rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

You know, the same thing has happened in SAM. Despite their preamble, it would get to the point where everyone was flying the same thing: a Lanzo Bomber with a Super Tigre. Although no one called it as such, it was a "one-design/engine event."

propbuster

My Feedback: (1)

No, more like $300 to $500 depending on the amount of completion per customer order. In no way can I compete with a $90 Chinese Kaos, but that's not what I'm trying to do. I'm going to offer custom made, per order planes that you just can't find anywhere anymore, crafted by real RC veteran builders.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

----------------


I wish you much success. I will most likely be a customer.

Sport_Pilot

Well looks like Airborne has discontinued the Intruder, so maybe that is up for grabs. A fiberglass one might be marketable.

roncoleman

My Feedback: (14)

I wish you much success also. I will be waiting.

roncoleman

My Feedback: (14)

I n reply to 8187 & Rainedav

That just takes all the fun out of it.

Deadstik

My Feedback: (8)

Sport Pilot,

I kit the ORIGINAL Kirland A-6 Intruder.... email me at [email protected] and I'll shoot you an email....nice thing about this forum... all you have to do is ask......


Dan Hines
Carolina Custom Aircraft

r/cdawg

Dan,

That is a great picture of Jim and his Intruder. I always loved the military trim scheme he had on his original. Did he ever do a "40" sized Intruder? I know he was one of the first to downsize with his Mustang X (I think I have plans for the "X" somewhere). Also, to show what can be learned in this forum I never knew that the Lanier Jester was based on Jim's Citron. I had a Jester around '77 or so with a Super Tiger small case .60. One of the nicest flying planes I ever owned.

dawg

Mturowski

Check the AMA website. There's a listing for the "Daddy Rabbit" by Whitley. Plan no. 30729. Probably the same plane we're talking about, although the picture of that great looking Daddy Rabbit in this posting looks to be modified a little bit from the plans in the posting that accompanies it. The mods look good and make it a cleaner plane. I ordered the plans from the AMA, 15 bucks plus 5 shipping, they knock off a buck and a half if you're an AMA member.

mshafer

Just an opinion from a 70's pattern flyer but the Phoenix V was the BEST flying model of the pre 1976 era IF you kept the weight down. Won alot of contests with mine flying against those Mach 1's, Intruders and the like.

mshafer

FYI

I spoke with Wing Mfg and they plan on kitting the Phoenix V shortly and promised a kit in "several weeks" but if memory serves me, they were going to have the Phoenix V out late last Summer also.

I'd sure like to get my grubby hands on one or two of the V's

Again, in my opinion, in competitent hands, the P5 would clean up on the Daddy Rabbits.. 5 second slow rolls at 50 feet altitude with a Rossi screaming is a sight and sound to behold. (opposed to those buzzing .91 4 strokes on those Daddy Rabbits)

I'm trying to talk Mark Radcliff (ring any bells?) into flying SPA with me.. he lives pretty close.

eness76-RCU

My Feedback: (13)

Hey I was trying to get Mark Radcliff to fly SPA as well!!

Stripes

My Feedback: (19)

Let us know when you get them if that is indeed the original Daddy Rabbit plan.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Yes, but look at the weight of the OS .91 and the four ounces of lead in the tail. That has to suck.

I'm fitting my Intruder with a Rossi .60 and Ultrathrust muffler. I honestly don't see how the OS .91 four-stroke is going to beat that unless folks are running 30% heli fuel.

8178

My Feedback: (17)

Yes! 30% is what they do!

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Problem is, a Mach 1 is designed to fly with retracts, which are banned in SPA competition. Those old ballistic screamers don't fly for beans with the landing gear hanging out.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Hmm, I wonder how many head shims I'd need for the Rossi .60 to burn 30% heli fuel...?

