MTK

Dave, I've not seen anyone use the MAC to determine wing area before. MAC practically always will be a larger number than the average chord as you well know (for tapered planforms). It looks like your point is that some folks tended to skew the calculation slightly to suit?

In truth there's no practical flying difference between a 682 sq incher and a 707 sq incher at the typical weights our crates came out to.

BERUSTY

My Feedback: (3)

I have both kits from the era including the Pulsar and Skybolt.

Rusty Dose
Team Futaba

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Hey Matt,

I don't spend much time over on RCU anymore as it has become a somewhat terse site to navigate. I think the whole site probably just needs to be re-started from scratch. But, it is nice to see the forum still getting some action.

In reply, yes, my mac x span "back of the envelope" approach is really just to get a quick idea of the area involved. A proper calculation can be done geometrically. You are right though in that I wanted to see if being generous in my area estimate would result in an area more closely approaching spec area and even though it overshoots the actual area it is typically still shy of spec area. So generally speaking it does seem that the classics (and perhaps still today although I'd be surprised if the scale folks do that too) tended to overstate the wing area of the model.

Perhaps not, but it does affect other calculations typically used or offered as specs. Stating that a model has 40 more squares than it actually does seems like a marketing ploy to reduce the wing loading of the model on paper. In the end, when you are designing models and offering specs on those designs, it seems erroneous to me to blatantly provide an over spec. I get a little hung up on things like that because I design and stating that a wing has 5 more inches in span than it does and consequently more area just compounds all other calculations downstream. In short, I can't see any good reason to do it but it doesn't worry me too much either.

David

dhal22

Good to hear from Rusty.

stuntflyr

Yeah, he was a big deal in the start of the more visible Classic Pattern contests, his 2010 Chicagoland was my first Pattern contest ever.

dhal22

He had a Blue Angel that I wanted.

hook57

My Feedback: (21)

And it was a beauty of a Blue Angel too! I got lucky and picked up a BA last weekend (ala Sunshine of Germany, I think) along with a Curare from the same mfr.
Rusty did a great job with the Chicagoland Classic event, I met stuntflyr there in 2010.
Mark

dhal22

Those are some European ARFs I'd like to get my hands on, I just don't ever pull the trigger.

hook57

My Feedback: (21)

These are not ARFs David. These have epoxy glass fuselages with fully sheeted foam cores, both also have a complete hardware bag that includes pre bent gear legs, firewall, balsa tips and caps, etc. I think the manufacturer was Wega Sunshine.
Mark

dhal22

That's right, I do remember looking at those offers. Someday maybe.

frequent flyer

My Feedback: (6)

Moises Sanchez

I received your email asking about the Patricia. Hopefully you are reading this thread. I answered your question,

Yes I have this kit, plans and parts are available for it.

I attached a list also but your email address failed.

Try emailing me again possibly from another different email address if you can and I'll try to reply using it.

regards
Don

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Don,

how far off are the Summits from production? Which one will be available first? Are they all being made from original glass fuses?

Cheers, David

frequent flyer

My Feedback: (6)

All are original unbuilt kits that were glass fuses. I'm out of state on business this week. The curare is next because of all the paid orders, The Summit's will depend on the number of paid orders. But other than that I will just do them 123.

stuntflyr

I have that Patricia kit, now I need a build helper. I have so many kits now, nice Sig wood pacs too.
Glad I met Don... glad Don actually met the challenge. How many cottage guys have fallen by the wayside since 2010? Don does this all by himself, not one helper. Especially not me!
Chris....

mightyhorn

Three I'd love
1) Jerry Nelson's Sultan
2) Dale Root's Ascender
3) Dale Root's Little Freak

RC YEAGER

Wow! Only know the Sultan... 1962 I think... I was born in 1964. If the rest are of same period were talking planes designed for reeds and R/C... I'm sure they're nice, but doubt they could be seriously used in CPA or SPA contests because of their compromised designs... Antique maybe? Probably make decent sport planes though...

mobileraptor

My Feedback: (1)

Hello Frequent Flyer and all interested parties.

I posted in this thread several years back concerning an F1-Tomcat. Well after several moves and several jobs I have gotten to appoint where I feel I can get back into the hobby and start building again.

I picked this plane numerous years ago and am wondering if Frequent Flyer wound be interested in re-kitting it. I can still pull almost no history on this model and/or when it was flown or by who. I still find it a interesting kit with beautiful lines.


The kit is 100% untouched but the fuselage is not 100% perfect but with you skills you could probably have it ready to mold in very little time.

I would be happy to ship you the kit, all I would like is one kit in return once it is reproduced.


Here are some pictures to jog your memory.

Yak13

My Feedback: (17)

David, I just read this and would be very interested in your new Arrow spirited airframe. I love my Arrow and have a couple of RE Jetts that would really move it.

I especially like fast pattern planes, such as the Arrow. Sometimes overpowered according to classic standards, but the feeling is incomparable.

Ed

crankpin

My Feedback: (15)

F-1 Tomcat. This is a first look for me. Should be getting back in the shop soon, been away too long.

Crank

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Hi Ed,

thanks again for your inquiry. I replied to your post in the Mach-8 thread on RCG. If you can send me a PM with your email, we can discuss offline.

Cheers, David

stuntflyr

That is one cool looking model. It'd look so good painted as a Hawker Hunter, which it looks so much like. Very cool.
Chris...

thermaler

My Feedback: (46)

Which Hartman Zeus fuselage would that be?
This one?



Thank You,
Joe

crankpin

My Feedback: (15)

I remember the Hartman Zeus. Built one, no canopy, used the Taurus Wing cores We would modify the center section, make a swept wing, with straight TE.
Crank.

Michaelj2k

They are more acclimated to VR/CS events. http://www.vintagercsociety.org

Michaelj2k

FB's fuselage is the Zeus (Mk. I) which was designed to use the Taurus wing and tail. Hartman produced a number of fuselage designs, all called Zeus.