Conference vmszoo::rc

    JIM,
    
    I had a Royal P-38 way back when and so did my buddy, Bob Frey.  What
    can I say?  As long as both engines are running, they're a
    piece-of-cake, just another airplane.  But, lose an engine, especially
    while low and slow, and KATIE BAR THE DOOR!!  You've got a tiger by the
    tail and you've got it just where it wants you.  Best do EVERYTHING
    right or you'll roll it into a very small ball.
    
    Yer' probably as well off doing a Royal kit as trying to scratchbuild
    one.  It's a 74" span designed for .40's and up.  At 10-lb.'s, .40's
    are adequate but both Bob's and mine had mild (non-schneurle ported)   
    .60's in them and their performance was very crisp.
    
    I sold mine for a handsome profit while Bob lost his in a contest in
    Riverside, California...you guessed it, he lost an engine (but didn't
    know it) when, of all things, one engine actually spit out its
    glo-plug on the far backside of the mandatory horizontal figure-8.
    
    As you've alluded, you'll be well advised to keep this baby on the
    shelf until you've gained PLENTY of skill/proficiency flying scale
    types.    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

I've got to stop scanning the Tower catalogue with my eyes closed.

Yes Cleveland has plans. Yes Royal has a kit. Hell, Rhom-air even makes P-38 
specific retracts. I guess I should do (some, any ;^) research before I 
embarrass myself in the notesfile.

Since I've got a previous owner/builder/flyer on the line, is the Royal kit a
reasonable starting point for a serious Scale attempt? Are the basic lines
true enough to be a starting point without tossing most of it out and scratch 
building anyway?

Any feeling about putting 4-strokers into this (say OS 90s) or is that just 
giving me more chance of engine failures? My feeling is that I would want to 
throw a couple of testbeds together with the same general planform but far less
effort than a serious scale ship and work out the engine/control bugs before
giving the REAL plane a go. This would also give me a plane with the same basic
flight characteristics that I could "fly to death" before putting the showpiece
on the line. If it was true enough to the scale one it would also give me an 
expendable to try anything new on.

These are LONG term plans but something to play around with as I develop my 
skills and such.

One more question for the Desert Rat, give the chance, would you build and fly
another of the Royal P-38s and if so, what might you do differently? What DID
you do differently?

Thanks for the time, 

Jim

    Why not develop a "test bed" with profile engine/booms and a built
    up cenetr pod. Wings could be foam cores making building that much
    faster. Profile booms could be made of light ply with maple engine
    barriers. Center pod would hold reciever. 
    
    If memory serves me Model Aviation has a plan for a stand off
    scale P38. Could be adapted.
    
    
    Tom

After bugging you about the C-45, do you get the feeling I want to try a twin?

I was thinking about doing mostly that. I thought about going a little
further and building up the profile booms with foam also. I'd want to match the 
wing loading mostly so the heavier foam construction would be offset by the 
lack of scale detailing weight.

                <<< WEWAND::$69$DUA0:[NOTES$LIBRARY]RC.NOTE;1 >>>
                  -< Welcome To The Radio Control Conference >-
================================================================================
Note 1193.2                  P-38 scale info/attempt                      2 of 4
39463::REITH "Jim Reith DTN 235-8459 HANNAH::REITH"  30 lines   9-MAR-1990 08:25
Jim,
    
>Since I've got a previous owner/builder/flyer on the line, is the Royal kit a
>reasonable starting point for a serious Scale attempt? Are the basic lines
>true enough to be a starting point without tossing most of it out and scratch 
>building anyway?
    
    The Royal P-38's outline is pretty close; close enough for competition
    but the landing gear location/height/angle/etc. needs to be corrected
    for good outline scores.

>Any feeling about putting 4-strokers into this (say OS 90s) or is that just 
>giving me more chance of engine failures? My feeling is that I would want to 
>throw a couple of testbeds together with the same general planform but far less
>effort than a serious scale ship and work out the engine/control bugs before
>giving the REAL plane a go. 
    
