Carl Weber's "Sequel"
01-22-2009, 07:40 PM
#26
My Feedback: (73)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA, Earth
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Guys,
Laser technologies may also be reached at: [email protected]
Sorry I forgot to put the email in my last post.
Leo
Laser technologies may also be reached at: [email protected]
Sorry I forgot to put the email in my last post.
Leo
01-23-2009, 05:13 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Belfast, IRELAND
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
Ray
02-08-2009, 05:27 PM
#30
My Feedback: (73)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA, Earth
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Guys,
I spoke to Dan at Laser technologies today. Good news. Dan has just finished a large laser cutting project and has time to move forward with a Sequel short kit. Dan said there has been enough interest in the project so he will start working on it.
Leo
I spoke to Dan at Laser technologies today. Good news. Dan has just finished a large laser cutting project and has time to move forward with a Sequel short kit. Dan said there has been enough interest in the project so he will start working on it.
Leo
02-16-2009, 05:03 PM
#31
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
I have a print of the original plans for Bob Violett's Shrike. Bought them when I was 13 years old. Purchased a flying fork on ebay a couple of years back. The owner also had a nib Shrike; which was his dad's. He wasn't going to part with this plane. [&o] I seems they lived in the general area where T&L Glassflite fabricated the fuselage's in Washington state.
I've been trying to remake the Shrike in Solidworks. But it ain't easy.
Jim
[/quote]ORIGINAL: RFJ
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
[/quote]
I've been trying to remake the Shrike in Solidworks. But it ain't easy.
Jim
[/quote]ORIGINAL: RFJ
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
[/quote]
02-17-2009, 11:17 AM
#33
Senior Member
My Feedback: (44)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: kuna,
ID
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
hi guys
i was reading thru the bd retracts website and they sell the flying fork also....http://bdretracts.com/products.htm#pneumatic_retracts part number and price B&D0021 Flying Fork $5.95 FYI
i was reading thru the bd retracts website and they sell the flying fork also....http://bdretracts.com/products.htm#pneumatic_retracts part number and price B&D0021 Flying Fork $5.95 FYI
02-17-2009, 07:44 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Perth, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
One wonders about the knife edge capability of the shrike considering there's so much area above the centreline and none below.
02-17-2009, 08:06 PM
#35
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Bob Violett's Shrike...knife edge capability
What do we know about the preferred cruise speed of Bob Violett?
FAI World Champion with Telford (pretty sure with Polecat), a very fast formula one model.
Vio-Jett ducted fan models which fly...very fast
Turbine powered scale and non-scale models...faster yet
Ever do a slow roll with a racing airplane...turns out a tooth pick at Mach 3.9 can knife edge pretty well.
My guess is that the intended cruise speed of the Shrike would allow it to knife edge fine...high alpha, probably not. Have enough rudder authority to fix a poor knife edge entry (if you were coming out of a 400 foot split "S").
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
Classically motivated
What do we know about the preferred cruise speed of Bob Violett?
FAI World Champion with Telford (pretty sure with Polecat), a very fast formula one model.
Vio-Jett ducted fan models which fly...very fast
Turbine powered scale and non-scale models...faster yet
Ever do a slow roll with a racing airplane...turns out a tooth pick at Mach 3.9 can knife edge pretty well.
My guess is that the intended cruise speed of the Shrike would allow it to knife edge fine...high alpha, probably not. Have enough rudder authority to fix a poor knife edge entry (if you were coming out of a 400 foot split "S").
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
Classically motivated
02-18-2009, 01:25 AM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Perth, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Actually I wasn't really commenting on the rudder area, more the whole design of it.
Having (this is my understanding) a lot of area above the trustline will translate into an uneven amount of lateral (trasnlated in knife edge to up-down) force about the centreline. much like having only one elevator. This in turn would lead to roll coupling in K/E and the sweep back may also add to increased elevator coupling, as the forces for the root are closer to the cg and the tip is further away.
Just a thought. I know That a lot of the old rudder only designs had massive sweep on the rudder to add a little but of "up elevator" effect on kicking the rudder, I'd assume that the shrike rudder would do the same.
Having (this is my understanding) a lot of area above the trustline will translate into an uneven amount of lateral (trasnlated in knife edge to up-down) force about the centreline. much like having only one elevator. This in turn would lead to roll coupling in K/E and the sweep back may also add to increased elevator coupling, as the forces for the root are closer to the cg and the tip is further away.
Just a thought. I know That a lot of the old rudder only designs had massive sweep on the rudder to add a little but of "up elevator" effect on kicking the rudder, I'd assume that the shrike rudder would do the same.
02-18-2009, 06:14 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Belfast, IRELAND
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
FAI World Champion with Telford (pretty sure with Polecat), a very fast formula one model.
Ray
02-18-2009, 01:09 PM
#38
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Sequel, Shrike...Just the facts...
RFJ,
Picky is what picky does (provide important and necessary details)
I hoped/assumed the details would be submitted. That photo looks familiar? Was this an American Aircraft Modeler cover? In any case, the AMA Museum has a pylon racing display which, I think, has a Polecat (orange)?
