Conference vmszoo::rc

and don't forget topic 1218, 'JUST FOR THE "WRECKORD"....'

    I flew my ACE All Star Biplane for the first time this week end.  It is
    a small plane, approx 34 inch wing span, foam wings, simple box fuse. 
    The recommended power starts at .049 and goes up to a .15.  An 049
    would be a mistake in my opinion.  I put an OS .20 four stroke on it
    which resulted in a balanced plane with no lead in the nose.  I used
    three Futaba 133 servos and a small 270MAh battery.
    
    This plane has rudder, elevator and throttle.  
    
    There was a light wind at about 30 degrees to the runway which made for
    an interesting take off.  All short coupled, short span biplanes are a
    bit twitchy and this was no exception, but once it got off the ground
    and my fingers settled down it flew quite well.  I putted around, did a
    few loops, did'nt have enought rudder to make it roll and then came in
    for my first landing.  Terrible glide and became very unresponsive to
    control inputs with the motor throttled back so I revved it up and went
    around and tried again.  A slightly bouncy landing but got it on the
    ground after about a five minute flight.
    
    I looked it over, fueled it up again (2 ounce tank) and took off. 
    Getting brave I tried a long smooth power dive.  The top wing popped
    off and now I had one hot monoplane!  All of the dihedral is in the
    bottom wing but it became unresponsive and I was lucky to arc it over
    into a fairly gentle plop into wet soft turf.  The damage was not
    terminal and an hours work will have it back in the air.
    
    I will add ailerons and try again soon.  I am getting another kit to
    bash into a small version of the ultimate with a .15 two stroke.  A fun
    little plane if you like em small and the foam wings make it a quick
    build.
    
    Will 

    Greetings from New Mexico!
    
    On Thursday, 4/15, I flew my Ultra Sport 60 on its maiden flight.
    It has B&D retracts, OS 61 RF (rear port), MACS header and pipe.
    I also put in dual elevator linkages and extended the canopy lo-
    cation forward 1 inch, and put soft mounts on the engine (Sullivan).
    
    This plane is to be my pattern trainer.  This plane has close to
    350 hours build time.  I left nothing to chance.  The first flight
    was totally uneventful (bad events).  I didn't even have to touch
    the trim tabs on the transmitter.  That is a first for me.
    
    That OS 61 is a phenomonal performer.  It's my first long stroke.
    It puts out so much torque I can use a 12x10 prop and hover the plane
    with full throttle on the prop.
    
    The only time I shook was when landing time came.  Usually I shake like
    crazy on a first flight, especially my knees.
    
    I have a US 40 with a piped YS 45 rear port.  I guess it is true about 
    bigger is better.  This thing flies like it's on rails, better than the
    40 by a lot.
    
    I will mention one other "first time".  I am teaching a student who is
    an Indy Car mechanic by profession.  You think his planes would be
    clean enough to eat off of.  WEEEEEEEEEEELL, apparently ground 
    vehicles don't communicate to air vehicles.  6 times on 6 dif-
    ferent days it never made it out the pits due to SLOPPY work-
    manship.  Now he wants to try again!  Oh, by the way, his race car
    team is getting their buns toasted, (Al Unser Jr. is the driver).
    Go figure that one!
    
    Good day,
    
    Ron Mouser

	During our last club meeting a member brought some HLG Epoxi 
	fuselages with carbon fibre spar as the tail. He had two versions, 
	one for DM 50.-(70 grams) and one for DM 70.- (50 grams) respectively.
	I purchased the one for DM 50.- and started to build immediately.
	I've choosen a standard elevator/rudder in + configuration. Others 
	use a V-tail to save some weight.
	The wing came out a bit heavy (but strong) partly due to 40 grams of 
	covering !  
	Everything got checked and looked okay. The CG I put to approx.
	30% - 35%.

	With a slight wind from east I've choosen a small hill (10-15 m)
	with a relatively steep slope. The big advantage here is, you have
	enough heigh under your plane right after the launch for potential
	recovery actions. So I standig there, few thoughts, 'what_the_heck'
	and up she went. A few up clicks on the elevator and I found me (the
	plane) immediatelly polishing the slope. There was no bad habit
	nor any other problem encountered. The rudder is very responsiv and
	the elevator just right. 

	After some time I found a thermal and climbed several meters (~ 100)
	Enough for a dive with followed loops. What I thought was that this 
	plane picks up quite some speed as opposed to the Genesis. Should be
	good when handlaunching.

	What really impressed me was the tight turns I can make without 
	loosing altitude. The polyhidreal really pays off in this arena. 
	In one thermal the wings where almost vertical and still climbing.

	One time I even outclimbed some ravens, doesn't happen too often.
	
	When pushing the stick forward from level flight it does a forward
	loop in short time. Doesn't need much altitude to gain speed. (You
	should see my Graupner Cirrus doing this - it takes forever) 
	Don't know what this indicates, just an observation.
	
	Can't wait to get the fingerhole in the fuse to try to handlaunch.
	What are good durations anyway per launch ? (Dave, Jim ?)


	Happy Handlauncher,   Bernd

    >>	Can't wait to get the fingerhole in the fuse to try to handlaunch.
    >>	What are good durations anyway per launch ? (Dave, Jim ?)
    
    The best duration is when you get bored and decide to bring it down.  I
    don't get bored too often...
    
    If the air is dead, your flights will be uniformly short, around 20 to
    30 seconds. If there's any thermal activity at all... well, the sky's
    the limit! If you don't need to go to the WC in the middle of the flight, 
    it isn't long enough! (The flight, that is).
    
    Dave

    
    Well, I finally got this fingerhole cut out and tried already. The wind
    was pretty stiff and no chance for searching thermals, just hovering.
    Got flights between 30sec to 60 sec. Was some lift in that breeze. 
    I was just curious about would it be competitive enough in contests to
    reach the 30 seconds ?  The way contests are held here is to get as
    many as possible 30 second flights within 10 minutes. If your plane
    (like my Genesis) would get only 20 second flights your chances would
    be zero. If your plane is able to exceed 30 seconds in dead air as
    worst case your chances get pretty good for the part depending on the
    plane.
    
    
    	Bernd
    

    Last Sunday, I tried a new glider which I will call the Spirit Floater
    since I used the Spirit wing with the Frank Zaic Floater fuse and tail
    feathers.
    
    First the flight - the initial flight was done by one of my many
    instructors using a Cox .049 power pod (to satisify the power fliers). 
    The glider did not have any bad habits but the trim was off and later
    corrected.  
    
    The glider climbed (for 9 minutes on 2 ounces of petrol) to a height of
    about 500 feet and flew for about 15 mimutes thereafter.
    
