3W Super Chipmunk ??
12-10-2012, 05:57 PM
#3
Member
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Baltimore,
MD
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
Hey,
Know this post is old...but I just picked up an unbuilt 3w Super Chipmunk. Did you ever build and fly yours?
I would be interested to know.
Sean
Know this post is old...but I just picked up an unbuilt 3w Super Chipmunk. Did you ever build and fly yours?
I would be interested to know.
Sean
12-12-2012, 03:20 AM
#6
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
Great, I consideredscratch building a Chipmunk this winter and purchased a photo pack and three view for Bob Banka. Decided to redo an ARF Cherokee instead however I'm not having as much fun.
12-13-2012, 05:34 AM
#9
My Feedback: (23)
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
MilkMarsh,
Thanks for the pics. I had bought a 3W 75 for mine and was thinking it was too much. A 50cc might be better.
I was also thinking about switching out the solid stiff landing gear that come with the kit in favor of something that would absorb the shock of all but perfect landings.
Any other tips on building or flying would be appreciated.
Thanks,
paul
Thanks for the pics. I had bought a 3W 75 for mine and was thinking it was too much. A 50cc might be better.
I was also thinking about switching out the solid stiff landing gear that come with the kit in favor of something that would absorb the shock of all but perfect landings.
Any other tips on building or flying would be appreciated.
Thanks,
paul
12-13-2012, 12:24 PM
#10
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
Plane is so light the landing gear should be no problem. Mine the colors are painted on the fuse, the white is the gel coat. the wings are monokoted. Plane flys like its on rails. I did a mod that allows the wings to be installed without removing the canopy, keeps it much simpler when out at the field. FYI Fibertech n more is in the process of marketing a 103" balsa and foam kit version. Suppose to be released this month, no price yet. Sopposed to be very light, 30 - 50 cc engine size.
12-13-2012, 03:37 PM
#12
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
ORIGINAL: mikmarsh
Plane is so light the landing gear should be no problem. Mine the colors are painted on the fuse, the white is the gel coat. the wings are monokoted. Plane flys like its on rails. I did a mod that allows the wings to be installed without removing the canopy, keeps it much simpler when out at the field. FYI Fibertech n more is in the process of marketing a 103'' balsa and foam kit version. Suppose to be released this month, no price yet. Sopposed to be very light, 30 - 50 cc engine size.
Plane is so light the landing gear should be no problem. Mine the colors are painted on the fuse, the white is the gel coat. the wings are monokoted. Plane flys like its on rails. I did a mod that allows the wings to be installed without removing the canopy, keeps it much simpler when out at the field. FYI Fibertech n more is in the process of marketing a 103'' balsa and foam kit version. Suppose to be released this month, no price yet. Sopposed to be very light, 30 - 50 cc engine size.
12-19-2012, 05:19 AM
#14
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northville, MI
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
I have been waiting months for the Fibertechnmore kit The flying thread looks really good. Initially he said it was going to be released in June or Juy.
12-22-2012, 02:22 PM
#18
Member
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Baltimore,
MD
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
Tony,
Yes but, that is one of the Great Planes Discontinued arfs. Flys very well on a Saito 1.50. I am working on a Dynaflite Chipmunk that I kitbashed into a Super. Modified wing heavily, fiberglass cowl and putting a Moki 30 CC gasser in it. I also picked up a G&L kit, very nice.Here are a couple of pictures. I like to build, would do it full time if I could. Started flying as a youngster in the late 70's.
Sean
Yes but, that is one of the Great Planes Discontinued arfs. Flys very well on a Saito 1.50. I am working on a Dynaflite Chipmunk that I kitbashed into a Super. Modified wing heavily, fiberglass cowl and putting a Moki 30 CC gasser in it. I also picked up a G&L kit, very nice.Here are a couple of pictures. I like to build, would do it full time if I could. Started flying as a youngster in the late 70's.
Sean
12-24-2012, 09:30 PM
#19
My Feedback: (28)
RE: 3W Super Chipmunk ??
