Cox .049 engine and guillows planes
08-13-2016, 09:25 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cox .049 engine and guillows planes
Hello everyone! this is my first post! I have come across an issue. Im looking to buy a cox .049 engine and put it on a guillows balsa kit plane but i dont know if it will fit. will it fit/work on a bf109 model 505? if not what is the next smallest plane i can get without spending a lot to use with the cox .049? Thanks!!
08-13-2016, 11:09 AM
#2
First, WELCOME!
Have you built model planes before, wood structures specifically?
The kit plans for the Guillows scale models mention converting to glow engine power, but I don't recall them including the details of how, or the wood parts to do it I have flown a converted Guillows Curtis Jenny (I think it was) a friend built for control-line. It was drastically tailheavy, but didn't have enough power to do anything silly. No great fun... Could have been much better.
Do you have any nearby friends who fly CL? If they have reasonable experience they could be a great help for both structure and tips on how to be sure it will be flyable.
Have you flown control line before? If not, and with an experienced friend, a simpler project can prevent disappointment. There are many simple 1/2A flyers, and most can bounce if the ground jumps up at them...
Luck, and I hope you can soon join us in the lasting pleasure CL can be.
Have you built model planes before, wood structures specifically?
The kit plans for the Guillows scale models mention converting to glow engine power, but I don't recall them including the details of how, or the wood parts to do it I have flown a converted Guillows Curtis Jenny (I think it was) a friend built for control-line. It was drastically tailheavy, but didn't have enough power to do anything silly. No great fun... Could have been much better.
Do you have any nearby friends who fly CL? If they have reasonable experience they could be a great help for both structure and tips on how to be sure it will be flyable.
Have you flown control line before? If not, and with an experienced friend, a simpler project can prevent disappointment. There are many simple 1/2A flyers, and most can bounce if the ground jumps up at them...
Luck, and I hope you can soon join us in the lasting pleasure CL can be.
08-13-2016, 11:54 AM
#3
Depends on your level of experience, and what you want to do. Fly it Controline, and you have the problem of fuelproofing, installing a belcrank, pussrod and making a working elevator. Fly it Free Flight, you have the problem of fuelproofing, getting it trimmed out and quite frankly I think a Cox .049 would be too hot for it. If I had to suggest, I'd point you towards the Brodak profile models for controline. You will still have to fuel proof the model but I think it would be a better match for that engine. They don't have a BF109, but they do have a nice Zero, Mustang, and a Wildcat if you dig the WWII types. But if you're new at model airplane building, start with something that has a lot of the dynamics for flying that kind of model already figured out. In my opinion, I think the combination you're suggesting, Cox .049 and 16.5" Guillows scale model, would be challenging even for an experienced modeler. You are wise to be doing your research first. Checkout the Brodak 1/2A models here. http://brodak.com/control-line-kits/...eries.html?p=1
08-13-2016, 07:32 PM
#4
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Lou for the kind welcome! As for your question, I have built a balsa kit with good results considering it was my first build. And about the kit being modified for cl, the booklet included states that you make a thing to hold a wire/string and you put it on the end of a stick... That was all lol. On the topic of cl flying, I have never flown cl but I plan to in the future. I also, unfortunately, do not have anyone I know of or any clubs that fly cl so I guess Im out of luck there. Thanks for a reply!!
08-13-2016, 07:47 PM
#5
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Tom! Thanks for sending me a reply also!! As for my experience level, I would say beginner. I was planning on doing free flight. I had recently bought a diesel cox .049 for a good price since I can't fine a .010 and I can't get a cheaper price on a .020. I did look at the link you included and the models are great! The stop sign plane is pretty cool! I do dig ww2 birds lol. As for the guillows bf109 I believe i read somewhere that the wing span is 20-22in but I never saw one in person. And I do agree with you about a .049 being kinda strong for a small plane. I am a new modeler so I probably think that it would not be a very good idea to do that lol. I do have a guillow stearman that my grandpa built and he didn't use tissue so It crashed and was never flown since then. It has a Cox .049 I believe but I can't really tell. It is also built for free flight and I'm afraid to try it. I was thinking of getting that kit for the engine I just bought. Would that be a wise choice for a free flight plane? Thanks again!!