    Well, my feelings about 4-strokes should not be a secret.  In my
    opinion, they're far too fiddly to trust in a twin.  Case in point:
    Col. Art Johnson crashed his beautiful B-26 Marauder no fewer than
    4-times, all due to [4-stroke] engine failure...the last one, at the
    Tangerine last December, was fatal!  That aside, .60 2-strokes are a
    tight fit in the -38's streamlined nacelles so .90 4-strokes would be
    nearly impossible.  Also, the engines must be mounted inverted which
    adds another factor into the reliability angle.  2-strokes are more
    fiddly to start inverted but run fine; I can't honestly speak to a
    4-stroke's behavior in an inverted installation but, with them
    _already_ being a bit cantankerous, I can't imagine that inverting them
    improves the situation.  BTW, a coupl'a beaters to practice on is a
    GOOD idea.

>One more question for the Desert Rat, give the chance, would you build and fly
>another of the Royal P-38s and if so, what might you do differently? What DID
>you do differently?
    
    Probably not.  The Royal -38 is a tad small by todays standards and is
    a logistical nightmare to rig/install hardware and radio in.  What
    would I do differently?  I'd eliminate a lotta' linkage/bellcranks and
    install separate/individual servos for throttle and aileron.  Also, I'd
    mount the elevator servo in one boom and the rudder servo in the other,
    eliminating more hard linkage and getting some equipment outa' the
    fuselage-pod, which gets _real_ crowded REAL quick!  As this suggests,
    you'll wind up with lots'a extension leads and "Y"-connectors so
    adequate shielding/choking/etc. to prevent glitching the radio will be
    a must.
    
    My -38 was a great flier and a terrific attention getter and I
    certainly don't regret having one but I'm not terribly anxious to get
    into another one.  If I ever do another twin, it'll likely be a
    Westland Whirlwind...I've had my eye on that one for years and it
    presents none of the installation hassles a twin-boom planform like the
    P-38 does.

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    Al, arn't you also a advicator of in any twin buying two new identical
    engines and treating them like identical twins as far as breakin etc.
    
    Mark Antry
    

While we're on the topic of P-38's, RCM published plans for a small P-38 a
couple of years back. If you're interested in a test bed you might want to 
take a look at them. The plans called for a couple of 10's for motive power
and it was a three channel ship. The original design was hand launched with no
gear to perserve the sleek looks. He's got optional fixed gear drawn on the
plans. I liked the little begger enought that I bought the plans. I might build
one this summer during my vacation.

Dan Eaton

    Re: .6, Mark,
    
    Yes, absolutely!  If you can swing it, when considering a twin, obtain
    two identical engines then break them in as identically as possible;
    equal time bench running, flight time, etc.  Hopefully, this will yield
    two engines as close to clones on one another as is possible.
    
    More important, however, is how the engine are run once installed in
    the twin.  I STRONGLY recommend that you throw away the tach (if you
    have one) and don't attempt to sync the engines via a tach.  I've seen
    more twins lost due to this approach than almost anything else I could
    name.  The end result is almost always tuning one engine too lean to
    match the rpm's of the other engine and this leads to losing an engine
    in flight...it almost guarantees it.  If you _insist upon using a tach,
    use it ONLY to check rpm's for reference purposes AFTER the engines are
    properly tuned.
    
    So how do you "properly tune" them?  Easy...just treat each engine as
    if it were mounted on a single engine ship; tune one for its own
    individual best output, just a tad rich of peak rpm, then shut it down
    and tune the other for _its_ best output.  Then, start both engines and
    DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!  If they're not exactly in sync, who cares?! 
    They're both set for individual performance and chances of one quitting
    are almost nil.  Also, a strange phenomenon takes place once airborne
    where the engines tend to come into sync all by themselves, almost like
    they were talking to each other.  I guarantee that, if you start
    tweaking needle-valves to get the engines in sync on the ground, it's
    almost certain one will go lean and possibly quit somewhere into the
    flight.  That's why I abhor the use of tachs...they almost encourage
    you to tweak around trying to sync the rpms and, invariably, one engine
    winds up too lean.    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    Al,
    
    	How about the ME 410 or the Hadley Page Hampden.
    
    These two hit a soft spot in my heart.
    