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
RFJ,
Picky is what picky does (provide important and necessary details)
I hoped/assumed the details would be submitted. That photo looks familiar? Was this an American Aircraft Modeler cover? In any case, the AMA Museum has a pylon racing display which, I think, has a Polecat (orange)?
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
02-19-2009, 09:07 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Belfast, IRELAND
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
the right stuff, and at the right time
Was this an American Aircraft Modeler cover
Ray
03-08-2009, 12:25 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Belfast, IRELAND
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
the AMA Museum has a pylon racing display which, I think, has a Polecat (orange)?
Ray
03-19-2009, 08:08 PM
#41
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Bud Weber's Sequel...
The power plant arrived today...NIB Super Tigre Blue Head, Mac's flow thru muffler and the Fox aluminum mount as specified in the construction article.
This was found via a tip from a contributor to the soon to be published "Classic Pattern-Trader" and picked up with shipping for less than $145.00 from an international on-line auction site.
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
Classicly Motivated
The power plant arrived today...NIB Super Tigre Blue Head, Mac's flow thru muffler and the Fox aluminum mount as specified in the construction article.
This was found via a tip from a contributor to the soon to be published "Classic Pattern-Trader" and picked up with shipping for less than $145.00 from an international on-line auction site.
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
Classicly Motivated
04-05-2009, 03:40 PM
#42
My Feedback: (73)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA, Earth
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Hi Guys,
I spoke to an at Laser Tech today. He has redrawn the Sequel plans since there were really no good clean copies available. The new plan will include one wing panel at full size detailing the landing gear set up. The original plan was lacking in this area. The first short kit was cut today. I will start a build thread on The Sequel in the next few days.
Leo, aka glockguy
I spoke to an at Laser Tech today. He has redrawn the Sequel plans since there were really no good clean copies available. The new plan will include one wing panel at full size detailing the landing gear set up. The original plan was lacking in this area. The first short kit was cut today. I will start a build thread on The Sequel in the next few days.
Leo, aka glockguy
04-06-2009, 06:44 PM
#44
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Weber's "Sequel"
Bud Weber's Sequel,
Question: Does a modeler want to reproduce the most accurate reproduction or does a modeler want to recreate the "flying characteristics" of the original model, which may be lighter, as accurate and more readily reproduced by the average modeler?
What do you mean?
Example #1: I want to reproduce an EXACT replica of Bud's Sequel. As a competition modeler I recognize that Bud would have used the finest and lightest hand selected balsa wood, sanded, whittled every wing tip, fuselage block, fin and rudder to save weight based on his choice to use mostly blocks of bals wood. A silkspun coverite, laquer primer and dope finish was chosen.
Limitations reproducing example #1: Wood selection is very critical for the fuselage, fin and rudder wood AND every effort will need to be made to save or 1 - 4 ounces will be mysteriously be UN-added during construction. The finish is simple, fragile, marginably able to handle moisture and requires great skill to apply and be light.
Example #2: I want to create the "flying characteristics" of the Sequel. The modern kit manufacturer recognizes the limitations in example #1 AND desires that the kit be easier for the least skilled modeler to reproduce with a high degree of accuracy. The modern manufacturer choses to simplify construction, re-engineer structures to create a lighter and more rigid structure. The builder may also choose to use a modern film covering as well.
Limitations reproducing example #2: Easier for the average modeler. Easy to find materials. Simple covering process. Longer lasting more consistent model due to more rigid construction.
Okay, you made the point: "The more modern the kit, the easier it will be for the average modeler to create or re-create the flying qualities of the original model."
The Sequel issue...Bud chose to use 3/4" blocks of balsa to make the fin and rudder. According to the construction article "...his kids liked the balsa shavings...and it could be built up..." I talked to Dan (Laser Tech) about this issue. I said that a built up fin and rudder would lighter, stronger, remain straighter longer and I will not need to buy $40 worth of wood to get a few precious pieces of 3/4" stock that is even close to Bud's competition model weight (my goal).
Long story short...It is my opinion that a purist will scratch build a model using the original plans...great, I admire your skills and abilities. The rest of us (90%+) want to "experience" the characteristic of the original model, removing all of the known variables like weight, ease of accuracy... using modern techniques.
A classic kit reproduction manufacturer may create an "exact" reproduction and other/s may create the simplest, 100% accurate without using different materials and techniques.
NO ONE METHOD IS BETTER OR WORSE.
Personally, I have a split personality. I have selected different kits for my different goals and expectations.
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
P.S. I generally try to edit spelling errors, confusing sentences or to simplify message.
Question: Does a modeler want to reproduce the most accurate reproduction or does a modeler want to recreate the "flying characteristics" of the original model, which may be lighter, as accurate and more readily reproduced by the average modeler?
What do you mean?