    Once down, the trim was corrected, needing 6 turns of right rudder and
    4 turns of up elevater.
    
    The first real flight - the glider was put back up to about 500 feet
    and the search for lift was started.  A "boomer" was found and the
    climb looked to be about 20 feet per circle until the ship was almost
    out of sight.  
    
    Using loops and downward spiral to decend to about 500 feet, the
    "boomer" was found and again went up rapidly to a dot in the sky.  This
    procedure contunied for a total time of 42 minutes.  The glider was
    then brought down because of "gliders neck" (a pain in the neck from
    looking up so long).
    
    The Floater has a flat bottom airfoil which I will use for no lift days
    in three spands - 78", 99" and 130" and the Spirit wing will be used in
    the same lengths for lift and windy days.
    
    The fuse is of the pod and boom type made of all plywood and is almost
    indestructible.
    
    I am trying hard to learn to fly power, but these kinds of successes
    make it extreemly hard to acquire the desire to do it.
    
    
    Regards,
    
    Ollie
    

    
    Congrats, your Spirit Floater sounds like a real winner. 
    
    In the mind of some glider pilots here a power pot is a major no-no.
    (Thery might never learn) I myself have a Graupner Cirrus with a Power
    pot and a 010 in it. Very marginal runtime. But my tank is real small.
    1/2 ounce or so. A longer runtime gets you great opportunities to look 
    for thermals while climbing. In this way I could get great hights with
    just a couple minutes motor runtime (maybe 2 minutes).
    
    Let's hear more....
    
    
    Bernd
     

    I always wanted an RC plane that would go straight up with unlimited
    vertical performance, so...
    
    An EZ .30 Chipmunk was purchased last winter and this spring a Royal
    .46 was purchased.  The Chipmunk has full span ailerons, rudder,
    elevator and throttle and retracts.  The retracts are a first for me.
    
    The Royal was broken in last week end with about 16 oz of Byron 10%
    sport fuel. This was not a complete break in, however I was able to
    tune the motor to get excellent idle to full speed throttle response
    and reliable running out of the motor.
    
    The Royal was mounted using the Davis Diesel ISO Mounts.  I have been
    using iso mounts in one form or another for several years now.  Soft
    mounting is good for preserving the airframe and the radio gear and
    makes the airplane quieter because noise is not radiated through the
    air frame.  The Davis product is excellent and very easy to use.
    
    The Royal was mounted upside down which unfortunately got the needle
    valve slightly below the mid line of the fuel tank causing a bit of a
    syphon problem.  
    
    The retracts are a bit spindly which make for some interesting ground
    handling but nothing too difficult to deal with.
    
    I taxied around the runway for a while, got my nerves steadied and
    slowly advanced the throttle to take off.  The plane was trimmed
    slightly up and climed to 100 feet in nothing flat.  A couple of down
    trim clicks and one or two clicks on the ailerons and I began exploring
    the flight characteristics of this plane.  Took a couple of minutes to
    remember I had retracts!
    
    Most flying was done at half throttle.  This is one of the most solid
    feeling planes I have flown.  I rolled it a few times and found it to
    stop exactly where the ailerons were released, no slop whatsoever. 
    Loops would skew without rudder input to keep the plane from a yaw into
    the prop.  I did not get unlimited vertical, however, the motor was set
    about a quarter turn rich and when fully broken in should pull this
    plane straight up with no problem.
    
    The landing was a piece of cake, however, power had to be maintained to
    the runway. 
    
    The Chipmunk balanced with no lead, in fact I had to move the battery
    back under the canopy to keep it from being too nose heavy.  A .36 is
    the recommended motor so we will see how it holds up with a .46.  There
    does not seem to be a large power gap between an O.S. 35 SF and the
    Royal.
    
    This is an excellent small plane that feels solid right away.
    
    Will
    
    
     

    What about the vertical? 
    
    Remember that my definition of true vertical is that the plane can go
    straight up and maintain a constant roll rate. If the roll rate does
    not stabilise and continues to slow down the plane is losing speed.
    
    E = >1:1
    

    I was unable to really test the vertical capabilities because I was
    running the motor about a quarter turn rich.  It would go straight up
    but it slowed down and not being familiar with its characteristics I
    did not want to push my luck so long before it would stall I would fly
    out of it.  I'll let you know how it does rolling straight up with the 
    needle valve properly set. 
    
    Will

Well, I posted a note a while back about my Electra-fly, and it's demise! I was 
chatting to a friend at the weekend, and he'd got one which had also crashed. An 
examination of the two "corpses" revealed that I could get one good 'un out of 
the two, so I bought his wreck for a fiver, and set to. I'd originally decided 
to fit a third servo to control the motor, but I couldn't really fit it in 
anywhere, so I stuck with the slightly weird "motor switch on elevator" setup. 
Took a couple of hours to get it set up, and then I waited for the weather, and 
waited, and waited...

This last weekend was a public holiday here in the UK, and in traditional style, 
the weather was horrible, high winds and rain. About 7pm last night I looked out 
of the window, and it wasn't raining any more, but still very gusty. Very 
unsuitable for flying an electric glider really, so I did what every responsible 
modeller with a new toy would do..... 

When I got to the field, the wind was still high, but what the heck? I set the 
motor running, and gave a good heave. The EF flew away like a dream! I'd noticed 
that when I did my Frankenstein act the wings (from different aircraft) had 
different tip profiles, and this had concerned me. It appeared, however, to make 
no difference at all (or maybe other differences cancelled it out!). The plane 
flew very nicely, a little twitchy in pitch, but that may be down to the wind. 
That wing *really* bends! I was thinking about all that structure creaking away, 
with all that weight, but she seems to cope! I flew a couple of circuits, 
gaining height, then killed the motor. She's much smoother off the power. I 
decided then that discretion is definitely the better part of valour, and landed 
nice and gently in the heather.

I'm really pleased that I now seem to have an electric glider that actually 
works! I can now fly at our power site on those days when only silent flight is 
allowed.

Cheers

Nigel.

This holiday weekend in New England also brought plenty of wind. My 
maiden Gyro-1 flight got postponed until monday. The OS .32 ran great 
right out of the box and I was able to get it to throttle up reliably. 
The plane has pure vertical and plenty of power with an 11-4 prop. One 
hint of flutter but there was no damage. The control horns loosened up 
in the soft balsa and caused a no control flight into the tall grass 
across from the pits and I packed it up and will do the repairs at 
home. The plane was very predictable and handled quite well at the 
suggested throws.