    
    
    Tom

Re: .7

Anyone got a copy of the RCM article on the P-38 that they could copy and toss 
in the interoffice? RCM isn't one I've subscribed top in the past (just bought 
issues that caught my eye).

Jim Reith PDM1-1/J9

Re: .8

My intent was to buy new engines for the project, break them in at the same 
time and fly them in the testbed for initial flight time. I did this with the 
twin Webra .20s for the C/L version and both engines have run well since 
(though separately).

I mail off line I was reminded that Evil Eric is considering a twin 4-stroker
project and has reversed the direction of one of the engines. Does counter 
rotating props really help more than just eliminating P-factor?

With Al's comment about the .60s just fitting and .90 4 strokers being wishful
thinking, I was wondering about using a set of hotter .40s which have gotten to
the point of producing as much power as mediocre .60s but end up being smaller
and lighter

Great info! keep it coming.
Jim

    RE:.10
    
    Jim, I'll copy the article and send it your way. For future reference,
    the article is in the June 1988 issue of RCM. Its by a fellow named
    Gordon E. Whitehead. I goofed on a couple of points. He used two
    of OS-.15's instead of the .10's I mentioned. Another error was this 
    is a four channel ship (Rud.,Elev.,Throt.,Ail.) instead of a three
    channel. Just to whet your appetite, the wingspan is 52 inches with
    an area of 325 Sq. in. His weighed in at 4 1/2 pounds with a wing
    loading of 32 oz/Sq. Ft. The cowls, oil coolers, and canopy are
    available from T&D Fiberglass Specialties if you don't feel like
    rolling your own.

    For what it's worth ...
    
    Gordon Whitehead is a pretty well respected scale modeller over
    here in the UK
    
    He is well known for 'practical scale' but does well in competition
    scale  as well
    
    He has recently started a column in one of the UK mags and has been
    promoting twins
    
    In fact lust last month or was it the month before? a small Blenheim
    plan was given away
    
    It was for small engines -- around .15's I think
    
    If anyone is interested in this rather nice looking model ( IMHO
    ) then let me know and I will send details
    
    I seem to remember that it for hand launch or fixed undercarriage
    
    Regards
    
    Brian
    

Re: .12

It sounds like a nice little ship. Maybe I can cut the lines off my Webra .20 
intentions and do it with those powerplants... Being a reasonably recent issue 
I should be able to order a back issue too.

Re: Sticker shock

I went pricing .40s for my son's trainer project last night and looked at some
of the higher end ones as a ballpark guess for this project in the future and
it looks like this could end up being a $1000 project between the Royal kit, 
Rhom-air retracts, 2 GOOD .40s and materials for a couple of foam+ beaters 
without even getting into any of the detailing...

Re: Butterflys and such

How can you SERIOUS scale buffs fly these types of birds in anything but 
competitive situations? I would think that the time, effort and money would
add up to one h*ll of a case of nerves every flight.


Jim who's_finally_realizing_the_commitment_and_time_needed

    Re: .2850  P-38
    
    Jim, I'm having trouble executing the Keyword P-38 etc. to post
    this info, so I'll post it here.  Maybe others who are interested
    can thus quickly benefit.
    
    I found the book I was referring to,  It is entitled :
    
    FORK-TAILED DEVIL:THE P-38
    
    by Martin Caidin, Random House, Ballantine Books, New York
    
    Those of you who know Caidin recognize him as a prolific and
    excellent author of aviation books.  Other Caidin books that
    you wouldn't be able to put down are:  "Zero", and "Thunderbolt"
    
    He has many others as well.  I no longer have Thunderbolt, but I
    can tell you that after I read it, I had a new and enhanced 
    respect for this awesome beast.
    
    John

    If you are a P-38 lover, this one's for you:
    
    I just found a new magazine on the newstand called 
    "Victorious Eagles" (1939 - USAAF AT WAR - 1945),
    VOL. TWO, 1990.  published by Challenge Publications,
    Inc.,Canoga Park, CA 91304.  Tel. (818) 883-3019
    
    It's not exclusively on P-38's, it also discusses
    Cobras and Mustangs, but there is some heavy duty
    stuff on the P-38: a couple of 2-page color spreads,
    and a 2-page cutaway - just Gorgeous!. It's priced
    at $5.95.
    