08-13-2016, 08:58 PM
#6
I wouldn't suggest the Guillows Stearman to you. For that engine and your experience, you need a beginner model. Consider something like this. http://coxengines.ca/black-hawk-mode...kit-nomad.html Or a simple to build profile .049 Controline model like Brodak has. Seriously, as a beginner, you need easy and simple. Learn how that engine runs, as well making an aircraft stable to fly.
Last edited by Tom Nied; 08-13-2016 at 09:00 PM.
08-14-2016, 12:44 AM
#7
To your reply #4...
That sounds more like what we'd call "whip control!" It can be done without elevator control, but an important point to flying ANY model tethered is a control to adjust its altitude in flight.
Whip control depends on YOU turning around fast enough that centrifugal force keeps the line taut. (If a control-line bellcrank is installed to operate the elevator you'll need two lines and a 'handle' to rotate it so it can move a pushrod to a 'horn' on the elevator.)
Whipping requires pretty fast stepping around. Without elevation control you can do very little more than just swinging it around like a rock on a string. You'll be too busy keeping up the needed speed, and trying not to get VERY dizzy, to enjoy it for very long.
An engine powered model like Tom N suggests allows you to fly a circle of more than 30' radius, and to turn around will take a more comfortable 3.5 seconds or longer. You can much more easily keep your feet from getting tangled up...
Tom's points about fuel proofing are very important. Fuel for the little Cox engines is mostly alcohol, which could be used as a lacquer thinner. It also has a percentage of nitro to help the engine operate. Both are good solvents. Oil is mixed with them in the fuel, and it can soak into the wood and paper as the exhaust blows by. ...Makes things heavier AND weaker, not to mention less pretty.
If there are any model clubs, or active flying fields near you, you might find some fliers there who HAVE flown control-line. They can help. Most will probably try to convince you to "go RC," because that's what they are enjoying now. In over 60 years of messing with model flight, I have tried almost everything (before the recent quads - they don't interest me.) Only control line flying is physical, you FEEL the model in flight, and as you control it. Joysticks on a transmitter don't do that. Pre-setting controls on a free flight model gives NO physical feedback once you turn it loose.
I like to fly what I'm flying. CL requires that, and I enjoy it..
That sounds more like what we'd call "whip control!" It can be done without elevator control, but an important point to flying ANY model tethered is a control to adjust its altitude in flight.
Whip control depends on YOU turning around fast enough that centrifugal force keeps the line taut. (If a control-line bellcrank is installed to operate the elevator you'll need two lines and a 'handle' to rotate it so it can move a pushrod to a 'horn' on the elevator.)
Whipping requires pretty fast stepping around. Without elevation control you can do very little more than just swinging it around like a rock on a string. You'll be too busy keeping up the needed speed, and trying not to get VERY dizzy, to enjoy it for very long.
An engine powered model like Tom N suggests allows you to fly a circle of more than 30' radius, and to turn around will take a more comfortable 3.5 seconds or longer. You can much more easily keep your feet from getting tangled up...
Tom's points about fuel proofing are very important. Fuel for the little Cox engines is mostly alcohol, which could be used as a lacquer thinner. It also has a percentage of nitro to help the engine operate. Both are good solvents. Oil is mixed with them in the fuel, and it can soak into the wood and paper as the exhaust blows by. ...Makes things heavier AND weaker, not to mention less pretty.
If there are any model clubs, or active flying fields near you, you might find some fliers there who HAVE flown control-line. They can help. Most will probably try to convince you to "go RC," because that's what they are enjoying now. In over 60 years of messing with model flight, I have tried almost everything (before the recent quads - they don't interest me.) Only control line flying is physical, you FEEL the model in flight, and as you control it. Joysticks on a transmitter don't do that. Pre-setting controls on a free flight model gives NO physical feedback once you turn it loose.
I like to fly what I'm flying. CL requires that, and I enjoy it..
08-14-2016, 06:40 AM
#8
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't suggest the Guillows Stearman to you. For that engine and your experience, you need a beginner model. Consider something like this. http://coxengines.ca/black-hawk-mode...kit-nomad.html Or a simple to build profile .049 Controline model like Brodak has. Seriously, as a beginner, you need easy and simple. Learn how that engine runs, as well making an aircraft stable to fly.
