that require light weight covering."

I have no experience with this material, but that statement leads me to believe that the stuff was designed for a seven-ounce floater, not a twenty-two-ounce fueled biplane sometimes landing in grass stubble.

And Francis, don't forget to call me and let me know how it flies with the MP diesel -- should be a great engine choice!

Bliss! Update: Thank you to all that have been VERY patient in waiting out the much-delayed introduction of the "Bliss!" monoplane. I had some scary health issues (now resolved) and a late design change that delayed the heck out of introduction. "Real" production is just now beginning, and I should now be able to ship within one day of order.

To Robert Ness: (Blushing) Thanks for the great plug! Send me a photo if you can!

To Ron Fikes: That thing (FlexiFlyer) looks great! I'll be ordering plans. You've got some great designs there, Ron!

I have been making some custom frequency pins for myself and my mates. They are not hard to make and fun to do. I have put the instructions and some pictures on this site...

Use this page's ideas as a start, then try other designs: the sky is the limit! By the way, my free GeoCities web site only allows so many hits per hour. They slap my hand if too much traffic arrives all at once...

Some years ago, I built a battery cycler from a kit. The cycler kit was marketed by "TECH R/C", which used to be located in the Denver area. They also built the "ROYAL" radio line (I am really sure of that!).

Anyhow, several moves later, I find the cycler doesn't work. My problem is that I've lost the assembly instructions and the circuit diagram. I'm wondering if any SMALLnet subscribers could help me. I'd sure like to get copies of the instructions and circuit diagram. The unit is/was that good. I'd be glad to defray any expenses if someone could help me.

I'm having strange problems with 4.8V NiMH 200 mAh AAAA packs. The first started to give bad performance (i.e. drop suddenly to 30 mAh or less) after say the first 20 flights of my DH 82.

I re-cycled them with a Hobbico Accu-Cycle, so no overcharge was possible. (I also charge them with it.)

Discharge rate is 250 mA (the lowest under the Accu-Cycle). I bought a new pack, and the first reading was only 85 mAh and is now going into a second cycle.

Am I using inappropriate batteries ? I will try with 150 mAh NiMH AAA packs. All packs are from Batteries America. I think I might have heard that batteries with too many "As" were not good for R/C operation because they were not able to undergo the typical discharge rates. Any truth in this?

These are beautiful little planes and will make great Christmas gifts & stocking stuffers for young flyers and those young at heart. The "404" comes in a beautiful, original-looking box (hard to remember exactly what the old-time boxes looked like).

Hope they can make a go of it and keep adding to their fine line of products. Love the SMALLnet! Walt Rogers

...Walt, Frank Macy resurrected the American Junior model line quite a few years ago. But he's been plagued with ill health for a long time, and hasn't been able to keep working on the A-J stuff regularly.

Those little A-J "74" gliders will always have a place in my memory book! They used to cost a dime; came packed 12 to a box (a neat counter-top display carton) -- and were capable of much more in the way of flying fun than most purchasers ever knew.

Jim Walker used to demonstrate "74's" as a major part of his model flying show. The gliders were carefully adjusted and glued to retain their settings. Most were set up so that launched "sidearm" in a steep bank, they would fly a big level circle and return to the launching spot.

Jim would demonstrate this a few times with one glider; then while one was at the far side of the circle he'd toss another -- keeping two "74's" following each other around and around and around.

Then Jim would launch another "74" backhand -- one that was set to fly a left-turning circle. After a couple of tosses with this, Jim would launch it again -- then immediately throw a right-turning "74". The two gliders would pass on opposite courses on the "far side" of the circle.

Jim would also throw "74's" into loops -- he could make one loop overhead, skimming the floor as it passed between his legs; then flop lazily over right into Jim's outstretched hand.

The finale had Jim keeping THREE "74's" circling simultaneously. He had to move mighty quickly in THAT aerial juggling act.

Something else I fondly recall about A-J "74's": at the annual Toy Show at the Ambassador hotel in New York (March or April 1948), one afternoon Jim & I snuck four boxes of "74's" into an elevator and made our way to the hotel roof. Working as fast as possible, we put all 48 gliders together, then launched them off the roof -- downwind, of course.

That sort of thing was strictly against the Law, but we didn't get caught; and I can still remember the sight of those 4 dozen ten-cent gliders circling in the air at once over Manhattan. [JW]

Being indoctrinated by good friend Dave Larkin to the diesel, I am having the time of my life flying a Tiger Moth (.5cc); Sioux (.25cc), and Mudhopper (1cc) -- all Schlosser kits from Germany.

I'm also flying a Loening with a PAW .5cc plus a modified Samantha with a 1cc PAW. There is a throttle on all of them (I had to design the one for the .25cc) and I fly most of them in small areas and at the local field because I like big models as well.

I learned to mix my own fuel: the ether being the tough ingredient to get. I wish everybody to have as much fun. Gerry Pronovost

To Dave Moellenkamp: The PS 99 Is a great flyer, and Buzz Waltz, the builder, really knows his stuff about R/C. I have a PS 99 with an Astro Geared 25 and it flies really well. I would go along with whatever Buzz recommends. He has a website, and his phone number is (760) 327-1775. Bud Orren

Is there any special set-up in order to fly a 1/2A-Texaco or a small sport ship, say, Vic Smeed's Playboy, on rudder-only? Is it a simple matter of getting a floating glide, without fuel load, or is there a little black magic involved? TIA.

...Mac, I've done a LOT of single-channel R/C flying, and though there is a *little* black magic involved, in general the setup is simple enough.

First, the power should be JUST enough for a gentle climbout. Without a throttle or means of cutting the power, you don't want your model to become a tiny dot in the sky before the motor stops.

Second, use about 3 degrees of right thrust. This makes the model respond about the same under power as in the glide -- that is, it should fly straight with neutral rudder, power on or off.

Third, trim the model with about 3 degrees difference between the wing and stabilizer incidence angles. Balance the plane for just a trace of "gallop" in a hand glide. This has two benefits.

First, this *slightly* tail-heavy trim in straight flight permits circling without spiral diving. Of course, you CAN spiral dive with hard-over rudder -- and when you do that, the model builds up speed. Then, when you straighten out from the diving turn, that excess speed can produce a whipstall, stall turn, or even a loop -- depending on how much nerve you have in maintaining the spiral as the model gets closer and CLOSER to the ground...

Second, the recommended trim permits flared-out landings.

The way I do it is to let the model continue turning in the glide, circling over the end of the landing path. Then, when the ship's a foot or less off the grass, I apply a quick pulse of opposite rudder and let go of the stick. The sudden straightening of the glide path, plus the extra speed built up in the circling approach, produces a neat flare-out and touch-down. [JW]

SMALLnet Posting post403