    
    Well, having stuffed 3 planes in 10 days recently, I found myself with 
    nothing to play with. 8^(  Luckily, my ever understanding better half 
    came to the rescue, and doubled up my birthday present. 8^) As well as 
    the Flair Puppeteer that I've been lusting after for a while, she got 
    me a trainer, called the "Trainer 40 L", made by a Hong Kong company. 
    It has a jig built fuse, foam wing, and pre-built built up tail 
    surfaces. All you do is stick it all together, cover it, and go fly! 
    Three evenings work had it assembled (I can't say "built"), and the OS 
    .40 4 stroke installed. Three channel radio (rudder, elevator, 
    throttle) installed, and we were ready. Balance came out spot on! This 
    is the first plane I've had that didn't need nose weight. Overall the 
    design and construction are very nice.
    
    When we finally got a day that wasn't blowing a gale I went to the 
    field, fired up the motor, and chickened out. I gave the trannie to 
    John, the guy who has been instructing me and watched.... The plane has 
    a steerable nosewheel, which makes for excellent ground handling. She 
    tracked straight as an arrow, and lifted off beautifully! Power was a 
    little down (I was using a 10x7 prop, subsequent flights with an 11x7 
    are much better). About three clicks of up trim, and I got the trannie. 
    This was absolutely uneventful. She flies very stably, no nasty vices, 
    just perfect for a trainer. There was a reasonable breeze blowing (15 
    mph ish) and she would just hover into the breeze, weaving gently from 
    side to side as I over-corrected. A few circuits, a rather messy roll, 
    a couple of loops (to see if the quarter inch wing dowels are up to the 
    job! 8^) ), and in for a landing. The first approach was too high, with 
    a rather broad flat bottomed wing she just doesn't want to come down! 
    So I flew another circuit, came in flatter, with a few revs on, and 
    STILL ended up right at the end of the strip! 
    
    So, this one does what I want it to, it should let me get some stick 
    time in, and didn't disrupt my busy building schedule too much 8^) The 
    only major change I made was to replace the main gear fixing bolts 
    (quarter inch steel bolts) with plastic number plate bolts. The value 
    of this was proved on a later flight, when a rather heavy arrival just 
    knocked the wheels off, and put a bend in the nose leg. The nosewheel 
    steering stands up well to our rather rough strip. I'm a happy boy 
    again!
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

    Oh Dear, another crash report........
    
    I finally finished my Bi-Fly 25, a 36" span biplane, that looked kind
    of, ummm, exciting?
    
    Short, short moment arms, a .25 engine and 3.5 pounds looked like
    fun! I spent a long time on the building (see the Building, Oops!
    note) 8^)
    
    Anyway, last week I finally got to test fly. I found that the rudder,
    with steerable tailwheel gave LOADS of directional control on the
    ground, maybe a bit too much, since she tended to "fishtail" a bit.
    This resulted in the first couple of attempts being aborted.
    
    The third attempt got into the air, but the plane was all but
    uncontrollable! The C.G. was spot on, and control movements were
    OK, but she was dropping a wing like crazy, and was tough to keep
    in a straight and level line. I flew half a circuit, but on the
    downwind turn she reared up into a stall turn, fell off and went in.
    I still don't clearly understand what happened here. She had plenty of 
    airspeed
    and I didn't do anything that would have caused the stall turn. I
    think! Any ideas folks?
    
    Anyway, damage wasn't too bad (and is almost repaired). If I ever
    get any time to get back to it, I'll try again.
    
    Nigel (who's beginning to forget where home is!).

    Sounds Tail Heavy from the way it pitched up on you and was dropping a
    wing.
    
    Charlie
    

    Yep, double check the CG. Also, look for any wing warps or
    misalignments. I had a Laser (briefly) with a badly built wing that had
    a devilishly hard to spot problem. The leading edges of the two wing
    halves were at different heights, which lead to different angle of
    attack. It made it a real handful on takeoff (as Charlie Watt
    discovered), but was masked at higher speed.
    
    Dave
    

Yep, the incidence meter is your friend 8^)

The wrong angle of attack can cause similar problems as well. An 
incidence meter can show up problems including differences between 
the top and bottom wings!

    Build a Panic!
    
    EVL-1

    Yes Eric? helpfull as ever 
    Are you sure Nigel's ready for the panic a "Panic" causes..
    Hurtfully yours
    Trev_H

    
    I'm ready! Unfortunately, my hands, eyes and brain aren't 8^)
    
    Actually the Bi Fly was probably a touch ambitious at this stage of my
    flying career, but you know how it is when you're in the model shop,
    and there's some money in your wallet crying to be liberated.
    
    Thanks for the advice, looks like I'd better go and buy an incidence
    meter.
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

    Panics are not hard to fly.  If not overpowered they are a very
    forgiving bipe.  By the way, rough incidence checks can be made with a
    good ruler.  Put a pin at the center of the leading edge of each wing
    and measure to the datum line at leading and trailing edge.  A little
    Trig and you have the incidence angle.  I barely use my meter because I
    believe that I can do it more accurately with a ruler.
    
    Charlie
    

    Panics are very good first bipes. They are designed to come apart on
    bad landings, read crashes, if the dress poppers are used on the struts
    etc.
    
    They are very easy to fly if not overpowered, For example, a merco.61 and 
    a Panic are a very good combo for an aileron capable flyer.
    
    The U/C is designed to handle major bounces and the full length top
    flap allows for very slow approaches.
    
    When you put an OS 1.08 or an Enya R120 on the front, (Minus 3" of
    nose to get it to balance), it becomes a very interesting wee beastie!. :-)
    
    
    The thick wing section is very forgiving and when built light these
    things do well in climb-and-glide events..........
    
    EVL-2DAY.                                           

    
    This is interesting. I've seen Panics perform such outrageous
    aerobatics that I've *assumed* that they must be a real handful to fly.
    It never occurred to me that they could be "tamed".
    
    Hmmmm...... Oh-oh, my wallet's itching again  8^)
    
    Nigel
    

Yep, they're real nice to fly and handle well. The wild gyrations
are due to the comfort level you can develop. I've done some 
incredible saves with mine due to the handling capabilities.

    Panics are light with lots of lift - which makes for a very easy plane
    to fly if you don't go overboard on the rates and the power.  I had a
    blast with mine! (I still have it but I moved over to Pattern)
    
    Charlie
    

        Somebody should answer the question!
        
        The problem  is  engine/propeller  torque!  In short coupled tail
        dragger bipes there's  significant propeller torque.  The average
        pilot will tend to  work  against  it with the ailerons, which is
        deadly.  You MUST control  the  ground  handling  with the rudder
        only and have neutral ailerons when  the  plane  flies itself off
        the ground.  And then be ready  to  give  the appropriate aileron
        correction, of course.  PLus adequate ground/air speed.  The fact
        that  it  lifts  the  tail  doesn't mean its ready  to  fly.    I
        destroyed an Aeromaster bit by bit learning this lesson!
        