    Look around at bookstores, it may still be on the 
    mag. racks.                              john

Follow up to .7 & .10

Thanks Dan Eaton for the June 1988 RCM article on the .15 powered P-38. Nice 
article. Covers a lot of flight characteristic problem situations. The RCM
plan number is 1020.

I thought I'd list the references from the end of the article for others to use
(in case anyone else is crazy enough to attempt this ;^)

1. Lockheed P-38 Lightning by Roy Cross. Kookaburra.

2. The P-38 Lightning by Gene Gurney. Arco.

3. Lockheed p-38 Lightning. Aircam No. 10.

4. Lockheed P-38, F-4 and F-5 Lightning USAAF, ETO & MTO 1942-1945. Camouflage &
	Markings No. 18. Published by Ducimus Books.

5. P-38 Lightning in Action. Squadron/Signal No. 25.

6. Aces of the South West Pacific by Gene B. Stafford. Squadron/Signal 
	Publications.

7. Modelaid International No. 10. Maltese Magazine obtainable via Bill Dean 
	Books.

and as Dan mentioned:

T & D Fiberglass Specialties, 30925 Block, Garden City, Michigan 48135, (313)
421-6358 has cowls, oil coolers, and canopy for P-38. T & D carries many RCM 
plan parts.


Hopefully this will help others who get interested.

    Caidin is also a Science Fiction and Technical Writer.  I have a book on
    Human Factors in Software Design by him, and he's also the Author of the
    book "Cyborg", the story on which the TV series The Six Million Dollar
    Man was based.

Does anyone out there have the RCM plan index? I'd like to order the plans for 
their .20 powered P-38 but I need to find out the cost of the plans for the 
order form ;^) The plan number is 1020 from the article that Dan Eaton forwarded 
to me last March. I'm hoping that this will be a good twin to start my scale 
P-38 quest with. I've gotten a pair of Webra .20s in shape and I'm hoping to get 
this built over the winter.

	From R/C Modeler Magazine
			Full Size Plan Service Plans Listing...


			LOCKHEED P-28 LIGHTING
	#1020		     June 1988			$6.50

	Gordon E. Whitehead brings us another of his super
	.15 size WW II fun scale models. This 52", 325 
	sq. in. P-38 is a real performer and can be handled
	even on one engine. Weight comes out to be 72 oz.
	giving it a 32 oz. wing loading. One sheet: 34 1/4"
	 X 64 1/2".

	USA orders - sent 3rd or 4th class - no postage necessary.
	For UPS, folded in an envolope, add 25% of your total order.
	If you would like your plans mailed UPS, rolled in a tube,
	add $3.00 for 1-4 plans; $3.50 for 5-10 plans (limit 10 
	plans per tube).


	Is this what you are looking for?

	I have used this plan service before and the actual reproductions
	are very good. Sharp lines and easy to read - no fuzzy blue prints.


	-TomR-

That's the one. Just a low cost, fun flying P-38 that will allow me to get used 
to the orientation of flying a P-38 and check out how to fly multi-engines in 
preparation for a large scale effort some number of years down the road. I'll 
keep people posted on my winter project.

I recieved two copies of the plans on monday. I sent for two so I'd have one to 
build on and one to reference (when some structure is over a notation). They 
send a copy of the text of the construction article with the plans and ordering
them rolled was the way to go. I'm starting to put together a materials list and 
will get a wood order together in the next month. I hope to get this done in 
time for the second annual DECRCM winter building contest (since I want to fly 
it early next spring ;^)

More as it developes (including questions) since I'll be changing the plans 
somewhat for smaller servos and more of them. I want dual throttle servos and 
I'm considering flaps since there's room.

    Every journey starts with a single step (but you have to follow it with
    more ;^)
    
    This has been on the back burner for a while but progress is starting
    to appear. Since I got the plans, I've gotten the servos and one of the
    engines and the wood has been calculated and will be ordered this week
    from Lone Star.
    
