Prawnik

Has anyone ever done an R/C conversion of the old Sterling Piper Vagabond kit? 31" wingspan, fully sheeted fuselage and wings. Should be a cute little short-wing Piper when I am done. Has anyone ever done one of these?

I am planning to convert one to a 4-channel r/c, either 1/2A or to electric. How much dihedral should I use? Any weak spots that could stand reinforcement? Additional mods to the kit?

Prawnik

One cheezy idea I had was to snag the electric motor, batteries, and prop out of a ParkZone Super Cub. Not a great performer, but adequate, and about the same size, wingloading, wingsection, and intended use as my little Vagabond. That battery might be a little heavier than what I want, though.

ptulmer

My Feedback: (5)

I have one of these in my hands right now and it's a very nice kit of parts.

http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXFAH8&P=0

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

33" span. It was actually DESIGNED for RC.
Let me say this: it was Sterling at their BEST.
Great model, builds fast, very sturdy, flies GREAT.
Mine had three channels and a Paw033, and I flew the living daylights out of it. Still have it, at my place down in florida.
One of the most enjoyable models I have ever owned.
Only potential weak spots are the landing gear(glue everything well, does not hurt to reinforce things there) and the front of the cabin where the wing mounts, that's the weakest spot.
I would probably not convert it to ailerons, it flew just great as designed for two(three, for me, thanks, I like having throttle) channels. You are not really going to be doing much rolling or inverted flight with a high wing piper, anyway.
What was really fun was taking it way up high and seeing how many spins before the ground started coming too close. Thirty or forty is do-able! Once or twice, just spun it right into the ground, with no real ill effects.
The wing is great, very strong, very easy to build.
Mine was covered in opaque solarfilm, and the only reason it was retired is that solarfilm is not deisel-proof, and eventually, the covering seperated from the coloring around the nose due to seepage.
Will thermal around in decent air, too.
With the PAW at idle, I remember getting forty minute flights with a little thermal activity.
Will loop and snap and do most two channel maneuvers.

Prawnik

Interesting, and glad to hear good things about this kit. I knew that R/C was an option with the Vagabond, and I know that Sterling actually built an R/C test-bed Vagabond, but I sort of assumed that R/C was an afterthought in the design.

With the lightweight radio equipment available today, is there a reason I should NOT go for ailerons? I don't roll my sailplanes much either or fly them inverted, but I like what ailerons do for turning.

I'll keep the landing gear and cabin-area reinforcement in mind. Thanks for the tip!

Ptulmer: my wingspan is a liitle longer than recommended for the Tower Hobbies conversion kit, and I am pretty sure that the Vagabond's built-up construction makes it heaver. Think it will still work reasonably well?

Prawnik

One more thing, EASYTIGER - do you recommend glassing up the cowling? IIRC it is quite thin and fragile.

ptulmer

My Feedback: (5)

Prawnik, first of all, I'm the last person in the world of RCU to recommend anything electric. This is my first shot at it. I was under the mistaken impression that the J-3 you spoke of was smaller than it is. Wingspan isn't nearly as important as weight. You can have a 60" glider that will work on the same system as a 31" sport plane. There are lots of other factors too.
My vote would be for a Norvel if it's big enough. That's the "Lincoln" of 1/2a engines. Deluxe items like a good carb and the longevity of a Ford.

Prawnik

Norvell .061 or the .049? Can you suggest a decent prop for the little squirt?

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Well, your guess is as good as mine, but I think RC was the primary thrust of the design. A large, all sheet FF put out around 1979 would not be a great marketing idea, and high wing CL jobs are not exactly hot fare, so, my guess is it was a purpose-built RC job. Too bad there were not more in that series, like there were in the smaller all-sheet series...
Ailerons, well, sounds like you know where you are going, adding them will only be an ounce or two. I would leave the dihedral stock, that way you have the R/E airplane as designed, then you can deal with ailerons on or off as you like it, whereas if you change the dihedral, it may never fly that great, who knows? Try it. Probably will fly best with coupled aileron-rudder, not just aileron turns.
Either norvel should be fine, you do want a throttle, though, a lot more fun.
Beleive it or not, my cowl is still intact after hundreds of flights, but it cannot hurt to reinforce it, you will need noseweight anyway, most likely. Reinforce around screw holes, that's where cracking starts.
Mine flew forever on the same cox hard rubber 6/3 prop, either norvel will turn it just fine.