        Anker

    Only if it is an Aeromaster......... :-)
    
    Done any good Henderson rolls lately?????????
    
    
    EVL-1

    What's every body clapping for............
    
    Oh sorry, that's Anker's aeromaster WINGS SLAPPING TOGETHER......
    
    Steve 8^)

        Re:              <<< Note 1517.29 by SNAX::SMITH "I FEEL THE NEED" >>>

        So you still remember me spinning it at full power with an OS .91
        up front. That really was awesome!
        
        Anker

    Actually Anker, I thought you were VERY innovative. You took off with
    a bipe, and landed with a SWING WING. I don't think I've seen any 
    others since. 8^)
    
    Steve

    Anker,
    	How could we forget!  That Aeromaster was spectacular with the 90
    up front.  That Henderson induced spin was a high pucker factor. 
    Actually, I don't know if I've flown with you since then - and that
    must have been 3 or 4 years ago.
    
    Charlie
    

    He took up glider flying after that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    
    E2

    Ah! Glider flying..
    
    Having had a couple of weeks off to enjoy my newly arrived daughter, I
    managed to fit in the completion of a 2 metre project which has been
    under delevopement for 3 years. Not that it is particularly complex or
    high tech or even that massive ammounts of theory went into it, just
    that on most occasions it only got picked up, pondered, and put down 
    and recieved a very low priority... I guess you've been there..
    
    Anyway last Friday afternoon, with the minimum of covering (not
    bothering with the inner-sheeted panels or the Fuz), COG estimated 
    (slightly swept wing never makes it easy), batteries charged, control
    throws set to extreme, out I went...
    
    First a hand lanch which needed some forward stick to stop the slight
    zoom, then a couple more and into 360 circuits and returning to a
    catch. A little twitchy still so I added some nose weight. Fine, Ok..
    out with the Bungee...
    
    Recheck the the COG and the relative position of the Tow hook, just
    forward a bit to keep on the docile side.. OK Here we go.
    
    A half height launch but there's lots of bugs in the air, and sure
    enough the model is now being pushed about and each turn shes holding
    her own, no, its climbing.. after about 8 mins I was making a landing
    approach and sure enough, same as all good fairy tales, another good
    bump and round we go again...
    
    Final first flight time 15.47.. and a very pleased designer.
    
    Second flight.. I wont bore you but I got 25.41..
    
    Trevor
    
    PS. Daughters name Stephanie, Models name Browzer.
    
    
    

This story begins about 6 years ago when I built the Tutor, a John
DeVries design.  I guess it had its first flight then: test pilot Ivan
managed to get it rolling down the runway far enough for it to get
about 18 inches into the air.  Then he discovered that the ailerons
were reversed -- that's what he gets for trusting me -- and he cut the
power.  We talked about it and decided it needed a more powerful
engine than the '72 vintage OS.25FP, plus a few mods like moving the
landing gear back.

That's where it sat for 6 years...since the nose on the Tutor is too long to
put a heavier engine on, it had to wait for other things to get
done...like learning to fly.  There was a brief flash of hope a couple
of years ago when I acquired an OS40 4-cycle and I entertained
thoughts of bobbing the nose 1 1/2 inches or so, but that never
happened.

Well, finally I acquired an OS.25FSR, but it kept busy as a
ready-to-fly reserve on my Liddle Stik.  Then, with some proficiency
gained, I decided to mate it up with the Tutor and see how it flys, at
long last.

So yesterday it happened.  I was only going to run up the engine and
check its ground handling, but along came Ivan the test pilot, and I
took the chance.  It didn't need to wait so long.  It lifted the tail
in a couple of feet (an achievement up here at 7200 feet!) and did the
prettiest roll to a smooth takeoff.

Then the fun began.  It would not respond to its barn door ailerons
and the rudder was set so sensitive that the slightest touch would put
it into a dive for the ground. Anyway, Ivan sorted it out and I even
got a couple of minutes on the sticks--it wasn't so bad for me since I
routinely coordinate rudder and aileron and am used to small twitchy
airplanes.

We landed and reset the rudder and the second flight was very nice,
though its tendency to roll on rudder was still a problem.  Ivan
suggested that I cut some of the dihedral out, since it came with
almost 2 inches in each wingtip.  And that's what I did last nite
between trick and treaters.

One other problem-- I made the mistake of covering the wings in light
blue and it flat dissappeared on me several times.  So recovering will
be with another color, probably red or orange.

Gonna have fun with this plane.

Good job, John.
I always thought the Tutor was too nice a plane to be a hanger Queen.

    
    I bought a very "pre-owned" Quaker Flash at the club auction last week.
    I decided to fit an OS .20 FP to it, I wasn't sure that this would be
    enough power for a relatively large model, but what the heck?
    
    I had to fit a small tank to the plane, since the existing one had some
    kind of problem, and I couldn't get to it without major surgery. I just
    banded the new tank on the side of the fuselage. I'll fit it properly
    later (sure!).
    
    Saturday the field was socked in with low cloud, so flying was
    impossible, Sunday as a bit better with faint mist, but absolutely no
    wind at all. In fact an ideal day for a Quaker Flash!
    
    I fired up the engine, and put the model on the strip. Opening up
    started her moving quite briskly, but resulted in a ground-loop. I
    think the problem is a combination of very forward set wheels (a
    hangover from the original being a free-flighter), and the fact that
    the fuselage blanks the rudder when the tail's on the ground. As she
    picks up speed and the tail rises the rudder comes in with a bang, and
    she whips round. I eventually got the hang of catching the tail with
    the rudder as she rises.
    
    The .20 turned out to be more than powerful enough. As I said the day
    was flat calm (most unusual for our field which is 900' above sea
    level). I found that in these conditions she'd hold altitude on two
    clicks of throttle above a very low tickover! I proceeded to put in a
    fifteen minute flight, which had a huge silly grin painted all over my
    face. This plane is just so relaxing to fly! I spent about five minutes
    just flying touch-and-gos for the hell of it. Then chug back up to a
    couple of hundred feet, and fly huge circles at ridiculously low
    speeds. What a blast! The only worry with this plane is keeping an eye
    on the trannie meter. At the end of the fifteen minutes I landed
    because another guy had arrived who wanted my frequency. The only
    problem with landing is getting her to come down, and remembering that
    she doesn't lose height in a turn unless you put a bit of down elevator
    in. I checked the tank, and I'd used three ounces of fuel in fifteen
    minutes. 
    