    Since I've been having trouble getting reliable performance from my
    Webra .20s, I decided to go with new engines and leave the Webras on
    the single engine planes I've been using them with. I decided to go to
    OS and since I was looking at the FP .20, I found that I could get the
    .25 for a couple of bucks more and get some extra power for the same
    weight. One has been bought, the second is being saved for.
    
    I've also got the opportunity to get an Airtronics Gyro in trade for
    some stuff I haven't been using. This gyro has a separate battery pack
    so I don't have to worry about it killing my Rx pack if it goes
    haywire. I've seen people comment about using the servos with JR/Futaba
    equipment, will I have problems using this with my JR? (I'm pretty sure
    I have some wire swapping to do but I'll dig into the servo notes to
    find that). I'm hoping to use the gyro on the rudder to improve the
    engine out handling of the plane. Comments? 

    Jim,
    	I don't know if the Gyro will help your engine out handling if you
    are used to using rudder.  If you are not very good at using the
    rudder, it will help, but you won't know that the gyro has applied a
    bunch of rudder and you may not make the other needed corrections to
    save the plane.  In most cases, the rudder alone will not be sufficient
    to compensate for the yaw and extra drag caused by the dead engine. 
    There was a fairly recent article, I think in RCM, about how to fly a
    twin with an engine out.
    
    Charlie
    

    Right. It was the RCM article that specified using a gyro would/could
    help. That was what got me thinking about it in the first place. I
    really don't need the extra weight but I figured that it could help at
    those inopportune moments when you don't react in the first couple of
    seconds. You know the typical case of a go around when one engine comes
    up and the other coughs and dies ;^)
    
    You're an Airtronics guy, should I have any problems making it work
    with the Max6?
    

    The Max 6 should (in PPM mode) work with Airtronics FM receivers.  I
    saw an ad for the new Airtronics receivers that implied that they are
    compatable with all of their FM TX's.
    
    Charlie
    

    That's what lead me to believe that the Gyro should work with the JR Rx
    (with the connectors rewired as noted in the servo note). I want to
    use my JR Rx but put the Gyro between it and the rudder servo (or maybe
    I'm not understanding how the gyro gets hooked up)

         hi jim,
         
you stopped writing about your p38, when you started building it, 
and that was almost two years ago.

so i want to put in some new information:

from one of the german model mags a plan is available designed by the french
pierre flageolet.
the colour scheme came from h.-h. sealy, who was flying his p38 in china.
this explains why the ship is coloured in dark green with a light green
dragon painetd along the tail booms. the dragon has white/black eyes, white
teeth and a red mouth painted onto the engine cowls.
the specs are:

wingspan:    2.14 m, 84.25 in
length:      1.42 m, 55.9 in
weight:      7 kg,   15.4 pounds
engine:      2 x 0.45 2c or 2 x 0.72 4c 
props:       12x5
wing area:   6.14 sq. ft.
wingloading: 124 g/dm^2 (1 dm^2 is 10 cm square). this would be around 
               40.4 oz/sq. ft.
scale:       1:7.5
a retractable gear is shown on the plans.

the plan is a special anniversary offer from one of the german model mags,
i ordered one. its two huge sheets, and real cheapo, around 15 us$.
normal cost will be more than twice. as i did never build something in
scale, i can not judge if the plan is suitable for the real scale freak. 
pierre says, he cheated a little bit with the wing area.
he also says, that all is built from scratch, so zillions of hours 
accumulate building it, although the plan is pretty detailed.

together with the plan they offer a documentation set called
"P-38 Lightning in action". in action seems to be the name of the 
publication series.

i know that there is a plan available through RCM, can anybody tell me 
something about it regarding powering, building effort, how it flies etc?
i have the article about twin engined model from mr. g. e. whitehead in
the rcm september 90 issue, but the second part is missing, i buy the rcm
only occasionally.

as far as i know, there are two kits for the p38 available: one from royal 
(don't know anything about it) and one from marutaka, 1.88 m (74 in) wingspan
with two .40 - .60.
has anybody some references about these kits?

who else is flying a p-38?

cheers
joe t.    