Sport_Pilot

Ed,
Almost all of the SPA planes were designed for retracts. Besides most planes sold are not used in the SPA. They all fly well, just not as fast as the original. If using a two stroke, I would suggest a tail dragger to gain back some speed. Of course you could shim the head up and use 30% heli fuel, but the last time I went to a meet they were using mostly 20/20. Not sure if an OS FS will run well on 30% heli fuel.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Since the SPA rules have been "bent" to increase participation, why not bend them a bit more and let folks use pipes and retracts if they so desire? At least pipes and retracts were actually used on most of these aircraft. Four-strokes running high nitro did not even exist back then.

Personally, I would rather see a return to what was actually used in the appropriate period and then separate the competition classes by gear used in the appropriate era. Then again, I doubt that anyone is all that serious in SPA. And if they are, they are missing the point. Just like they did back in the Seventies!

I doubt if SAM competition bans the use of pipes and retracts!

BobHH

My Feedback: (18)

Guys, just a bump on the Mid-South Vintage RC Society Fly-in May 13 and 14th. We will be having a Class III Pattern Competition with some nice trophies (See Below) as part of the event. If you are available come on down. I know Dan at Wing Mfg will be down and showing some of his wares (Rabbit, Banshee, Cure Air, Cutlass, Phoenix 5, Trouble Maker, Nutcracker, Quick Fli III and Eyeball to name a few) along with Deadstik Carolina Custom Models and Jeff with Home and Hobby Solutions with his Taurus and Kwik Fli III. If you get a chance go to the website http://midsouthflyin.tripod.com. Hope to see everyone there!

Bob Harris
Early RC Models

Sport_Pilot

Pipes were not that common till after 76. Except for FAI competion which is where they grew from. Retracts were used in the 60's but not that common till the early 70's.

They are trying to keep costs down. They don't want people to keep upping the anti as they do in regular pattern. I can see allowing retracts (though I doubt it is any real advantage), but adding pipes would start a gravitation to expensive hot two strokes. I don't want to have to buy one of Dubb Jetts engines to be competitive any more than I want to spend money on a YS.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

---------------


On the aircraft that were designed for fixed gear, I can understand not permitting them to use retracts. The same logic would say that four-strokes would not be permitted on models from eras when four-strokes did not exist.

I don't want anyone to get upset. We're just chewing the rag here. This has to have been an issue that generated many, many hours of dialog. Some of it quite heated, I'm sure.

I'm jumping into SPA flying with the rules as they are and I have no intention of trying to change a single rule. It just seems a bit odd from a newbie's perspective. I'll get over it.

Maybe I'll get with the program and use the Rossi .60 on something non SPA. I have only one .91 four-stroke at the moment. I do happen to have a Saito 1.00, but that is not eligible. My new Saito .82a might be a good compromise while powering a Kaos 40 ARF. It should not lack one bit for power, but knife edge and point rolls will suffer. No, not because of the engine, but because of the airframe. With the way that I fly these days, no one will be able to tell which suffers the worst. <G>

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

Well, if the 90 4-stroke anachronism is ok, and the goal is to keep the competition affordable, then why not allow 2-stroke .75s? The Super Tigre and Tower .75s are only about $5 to $10 more than the sixties. When you can buy a Tower .75 for $94.99 compared to $249.99 for an OS Surpass .91, I start to get confused about the validity of the cost argument.

Sport_Pilot

The limit up till the early eighties was 10 cc. So that is the rational for the .61 two stroke. Several years before they made the size unlimited they allowed the .91 four stroke, which was at that time equivilant. If you allow .75 two strokes, then that would give them the edge, then the four stroke fans would want their limit increased to 1.00, then the two stroke fans would be crying, etc. There is supposed to be an antique competition with pre 70's pattern planes limited to .61 loop scavenged engines or .70 four strokes. Perhaps they should be restricted to retracts and allow the normal competition to have retracts, but only if two stroke powered. They allow the Ultrathrust muffler so that is almost piped.

mshafer

Just my opinion once more but pre 1976 designs (as per SPA rules) were designed around 10cc engines and retracts. I understand the rationale of cheaper (no retracts nor "hot" 10 cc setups) but crippling a good design with fixed gear and then compensating by allowing more horsepower four strokes just seems.... wrong---> Advantage Daddy Rabbit

Mike Shafer