    I'm hooked. there aren't too many days you can fly vintage models in
    Yorkshire, but this one's definitely at the front of my "stable". In
    fact I'm thinking of building another.
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

    
    Am I the only one flying new planes these days?  8^)
    
    Saturday dawned cold, calm, and dry, so I had no more excuses not
    to go and test fly my Flair Puppeteer. First job was to check that the
    engine was happy with the installation. I wasn't too sure because it's
    inverted, and the carb's quite a long way below the mid-line of the
    tank. This is no criticism of the design by the way, but a
    consequence of my decision to fit a .70 four stroke, which is right at
    the top end of the recommended range. Anyway there were no
    problems apart from a slight syphoning effect causing a little fuel to
    dribble out of the carb when the tank's full and the engine's stopped.
    I'm *really* pleased with the Laser engine (more on this in another
    note later!).
    
    I decided not to try the first flight myself (wise man or coward?). I
    handed over to a trusted club member, and we checked controls etc
    etc. I asked Pete not to use full throttle on the first take off, since
    I was fairly sure that we'd be overpowered. The first run was aborted
    when my channel was hit by a guy on an adjacent one. A hasty bit of
    negotiation resulted in an agreement to both get our sets checked,
    and to avoid each other in the meantime.
    
    So, back on the strip. Half throttle, and she rolled smartly away, then
    picked her tail up and rose beautifully into the air. I had a grin on
    that was making people in the pits put sunglasses on! The rest of the tale
    is no fuss, no drama. This is a lovely plane to fly, and flew right
    first time. I'd set the tickover very low, and on the first approach the
    Laser quit, this demonstrated an amazing glide from the Pup, you'd never
    believe that she's a biplane.
    
    Takeoffs are best at half throttle, and look really scale like. Low
    slow passes are a treat, and that engine sounds gorgeous!
    
    Happy happy happy. I was really nervous about this one, it's been
    quite a lot of work, but now it's all very worthwhile.
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

    Congrats Nigel. I know the plane your talking about and it's nice to
    hear it actually does fly.
    
    I've done two test flights on a friends Puppeteer. The first "flight"
    was about 20 seconds. It was EXTREAMLY tail heavy and I was LUCKY to
    achieve a controlled crash. Just bent the gear and loosened the wings.
    
    The second time I flew it, the CG problem appears to have been
    corrected, but the engine went sick and it was all I could do to make
    a circuit and land. I thought it was going to fall out of the sky
    at any momemt. At least this time, I landed without incident.
    
    I agree about the glide ratio though. It was amazing.
    
    Steve

    
    Steve,
    
    I was really worried about the CG since two people I knew had had
    trouble with the CG as shown on the plan. I put faith in the designer,
    and went for it, and had no trouble. I suspect the two other guys (who
    both had models that zoomed almost uncontrollably) had in fact got
    incidences wrong. The planes would fly, but only with a *very* far
    forward CG, this makes them heavy of course, and you lose much of the
    pleasure of the design. 
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

>               <<< VMSZOO::DISK$WORK2:[NOTES$LIBRARY]RC.NOTE;2 >>>
>                  -< Welcome To The Radio Control Conference >-
>================================================================================
>Note 1517.38               First Flights (New Planes)                   38 of 40
>BAHTAT::EATON_N "Personal Name Removed to Save Cost" 41 lines  17-JAN-1994 07:59
>                              -< Flair Puppeteer >-
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (text elided)
>    is no fuss, no drama. This is a lovely plane to fly, and flew right
>    first time. I'd set the tickover very low, and on the first approach the
                             ^^^^^^^^
>    Laser quit, this demonstrated an amazing glide from the Pup, you'd never
>    believe that she's a biplane.
    
>    Nigel
    
Nigel,
    
    	Perhaps this is a case of people separated by a common language,
    but what is "tickover"?
    
    							Dave()    
    

    Two great nations divided by a common language - Winston Churchill.
    
    Tickover - Comes from the old british auto engines that could be heard to
    "tick-tick-tick" when at idle due to the valve train noise.
    
    
    E.

    ..that coming in dead stick could also be termed coming in "ticked
    off"?
    
    (sorry...)
    
    					Dave()

    Nice one :-)

    
    Amazing!
    
    An American four cycle engine idles, a British four stroke engine ticks
    over......
    
    Maybe I should get Eric to act as sub-editor on all my notes before
    publication!  8^)
    
    Cheers (or whatever your local equivalent is!)
    
    Nigel
     

    Just call it the "Low speed setting"
    
    :-)

    
    Hi all!
    
    Another first flight to report on (it's cold here, but not quite as bad
    a Mass. Yet!)
    
    I've been working on a Morris Models Predator. "Morris" is Stewart
    Morris, the chairman of my club, he kits the Predator which he also
    designed. It's a 50" high wing semi symmetrical section, aerobatic
    model. Balsa fuse/tail, foam wing, taildragger, all familiar stuff.
    
    It build into a rather pretty little model, fetchingly finished in
    yellow with black tiger stripes.
    
    First flight was amazing! I've fitted a Magnum .40, which is at the
    top end of the engine range (read it'll only just fit! 8^), and opening
    the throttle sent her scurrying down the strip like a rat up a
    drainpipe. Tracking pretty straight (or she would if I'd leave the
    rudder alone!), then tail up, and we have lift off! Acceleration is
    ummm, rapid? Three clicks of left aileron trim, and she's flying
    straight as a die. I reckon I'm getting the hang of this game
    y'know! 8^)
    
    Loops? Check. Rolls? Check. Stall? Check. Spin? Check. OK,
    aileron rates on high. Rolls? Bl***y H**l! Ever seen a fuselage with
    a half hitch in the middle? This model is going to give the local
    Wot-4's a run for their money (if I can keep it in one piece for long
    enough).
    
    So, rates back out, in for a landing, and....... Why's it coming down
    so fast? Ah. Dead stick. No fuss, no drama, slightly heavy
    touchdown, straighten the undercarriage out, fill up, richen engine
    slightly, and away!
    
    All this was accomplished on a pretty windy day, with gusts giving
    the odd adrenalin rush to liven the proceedings. All in all it was a
    very satisfying day, and I'm pleased with my Predator.
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    
    

    Nigel,
    
    
    	Sounds like a hot little number. I miss my WOT-4. I had a Super
    Tiger 60 on it and it performed nicely. Always got alot of comments
    on it's aerobatic capabilities. I should build another one some day.
    
    	Unfortunately, I got a little out of sorts one day and trashed the
    fuse. I gave the wing to Charlie who in turn gave it to Jack Z. who
    now has it installed on a scratch built design. So, part of it still
    lives. I made templates for everything, so I "could" build another one.
    
    
    Steve

    
    Steve,
    
    Yeah, the WOT-4 is very popular here, I was thinking about one, but I
    don't have a .60 kicking about here, and the .40 might have been
    working a bit hard to get a WOT-4 going. There's no doubt that Chris
    Foss designs are pretty sound, but I think the "Predator" flies to a
    similar standard.
    