ORIGINAL: jrlane
Note to Paul: Would sell the 3W Chipmunk kit? Please email me at [email protected].
John Lane
Note to Paul: Would sell the 3W Chipmunk kit? Please email me at [email protected].
John Lane
What John REALLY wants for Christmas ?? One of these 3W kits to build.
May consider a complete airframe.
He is a serious buyer if anybody has a 3W kit they would be willing to sell. His e mail is in the quote about..
Somebody ? Anybody ?
Merry Christmas !!
07-28-2014, 01:25 PM
#20
My Feedback: (20)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Highland ParkIllinois
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am my readying my 3W Super Chipmunk for an event and was looking to find the CG again, without much luck. Fortunately the original builder marked the fuselage, always a good idea. So to answer the question 6 1/4 back from the root rib of the wing itself will give you a safe start point, mine is right at 6 3/8. The model flies well at this CG and after downsizing the engine to a 3W 50 and changing exhaust systems I needed to add a bit to the nose, moved the ignition battery up onto the engine box and added a bit of weight.
My experience with this model is singular and perhaps the kit was a very early version. The original set up was a 3W 60 with a canister exhaust mounted in the fuselage. I bought the the airframe RTF with the caveat that it fluttered badly, it was at a good price. I worked on the tail and when I decided all was well off to the field. Take off and the first few laps were beautiful. Since things looked great I throttled up to about 75%, the entire field heard the tail shake, back off the throttle and landed, knocked the gear loose on one side.
4 yrs later I replaced the 60 with a 50, built a real scale trussed mount for the 50, about 2.5 inch legs, very scale. When the thing was ready to fly I talked to Cactus Aviation about the flutter issue, Bobby and I had talked about this before and he asked me about the mounting system and I told him scale engine mount. When he asked how long the stand off was and I told him 2.5 inches he said well that's the flutter problem with a one lunger on this they really thump... I cleaned the firewall and built an engine box, cut the hole and slipped it in.
I saw an earlier a pic of jarheads airframe with an engine box so I figure my airframe was early and this was discovered and corrected so the standoff would either not be required or be under 1/2 and inch.
So then everyone's next question is well the DA's have longer standoffs don't they, they work fine.........perhaps not on this particular airframe........my DA's don't seem really any smoother than the 3W's.
My experience with this model is singular and perhaps the kit was a very early version. The original set up was a 3W 60 with a canister exhaust mounted in the fuselage. I bought the the airframe RTF with the caveat that it fluttered badly, it was at a good price. I worked on the tail and when I decided all was well off to the field. Take off and the first few laps were beautiful. Since things looked great I throttled up to about 75%, the entire field heard the tail shake, back off the throttle and landed, knocked the gear loose on one side.
4 yrs later I replaced the 60 with a 50, built a real scale trussed mount for the 50, about 2.5 inch legs, very scale. When the thing was ready to fly I talked to Cactus Aviation about the flutter issue, Bobby and I had talked about this before and he asked me about the mounting system and I told him scale engine mount. When he asked how long the stand off was and I told him 2.5 inches he said well that's the flutter problem with a one lunger on this they really thump... I cleaned the firewall and built an engine box, cut the hole and slipped it in.
I saw an earlier a pic of jarheads airframe with an engine box so I figure my airframe was early and this was discovered and corrected so the standoff would either not be required or be under 1/2 and inch.
So then everyone's next question is well the DA's have longer standoffs don't they, they work fine.........perhaps not on this particular airframe........my DA's don't seem really any smoother than the 3W's.
07-29-2014, 06:40 AM
#21
My Feedback: (23)
In reading through what little instructions/plans that came with my 3W Chippy it looks like you are not far off with your CG.
On the rough drawing [all in German] that I have, it shows the CG at 6 1/4 inches back from the leading edge on an 18" chord.
Hope this helps,
paul
On the rough drawing [all in German] that I have, it shows the CG at 6 1/4 inches back from the leading edge on an 18" chord.
Hope this helps,
paul