Example #1: I want to reproduce an EXACT replica of Bud's Sequel. As a competition modeler I recognize that Bud would have used the finest and lightest hand selected balsa wood, sanded, whittled every wing tip, fuselage block, fin and rudder to save weight based on his choice to use mostly blocks of bals wood. A silkspun coverite, laquer primer and dope finish was chosen.
Limitations reproducing example #1: Wood selection is very critical for the fuselage, fin and rudder wood AND every effort will need to be made to save or 1 - 4 ounces will be mysteriously be UN-added during construction. The finish is simple, fragile, marginably able to handle moisture and requires great skill to apply and be light.
Example #2: I want to create the "flying characteristics" of the Sequel. The modern kit manufacturer recognizes the limitations in example #1 AND desires that the kit be easier for the least skilled modeler to reproduce with a high degree of accuracy. The modern manufacturer choses to simplify construction, re-engineer structures to create a lighter and more rigid structure. The builder may also choose to use a modern film covering as well.
Limitations reproducing example #2: Easier for the average modeler. Easy to find materials. Simple covering process. Longer lasting more consistent model due to more rigid construction.
Okay, you made the point: "The more modern the kit, the easier it will be for the average modeler to create or re-create the flying qualities of the original model."
The Sequel issue...Bud chose to use 3/4" blocks of balsa to make the fin and rudder. According to the construction article "...his kids liked the balsa shavings...and it could be built up..." I talked to Dan (Laser Tech) about this issue. I said that a built up fin and rudder would lighter, stronger, remain straighter longer and I will not need to buy $40 worth of wood to get a few precious pieces of 3/4" stock that is even close to Bud's competition model weight (my goal).
Long story short...It is my opinion that a purist will scratch build a model using the original plans...great, I admire your skills and abilities. The rest of us (90%+) want to "experience" the characteristic of the original model, removing all of the known variables like weight, ease of accuracy... using modern techniques.
A classic kit reproduction manufacturer may create an "exact" reproduction and other/s may create the simplest, 100% accurate without using different materials and techniques.
NO ONE METHOD IS BETTER OR WORSE.
Personally, I have a split personality. I have selected different kits for my different goals and expectations.
Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS Parts and Service
P.S. I generally try to edit spelling errors, confusing sentences or to simplify message.
09-30-2010, 08:46 PM
#45
RE: Carl Weber's
I might get my chance to build the Shrike. I have a T&L Glasfite kit in the mail at the present time. Feel like I'm 12 years old again with that issue of American Aircraft Modeler.
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
ORIGINAL: RFJ
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
09-30-2011, 03:24 AM
#46
RE: Carl Weber's
Well, if I can't find a Shrike. I guess I might just have to recreate one. I'll try modeling it in solidworks first. Having some issues with the lack of detail on the plans for the tail section.
Jim
Jim
ORIGINAL: Jim_Purcha
I might get my chance to build the Shrike. I have a T&L Glasfite kit in the mail at the present time. Feel like I'm 12 years old again with that issue of American Aircraft Modeler.
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
I might get my chance to build the Shrike. I have a T&L Glasfite kit in the mail at the present time. Feel like I'm 12 years old again with that issue of American Aircraft Modeler.
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
ORIGINAL: RFJ
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
12-31-2012, 02:57 PM
#47
RE: Carl Weber's
ORIGINAL: Jim_Purcha
Well, if I can't find a Shrike. I guess I might just have to recreate one. I'll try modeling it in solidworks first. Having some issues with the lack of detail on the plans for the tail section.
Jim
Well, if I can't find a Shrike. I guess I might just have to recreate one. I'll try modeling it in solidworks first. Having some issues with the lack of detail on the plans for the tail section.
Jim
ORIGINAL: Jim_Purcha
I might get my chance to build the Shrike. I have a T&L Glasfite kit in the mail at the present time. Feel like I'm 12 years old again with that issue of American Aircraft Modeler.
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
I might get my chance to build the Shrike. I have a T&L Glasfite kit in the mail at the present time. Feel like I'm 12 years old again with that issue of American Aircraft Modeler.
Update October 6,2010 ... My "Shrike" arrived today. We had a misunderstanding somewhere this is what I was shipped. Model Dynamics Shriek.
Jim
ORIGINAL: RFJ
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
I'm sure the Sequel is a fine aircraft but if I had a flying fork this is what I would build. Bob Violett's Shrike. Well done Leo in making the mechanism available again. Would also be excellent on large gliders.
Ray
12-31-2012, 03:53 PM
#50
RE: Carl Weber's
No, the shriek is correct. I got a flying fork from an individual on ebay a few years back. Emailed him two years ago to convince him to sell me his shrike. He did. When I got the kit in the mail, the "Shrike" was a "Shriek". I quickly sold the "Shriek" on RCU classified sections for $100.00. Should have held onto it. Didn't think it would sell for $400.00.
A member of the RCG classic thread, thought his Dad still had a Shrike fuselage, and he searched for it, but it didn't turn up.
Jim
A member of the RCG classic thread, thought his Dad still had a Shrike fuselage, and he searched for it, but it didn't turn up.
Jim