    As for "cranking them out", my production line is empty. 8^( Unless
    Digital have a change of heart my modelling budget is looking a bit
    shaky. I'll just have to sell some of the collection to get some new
    toys!
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

  Steve,

  I have the fuse from your Wot-4!  It's in much better shape than my original
Wot-4 fuse...but I'll keep flying mine until there's more epoxy than wood in
it! :^)   Then I'll use your fuse and make a new set of wings (I have a set
of cores already cut).

                            Jim

    
    Ah, yes! The old "Composite" fuselage, 90% epoxy, with the odd bit of
    balsa to keep it in shape.
    
    I don't know whether it's a comment on WOT-4s or WOT-4 pilots, but
    these models seem to be unkillable. I've seen several fuselages
    disappear from the field in a zillion pieces, only to reappear like
    Arnie in "Terminator" the next week!
    
    I'll doubtless be able to offer a report on Predator crashworthiness in
    due course!
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

    Re. Jim
    
    	Did I give you that??????? I thought I junked it. Oh well, so the
    WOT-4 will have 2 new lives. I'm touched (in the head).

  Actually Steve, you gave it to Charlie who gave it to me.  I should get that
other set of wings finished just so I have another plane ready to fly.  

  And why would you trash that fuse???  Honest...it's in 1000% better condition
than mine!   I think the epoxy in mine has brought the weight up to the 
10 pound range!  :^)



                         Jim

    Ah yes. Now I remember. I thought I just gave him the wing.
    
    >>>I should get that other set of wings finished.....
    
    So that means I can see my WOT-4 fuse fly again sometime during the
    1996 olympics?????????

>>    1996 Olympics?????????



  Probably more like the 2096 Olympics!  :^)

    
    On the subject of Chris Foss models and REF: "I made a template"... 
    He came and gave a presentation at our club last year and although 
    covered by copyright he believes there are more WOT .... copies flying
    than have been purchased. I guess that's a back handed compliment and I
    suppose indirectly it keeps advertising his WOT nots..
    
    Thought's for the day
    Trev

From what I can gather, also, Chris Foss does not like giving out
replacement cowls etc for the reason of the copies out there. 

I need a cowl for a Acro-Wot / Wots-Wot. I damaged mine in a recent crash
and this time I think it would be easier to get a new cowl.

Eric.

    Eric,
    	He will sell you a cowl if you bought a kit.  Otherwise, no.  By
    the way, I make templates of every kit I buy to make spare parts or
    scratch build a replacement.  I seldom get to use them but I do lend
    them out.
    
    Charlie
    

    Yesterday saw the first flights of my new electric glider.  It was
    built around a fiberglass fuselage I obtained from NSP.  The wings
    are pink foam(cut by me), sheeted with obechi, employing the RG15
    airfoil, with a span of 66".  It has a V-tail, which was a real pain
    to get set up, but looks cool!  I am using an Ultra 900 motor with
    10 1000mah SCR's.  The flying weight of the plane is 54 oz. and the
    motor in conjunction with a 10x6 prop puts out 48 oz. of thrust.
    
    This being a TLAR(that looks about right) design, I had no idea what
    to expect.
    
    I was pleasantly surprised - it flies great!  After reducing ailerons
    from 100% to 30% it really grooved.  Climb is strong and quiet.
    
    And I am happy to report that I finally got the spoilerons right!  They
    come up 70 degrees and do a great job of slowing the glider down.
    
    I am very pleased, this may be my best flying electric yet!  The lower
    weight is really nice when landing.
    
    Roll rate should be super, I will be exploring this more fully this
    week.
    
    

hi all,

wednesday evening:

finally my hand launch glider is ready. as a matter of fact, during the 
maiden flights i had it crash a little hard onto the ground, so i had to do 
some minor repairs to it. the problem was, that the rx was thrown in losely 
into the fuselage (you know that impatient feeling when you are almost done 
and light is fading...) and due to the high acceleration during the launch 
it moved backwards, thus shifting the cg backwards...

thursday morning:

before coming to the office, i stopped at a bigger than soccer area in my 
town center (1 minute from my home!) and did some test throws. not yet 
satisfied, so i will do some sunset sloping this afternoon to set things up.

thursday evening:

with richard i went to a gentle slope and we flew in a gentle wind. it was
flying ok. during hard throws, the plane tends to turn left, so i got
something warped. but in normal flight no problem. we met rolf, an old pal
of mine and very experienced flier. he is great in finding the slightest 
lift, as a matter of fact he starts flying when everbody stops flying.
as he has never flown a hlg before and wanted to try, i handed him over the
tx and he managed a several minutes flight. he also certified, that cg and
trimming was ok. when catching the landing plane, the LE cracked...
he continued to fly, when during the last flight the plane went into high 
grass, against a pole that was hidden there.... wing snapped off, two ribs 
and the LE cracked. fortunately it was the same place where the LE cracked 
on the landing before!
we went home to richard and repaired the wing in about half an hour (sans
covering). the sad part is, that richards plane (same kit!) weighs 60 gramms
less! the wings had a difference of only 7 gramms, what can be explained by
some parts he left out. the rest is coming from the fuse.
richard replaced some heavy balsa parts with lighter ones, but the main
difference lies in the tail (again!) so he is able to use a lighter rx and
lighter nicads, without compensating this with lead. if i would go for
lighter nicads and rx, i _must_ compensate with lead, because everything is
already up in front. richard proudly told me, that his first hlg ever had a
weight of 175 gramms, and did use a rg 15.
btw, we are talking about a kit named libelle competition, the parts are 
milled, so perfect fit and easy building is guaranteed. my libelle weighs 
390 gramms.

cheers
joe t.

    My experience with handlauch is that weight is critical! I've found
    that just adding a few ounces in the normal course of repairs
    completely changes the way the plane flies. It must be light, 
    especially in the tail. That means use lightweight wood and sand, sand,
    sand. Round the corners of the fuse, both to reduce weight and reduce
    drag. 
    
    My preference is for a flying weight of 14 ounces (400 grams), and
    about 400 square inches wing area. With less weight, it floats better
    but doesn't penetrate as well, and can't launch as high because drag is
    holding it back. With more weight, it (obviously) doesn't float as
    well, and can't be launched as high due to the weight. It also hurts
    more when you try to catch a heavy plane (Ooof!).
    
    Dave
    

    
    Well, talk about a perfect weekend for a maiden flight!!
    