08-14-2016, 06:56 AM
#9
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To your reply #4...
That sounds more like what we'd call "whip control!" It can be done without elevator control, but an important point to flying ANY model tethered is a control to adjust its altitude in flight.
Whip control depends on YOU turning around fast enough that centrifugal force keeps the line taut. (If a control-line bellcrank is installed to operate the elevator you'll need two lines and a 'handle' to rotate it so it can move a pushrod to a 'horn' on the elevator.)
Whipping requires pretty fast stepping around. Without elevation control you can do very little more than just swinging it around like a rock on a string. You'll be too busy keeping up the needed speed, and trying not to get VERY dizzy, to enjoy it for very long.
An engine powered model like Tom N suggests allows you to fly a circle of more than 30' radius, and to turn around will take a more comfortable 3.5 seconds or longer. You can much more easily keep your feet from getting tangled up...
Tom's points about fuel proofing are very important. Fuel for the little Cox engines is mostly alcohol, which could be used as a lacquer thinner. It also has a percentage of nitro to help the engine operate. Both are good solvents. Oil is mixed with them in the fuel, and it can soak into the wood and paper as the exhaust blows by. ...Makes things heavier AND weaker, not to mention less pretty.
If there are any model clubs, or active flying fields near you, you might find some fliers there who HAVE flown control-line. They can help. Most will probably try to convince you to "go RC," because that's what they are enjoying now. In over 60 years of messing with model flight, I have tried almost everything (before the recent quads - they don't interest me.) Only control line flying is physical, you FEEL the model in flight, and as you control it. Joysticks on a transmitter don't do that. Pre-setting controls on a free flight model gives NO physical feedback once you turn it loose.
I like to fly what I'm flying. CL requires that, and I enjoy it..
That sounds more like what we'd call "whip control!" It can be done without elevator control, but an important point to flying ANY model tethered is a control to adjust its altitude in flight.
Whip control depends on YOU turning around fast enough that centrifugal force keeps the line taut. (If a control-line bellcrank is installed to operate the elevator you'll need two lines and a 'handle' to rotate it so it can move a pushrod to a 'horn' on the elevator.)
Whipping requires pretty fast stepping around. Without elevation control you can do very little more than just swinging it around like a rock on a string. You'll be too busy keeping up the needed speed, and trying not to get VERY dizzy, to enjoy it for very long.
An engine powered model like Tom N suggests allows you to fly a circle of more than 30' radius, and to turn around will take a more comfortable 3.5 seconds or longer. You can much more easily keep your feet from getting tangled up...
Tom's points about fuel proofing are very important. Fuel for the little Cox engines is mostly alcohol, which could be used as a lacquer thinner. It also has a percentage of nitro to help the engine operate. Both are good solvents. Oil is mixed with them in the fuel, and it can soak into the wood and paper as the exhaust blows by. ...Makes things heavier AND weaker, not to mention less pretty.
If there are any model clubs, or active flying fields near you, you might find some fliers there who HAVE flown control-line. They can help. Most will probably try to convince you to "go RC," because that's what they are enjoying now. In over 60 years of messing with model flight, I have tried almost everything (before the recent quads - they don't interest me.) Only control line flying is physical, you FEEL the model in flight, and as you control it. Joysticks on a transmitter don't do that. Pre-setting controls on a free flight model gives NO physical feedback once you turn it loose.
I like to fly what I'm flying. CL requires that, and I enjoy it..
08-14-2016, 07:22 AM
#10
Long time ago, early in my modeling career, I built a Guillows Arrow. Flew it free flight with a Cox .020 powering it. It was one of my first earliest successes. Flew nice large circles slowly gaining altitude and when the engine cutout, glided down to a nice landing. Myself and my friends who were with me, we were just elated about the flights it would do. Tissue covered, Painted with very thinned out Butyrate Dope, it looked great when new. Eventually the fuel soaked into the tissue and it became heavier and the structure weakened to the point it was un-flyable. Not a terrible thing considering how much I learned building that plane. It was fun, might even build another now electric powered. So it seems you "groove" to the Guillows models. Did the Hawker Hurricane fly, or just go as far as you could throw it? There is a difference.