Hi Joe,

We've talked offline but I figure I'll enter the info in here in case there
are others interested in P-38s. I haven't built my RCM P-38 yet but I plan 
on getting the cowls and scoops at the WRAMS show in February. It looks
like it will fly well and my hope is to get it finished this winter. It's
about 4th in the building queue. A full reprint of the article comes with 
the P-38 plans from RCM

I have heard (and seen) that the Royal kit  is basically a balsa log that 
you carve into a P-38. The kit is all blocks and there seems to be a lot of 
carving. That has the potential for a heavy model (which Al Casey commented 
on a couple of years ago. 

My current "dream" is the Bert Baker P-38J from Yellow aircraft. The info 
below is from the Yellow Aircraft ad on page 32 of the December (Gremlin) 
1992 RCM (which I have at my desk)

100" wingspan $780 US
Optional custom retracts and spinners
Recommended Engines: Supertiger 2500/3000 and up
o One piece scaler detailed fiberglass fuselage with Integral fin
o Firewall and Formers are preinstalled
o Balsa presheeted foam wings with flying surfaces, wheel wells, and servo
	pockets prerouted
o Many other fiberglass parts - Cowl, LG doors or wheel pants, belly pan, 
	exhaust stacks, etc.

Send $3 for complete product information

Yello Aircraft
203 Mass Ave., Lexington, MA 02173
Tel: (617) 674-2222 Fax: (617) 674-2188

Disclaimer - I have no association with Yellow aircraft, I just admire 
their product.

    A member of my club had a Royal P-38.  It flew well and he liked
    it very much.  So much in fact, he is going to build another.
    Unfortunately it was totalled after an engine quit.
    
    I would recommend electric power for any multi-engine project.
    If you can live without the noise, I think electric power will
    give your project a better chance of succeeding.
    
    The IC powered P-38's I have seen are impressive, but are for 
    expert builders and flyers only.
    
    
                                                  Regards,
    
                                                  Jim

    
     I wouldn't worry about ol' Mr Reith with a P-38, his "engine out"
    experience with Twin engine planes is increasing rapidly ( or so I
    hear! :).
    
                                                               DW2

The January issue of RC Report had a picture of an electric powered P38 from
the Kress-Jet folks in electric column(Spears and Mountjoy.) It's powered by
a single cobalt 035( each prop is belt driven) on six cells. Each pod holds 3
cells. I saw the belt drive set up at their(Kress-Jets) booth during last years
WRAM show. They had in in a B17 and it worked great! 

According to the writeup, the P38 should be available very soon. Maybe I'll get
to see it at the WRAM show this year??  

-Lamar

Oh NO!

I can feel dollars aligning themselves in my wallet.
I looked at the B-17 (another favorite of mine) last
year and would probably "impulse buy" the P-38 if it 
was available and possible. The RCM version seems 
like the wing loading would be too high with 25s. 
Maybe Cobalt 15s? (don't get me started 8^)

>>  ( each prop is belt driven) 



  Any reason why this type of setup couldn't be used with glo engines too?

The only problem I can see might be starting. You'd need some type of
extended shaft similar to starting a ducted fan or chopper. As I recall,
the belt was "ribbed" to avoid slippage under torque.

    I saw the Kress Jets P-38 fly at this year's KRC.  It is a very
    light/small model which flew very well on its single motor.
    
    I can supply an address if anyone is interested.  Kress also makes
    a great Pucara twin(see this month's MA for a picture of Tom Hunt's).  
    
    As I have mentioned several times in this notes file, the most
    impressive IC plane I have ever seen fly is a P-38 which a guy
    from Pa. brings to the large fun flys in my area.  It is powered by
    twin HP .61's and has a span of 90".  It is all balsa covered with
    thin glass and ca.  The finish and performance of this plane are
    tremendous.  Whenever it is flown all other actitvity ceases, as people
    watch the impressive show.  He always lands to unanimous applause.
    I spoke with the owner several times and he only flies the plane at
    large formal gatherings and is usually working on the replacement
    because in his words- "I know this will crash some day."   
    
    Sad but true- most twins have short lives.
    
    
                                                  Regards,
    
                                                  Jim

    regarding the belt drive...
    