    With a bit of wind on Saturday, I put off flying the Junkers until
    about 5:00 when the wind started to calm down...  After an uneventful
    pre-flight and setup, I taxied it around a bit..  I was surprised at
    how effective the rudder was in steering (it only has a tail skid).
    Boy, it does jump left when you give it some throttle!!
    
    Mike and I had tweaked the engine earlier and it seemed to be running
    fine.  So, standing behind it I gave it throttle and kept it straight.
    I immediately notice that I need a bit of down stick/trim to keep the
    nose down and out of a stall...  But, at about 10-15' in the air, the 
    engine dies.  Luckily, I had enough room on the runway, but I was
    basically stalled at this point, and the plane made a solid 3 point
    landing on its wheels and nose.   
    
    The gear was a bit bent, but other than that it looked OK.  So I fired
    it up again.  Just before taking off though, I rechecked the control
    moevements and found that 1 aileron wasn't moving correctly.  Shut down
    and find that the mounting plate for the servo in the wing had popped 
    out (tearing a bit of the foam wing with it).  Done for the day..
    
    When I fiberglassed the wings, I figured I wouldn't cut the access
    panel until I had to..  So, I cut it open (ouch!) and replaced the 
    servo.  It was just as well, as I was a bit concerned about the 
    chattering that that servo was doing.
    
    Sunday morning I headed out to the club meeting with the plane again
    ready to go.  After the meeting, I wanted to be the first one up 
    so I would not have a lot of distractions..  That worked out OK..
    Bob Lacroix helped re-tweak the engine (a bit richer this time) and 
    we gave it another go.
    
    Well, for an 11# airplane, the 1.20 was more than enough.  It climbed
    out nicely and handled with just a few clicks of trim.  On about the 
    3rd time around the field though, I got some shouts that my aileron
    was coming off!!  I immediately throttled back and landed...  All the
    hinges appeared to be fine, but better safe than sorry..  The wing is
    so thick where the ailerons are that the gap is sizeable and with the
    sun directly behind, you could see the light through it.
    
    I will say this, those colors REALLY work to camouflage the plane..
    I was really unsure at first which way was up!  It got better as the 
    day progressed and the sun got higher.
    
    I got in 2 more flights with it, getting more comfortable with each
    one.  My on-board glow is not working for some reason, so I need to
    debug that and that will help slow it down on approach and keep it
    running on the grass...  I had a couple of long walks as we were
    landing over the trees.
    
    Now I have a couple of weeks to add some details (pilot, guns) as well
    as a few cosmetic repairs from my hard landing..
    
    Big planes sure do fly nice though!!
    
    cheers,
    jeff
    

    I finally flew the sig cub I've been working on for what seemed
    like forever and although there are a few more things I'd like to do,
    they aren't anything that would keep me grounded. My first attempt
    was unsucsesful, I ran it into grass. Engine restarted, I pointed it
    down the runway, ease off the elevator, tail comes up,she gets light
    on her wheels, add a little up elevator and she lifts off. Man, I 
    haven't been this nervous since I started flying. Now, I've flown
    high wing trainners, low wing sport planes, shoulder wing sport planes,
    flat bottom, semi semetrical, fully semetrical wings, but this bird
    was different. Cubs have very little dihedral and maybe this is why
    I felt it flew different. I find I have to turn it with ailerons AND
    rudder. To those of you with loads of experience, this may come
    as no surprize but it sure wasn't somethig Im used to. About half
    way through the flight, she started waht I think is called a flat spin.
    The nose was comming around the tail, I just stood there saying to my
    self " theres gonna be alot of pieces to pick up", but suddenly I was
    putting in opposite rudder and ailerons and advancing the throttle.
    She stopped spinning and I was able to climb out. It started to spin 
    after attempting another turn, this time, I corrected right away.
    The landing was horrible but I got to take her home with only a
    few cracks to repair. I can't wait till next time, but tell me,
    are planes of this type prone to spins, do they all need rudder to
    help turn, should I reduce the throw on the ailerons from the suggested
    throw? What can you tell me about planes like the cub and how the fly?
    
    
                                                           Thanks, Jim
    

    Congrats on your first flight!!  Always exciting!!
    
    re: "I've been working on for what seemed like forever.."  
    
    My wife is wasting no words reminding me that the Nieuport-11 is about
    to have its 10th birthday in our house, and it is still not done..  At
    least I have been working on it lately!
    
    re: needing rudder...
    
    The Goldberg Cub is very responsive to ailerons, and does not *require*
    rudder during a turn.  However, they do seem to look better if I
    remember to use the rudder.
    
    re: spins
    
    It sounds like your CG is still too far aft..  You were OK when the 
    fuel tank was full, but after you burned some off, the CG moved back.
    I would certainly add a bit more weight to the nose..
    
    Again, congrats on your first flight!!  What field do you fly out of?
    
    Cheers,
    jeff
    

    Well, to begin with, it's the Sig cub, secondly, it didn't show
    any signs of being tail heavy in flight unless the spin is the only
    indication. As a matter of fact. she flew just about hands off with
    little trim corrections. If Im not mistaken, you can make a plane
    spin on purpose if you want, can't you? I've been helping a guy from
    fitchburg learn to fly. He has a friend that owns a huge field he cuts
    hay from and has agreed to let him cut a runnway on the property. The 
    only draw back is I gotta drive an hour each way each time he wants
    to fly but hey, we're the only two there so we get in a lot of flying.
    Normally, I fly in Tewksbury with the 495th r/c squadron, how about
    you?

    If I'm not mistaken, the Goldberg Cub has a "scale" wing. I think they
    designed the wing right from the original factory plans. What this
    generally means with cubs is that you "have" to get used to using the
    rudder. At slow speeds during take off and landings, your ailerons will
    be "much" less effective and you'll need the rudder to correct for 
    heading changes. I know exactly what you mean when you say it "feels"
    different and it's because the cub wants to drag it's tail if you
    don't use rudder to make a "co-ordinated" turn. Most people with
    computer radio's mix the rudder and ailerons so that this happens all
    of the time.
    
    The other thing I've noticed on almost every cub I've flown is that
    they tend to want to "tuck under" during a turn. Fly the cub more scale
    like by keeping the turn shallower, using rudder, and easy on the
    elevator to cure this. As Jeff said, make sure you check the CG. The
    cub should balance on the main spar with the tank empty.
    
    Check your control throws. Again, Jeff is correct when he says that the
    cub is very responsive to ailerons. Also to elevator. Try doing a loop
    (several mistakes high) holding full up elevator. If, when pulling out
    of the bottom of the loop, the cub get's unstable, or outright snaps on
    you, you have too much elevator throw and need to reduce it. When you
    can hold full up elevator through a loop, that's the right throw.
    