08-14-2016, 08:34 AM
#11
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Long time ago, early in my modeling career, I built a Guillows Arrow. Flew it free flight with a Cox .020 powering it. It was one of my first earliest successes. Flew nice large circles slowly gaining altitude and when the engine cutout, glided down to a nice landing. Myself and my friends who were with me, we were just elated about the flights it would do. Tissue covered, Painted with very thinned out Butyrate Dope, it looked great when new. Eventually the fuel soaked into the tissue and it became heavier and the structure weakened to the point it was un-flyable. Not a terrible thing considering how much I learned building that plane. It was fun, might even build another now electric powered. So it seems you "groove" to the Guillows models. Did the Hawker Hurricane fly, or just go as far as you could throw it? There is a difference.
Sounds awesome! I wish i could have saw it! the hurricane did fly pretty good with me throwing it and it did good with the rubber band for power!
08-14-2016, 09:01 AM
#12
So then I'd suggest, buy the Guillows Messerschmitt BF-109, build it, fly it with rubber power. You cant go wrong. It will strengthen your building/flying skills and satisfy your desire for building/flying WWII scale models. There's nothing wrong with learning on a Guillows model.
Last edited by Tom Nied; 08-14-2016 at 09:02 AM. Reason: remove a word
08-14-2016, 09:22 AM
#13
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So then I'd suggest, buy the Guillows Messerschmitt BF-109, build it, fly it with rubber power. You cant go wrong. It will strengthen your building/flying skills and satisfy your desire for building/flying WWII scale models. There's nothing wrong with learning on a Guillows model.
08-14-2016, 09:33 AM
#15
It might work. Probably better scaled up to 32". I just think with the power of a Cox .049, you'd have better results with wingspans around 32". But what do you got to lose. Have fun with it
08-14-2016, 09:39 AM
#17
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
true. im sorry for asking so many questions, but how would one scale up a kit plane? Thanks
08-14-2016, 09:41 AM
#18
Yeah. But that's rubber powered, I think. It's pretty cool, definitely a neat project. Actually starting to get my interest. He did a pretty good job. Still think it would be better at 32" with that engine.
08-14-2016, 09:49 AM
#19
With a printer you could enlarge the plans and the laser cut parts. It would take some work, but basically you are redrawing the plans at a larger scale. Times 1.4 or 1.5 puts you in the ballpark, about 34". Not a simple task. Sizes of wood go up, some areas of stress need to dealt with. Not sure if you want to do that.
08-14-2016, 09:52 AM
#20
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the one in the pic is a rubber powered plane and i agree, he did do a good job! I will definitely scale up the wings if i am able to
08-14-2016, 11:17 AM
#22
I'm not sure what series Guillows you are looking at, so be careful how you scale it up. There's a 400 (24 3/8") and 500 (16 1/2") series BF-109. Suggest buy the larger one. Also, do more research, don't just take my ideas as gospel. I'm guessing from 50 years of experience. So you might want to find and contact a free flight group that could give you even more info as far as scaling up and what you need to do to scale up a Guillows model.
08-14-2016, 11:45 AM
#23
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I understand. I was actually gonna get the 500 series which i thought was the larger model since I didn't know they made to different ones. After looking at the price and size i realized I could get a 1000 series p47 for a little more and the wing span is 30.5" I decided to try and get that one. I just got to sell some stuff first...
08-14-2016, 12:21 PM
#24
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure what series Guillows you are looking at, so be careful how you scale it up. There's a 400 (24 3/8") and 500 (16 1/2") series BF-109. Suggest buy the larger one. Also, do more research, don't just take my ideas as gospel. I'm guessing from 50 years of experience. So you might want to find and contact a free flight group that could give you even more info as far as scaling up and what you need to do to scale up a Guillows model.
08-14-2016, 01:21 PM
#25
NO. Definitely not. It's my guess for a free flight scale model with that enginel, built light. You really need to check with a group that flies scale models with that kind of engine. And my guess is that most free flight scale fliers are using either rubber power or electric. As you know, glow or diesel power is messy, and for free flight there are better alternatives . Try a Google search for .049 scale free flight models. Might give you a better idea of power to size relation.