    I think Chris Spohr was looking at an A-10 Warthog that used an
    internally mounted engine and the belt driveout to the engine pods.
    Perhaps he'll pook his head in for a minute and sharee the details. I
    seem to remember it being an expensive arraingment.

Yeah, I looked over the Warthog at last years WRAMS show. It was expensive
(but then THAT was the A-10 version 8^) I'm sure I'd view a P-38 differently 
8^) 8^)

    Contact the people at Kress Jets.
    
    I believe they are working on a belt drive system for prop planes also.
    
    The DF fan version for the A10 was around $250 for the main drive gear,
    belts, and two 2-stage fans.  I think the steep price tag was due to
    the fan units, so a prop system may be a lot cheaper.
    
    Chris

I went to the WRAMS show this weekend and took a close look at the 
Yellow Aircraft P-38. It's a J model and the kit is $760. When you 
get done with the retracts and stuff it ends up being about $1600 
and THEN you need to add two engines and 13! servos. Guess I'll 
have to drool over this one a little longer 8^)

I did manage to find Fiberglass Specialties but they didn't have 
many "plan" parts in the booth. No P-38 parts. I paid my money and 
they'll send them out when they get back from the show. Hopefully
this will spur me on to get this plane done this spring.

One thing that always drives me crazy is the cost of parts. I got my 
box of parts from Fiberglass Specialties last night and opened it. Not 
a heck of a lot ofstuff in there. The canopy was $11 and that's 
something I couldn't do myself but the small air coolers are 
rediculous. The quality of the parts is great but the cost is high. 
Guess that we're still paying off the cost of the molds...

Time to move this project up in the building queue.

Wing Mfg. makes a series of short kits. They have a Zero, P-38, A-26, along
with a few others. In the November 1993 issue of Model Aviation on page 107
are ads for Wing Mfg. P-38 and A-26.

The Wing P-38 has a 70 inch wingspan. In this ad it says from  .40 to .60 
engines but I could have sworn in earlier adds the low end was .25's. The 
price for the semi kit is $79.75 I think that includes the foam wing cores.
They also sell a Full Combo package that includes the Semi kit, sig wood pak,
complete spring-air retract gear system, decal sheet, hardware, and wing
sheeting glue for $340.00 normally.
The add says Combo Special $285.95 so they must be having a sale.

The A-26 they sell has a 68 inch wingspan. Calls for .25 to .50 power and
goes for $69.75 for the semi kit and $269.95 for the Combo kit.

RCM has had reviews on both their P-38 and A-26 in recent years. The planes
are designed by Hal Parenti who has competed in the Scale Masters many times. 

They can be reached at:

Wing Mfg.
306 E. Simmons
Galesburg, IL 61401

309-342-3009

They take Visa & Mastercard.


I took a look at the stuff I have for my project also. The original RCM P-38
has a wingspan of 51.5 inches with a center chord of 9.75.  I enlarged that
to a wingspan of 66 inches with a center chord of 12.5 inches. With that double
taper on the wing there's not a lot of area out there.

Take care,

Dan Eaton

hi jim et all,

i found this in r.m.r.a and thought you should know about it. but hurry, 
maybe he won't stay in the supply business until the next century (or will 
your p38 still fly this decade?) :-) (sorry couldn't resist!)

cheers
joe t.

From: [email protected] (Kurt Ziegler)
Subject: Gordon E. Whitehead address
Date: 21 Sep 95 02:47:41 -0700
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc.air

Does anyone know how I can get hold of Gordon Whitead. He's designed 
planes and would like to thank him for the P-38 plans that he drew. I 
built the model out of foam and also made the vacuum formed parts 
needed to complete the plane. If anyone has built this plane and 
would like the vacuum formed parts let me know. I have the cowls, 
turbo chargers, oil coolers, and canopy. The plane flies great and 
looks good in the air. For anyone that is interested the plans are 
available from RCM Magazine. The plan number is #1020 and cost about 
$15.00. If anyone can help me with the adress of this fine individual 
it would be appreciated.

Yeah, that's the same one I'm building. Same plan set. I've got all those
parts in fiberglass from one of the othe suppliers.

Thanks for the lead though.

Don't know if it'll be this millenium 8^)