    The cub is also very responsive to rudder. If your not used to using
    the rudder, and you have too much rudder throw, and couple that with
    the cubs tendency to "tuck", it's easy to understand how you could have
    gotten into a spin/spiral.
    
    Work on fixing ONE THING AT A TIME, and you'll have loads of fun with
    the Cub.
    
    BTW, the Anniversary Cub I used to have was flown with an OS45 2
    stroke. I rarely flew it above half throttle and usually flew it at a
    quarter throttle. Too much speed with a cub will make it act funny
    also.
    
    Regards,
    
    Steve

    It's the SIG cub. All the information is the same.
    
    I live in Leominster. What field in Fitchburg do you use. If you want
    to meet out there sometime, let me know and we can check out the Cub.
    
    
    Steve

    Yup Jim, I am aware that you have the Sig Cub..  We had that discussion
    already! :-)  I was just qualifying my statement about the flight
    characteristics..  I have a Goldberg Cub and it is very responsive 
    to ailerons.  You asked about flight chars. of cubs in general..
    
    The more tailheavy the plane is, the flatter the spin.  Yes, you can
    spin any plane.  But my (full size) Beech Sundowner is so nose heavy,
    that it will never end up in a flat spin.  Step on the opposite
    rudder, spin stops.
    
    If the CG is too far back, the flat spin will be unrecoverable.  It
    sounds like yours *MIGHT BE* a hair too far back.  Some people like
    a reward CG as it can make the plane more responsive..  Leave it there
    if you like the flatening spin, or move it forward to make it more
    stable.
    
    Remember, the CG on the plans is the theoretical point for that airfoil
    and airplane combination.  If the airfoil is sanded, the
    characteristics can be changed and the CG may also need to be changed.
    
    Sounds like you have a nice field!  I fly with the Southern NH Flying
    Eagles in Merrimack and New Boston, NH..
    
    Cheers,
    jeff
    

>                     <<< Note 1517.64 by CSLALL::ONEILL >>>
>                                -< what a rush >-
>
>    I finally flew the sig cub I've been working on for what seemed
...
>    I felt it flew different. I find I have to turn it with ailerons AND
>    rudder. To those of you with loads of experience, this may come

I haven't found this on my SIG Clipped Wing Cub.
It turns slightly better with a little rudder mixed in but it just takes
a very little bit.

>    as no surprize but it sure wasn't somethig Im used to. About half
>    way through the flight, she started waht I think is called a flat spin.
>    The nose was comming around the tail, I just stood there saying to my

As suggested before make sure the CG is forward.  It is seems right add a
some lead and move it forward another 1/4" inch - just for test purposes.
It won't hurt and you'll know after one calm flight if it helped.
But... I would be real concerned about throws.  Elevator especially.
I can't spin my cub with the normal throws.  I use the snap roll switch
with much greater throws and even with that it will only spin if I am
under substantial throttle.  Once in the spin I can reduce throttle and
it will keep a tight spin but I can't enter one unless I really get on the
throttle first.

>    self " theres gonna be alot of pieces to pick up", but suddenly I was
>    putting in opposite rudder and ailerons and advancing the throttle.
>    She stopped spinning and I was able to climb out. It started to spin 
>    after attempting another turn, this time, I corrected right away.

I also agree with Steve Smith about the Cub wanting to drop thru a turn.
This causes you to add up elevator.  Now if you are using your aileron
to turn (don't we all) and trying to also add some rudder and it starts
to drop out like I believe Steve suggested and like mine seems to want to
do then when you start adding up elevator you are putting together all the
right ingredients for a snap roll/spin.  About the only thing I can suggest
here is decrease throws a bit and plan on loosing altitude on the turns
with a cub.  I'm sure glad this conversation came up because I was beginning
to feel like every slow turn with my cub was a down wind turn where I screwed
up the air speed and got myself going too slow.

>    The landing was horrible but I got to take her home with only a
>    few cracks to repair. I can't wait till next time, but tell me,
>    are planes of this type prone to spins, do they all need rudder to
>    help turn, should I reduce the throw on the ailerons from the suggested
>    throw? What can you tell me about planes like the cub and how the fly?
>    
>    
>                                                           Thanks, Jim

Good luck - keep us posted.

Bye          --+--
Kay R. Fisher  |
---------------O---------------
################################################################################


    

    A buddy of mine went out and bought the Hobbico sturdy birdy, 25 size,
    to learn on. He also has the dura plane. Im teaching him, or I should
    say, was teaching him to fly using the dura plane. Please don't respond
    with how bad a trainner these planes are, I've been over that with him
    quite a few times but the planes are bought and built, might as well
    use'm. I never did like the dura plane for obvious reasons although
    I will say, adding more engine down thrust made it fly much better
    than the stock set up. The sturdy birdi is basicly the same plane
    with the exception of it being a tail dragger, however, it flew
    real nice first time out. To make a long story longer, this guy has
    done two safe landings and now takes off by himself.

    I had my first flight on my Tiger Stick ARF last night.
    
    I've just got my wings at the beginning of summer and flew my Tiger
    trainer all summer up til now. I was doing the usual full speed low
    passes and hamerhead turns fighting my trainer all the way. Thought the
    Tiger stick would be a good second plane.
    
    Took a couple of nights to put together no major problems other than
    keeping the glue off the finish always give me heart attacks.
    
    I wanted to fly this plane all by myself even though I handn't flown
    anything but my trainer, I had read all the books ;').
    
    Took it to the field, did the range check and a double check to make
    sure all the controls went the right way, all looked fine.
    
    Fired up the engine, a Thunder Tiger 40 pro, started first flip. Took
    it to full throtle and touched the needle to just before leaned out.
    Seemed like the plane wanted to go.
    
    Out to the runway and the next problem was the tail dragger, no problem
    I'd read all the books about this too. Taxied around a bit to see if it
    steered, no problem.
    
    Well down to the end of the runway turn into the the cross wind ease on
    the throtle wait for the tail to lift and then hit it full, just like
    the book said. Seems the plane had read the book also as it lifted off
    just right, now I'm about 30, 40 feet in the air, thought it might be
    time to start my turn, hit the alerons and the plane banked real nice
    but it didn't turn, oh yah have to use the rudder, added the rudder and
    some up to crank her around and all was well. A little up trim and the
    plane flew hands off no problem.
    
    Even though all was well the knees were still shaking about, thought
    I'll run around a bit just to see how it goes than land. Landing was
    very easy, throtle back and the plane started to drop just at the right
    speed a litle left for the cross wind and we were on the ground safe and
    sound.
    
    A GREAT FIRST FLIGHT. Not only the first flight of the plane but my
    first first flight of a plane, if you know what I mean.
    
    2 more flights that night and I was feeling pretty good.
    
    Fred