PSBUN

Hi pd1

Thank you so much for the updated plans, just think if I had not found your earlier plans I wouldn't have found this great thread and then hope to start building an Aeromaster later this year!

Peter

pd1

Most of the Aamco plans are at..... www.outerzone.co.uk

Sportmaster... www.outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=2845
Check here first, they're free and full sized.


I just found this picture of my first Sportmaster. The radio was Digitrio modified for four channels.
Flight lasted just under 60 seconds. That was the last time I flew with the Digitrio.


Rick.. pencil drawings never left the office.
There might have been a quick sketch of a modification that was in pencil though.

nine o nine

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Paul, I won my first modeling trophy at Orange with a Sportmaster and flew it later that year on floats at Brimfield. The kit was a gift from Lou for shooting and framing a print of him with Dennis and Ernie. I remember it was hung on the wall in his office/drawing room.
I'm now restoring an Aeromaster Which I built and flew in the early seventies. Mitch

Essex BOF

I have put the Aeromaster aside that I was making, as there seems a lot of work in it.

But I have made a bi plane of my own by taking an old design of mine from 40+ years ago and changing it into a bi plane, The original model was called a Skydancer & was kitted in the UK by Saturn Models in the 70,s. Now re incarnated as the Skylark (sorry CG)
Electric powered or IC 38" span.

If I could find out how I would send a picture with the message

Minnreefer

Thanks for that site
I love and hate that site, I want to build so many of the planes that are there, heck I would be happy to build the trainermaster and the minimaster, I just need more time and money. ))

LennyD

My Feedback: (1)

I have been fortunate enough to acquire this sportmaster autographed by Lou Andrews himself!! Now I dont know if I should build it, which was my oroiginal intention, or perhaps I have something that might have more value to it that I know. What do you guys think? especialy PD1 as if I remember correctly you had worked with Lou

aeomaster32

One friend I have, copied the plan and built the plane using information from the kit, but not the kit itself.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

+1

pd1

Hi Lenny,
I'm really the last person to assign value to collectibles, there are so many people that are more knowledgeable than I on these boards.
I would defer to their opinions.

The only thing I have noticed is the more complicated the kit, the more available it is now.
There seems to be a lot more Aeromasters come up for sale than say the H ray.
I assume that when the original purchaser opened the box at home, saw how much work there would be, then decided to put it aside for now, and never got back to it.

The box you show is a Trainermaster, that was a real easy airplane to build and I have seen less of them for sale than the Aeromaster.
Also the one you have was produced when Great Planes owned the company.

I would download the plan from Outerzone, or copy your plan and build the Trainermaster from the plan. Maybe the kit will get more valuable in time.
Just my .02.

BW2

Just noticed there is a Great Planes Super Aeromaster kit for sale on Ebay..just in case someone needs a project.

deanz406

My Feedback: (28)

I just wanted to chime in again, on this great thread. Well, I have changed the engine in the red WW1 schemed Aeromaster, installed a brand new Supertigre 90 in it, and am waiting for the new sport muffler for it. I went to a big swap & shop over the weekend, and did manage to come home with a couple "Nice Prizes"(as my wife would say). I was looking for a Bucker Jungmeister kit. or built one, and came across this one in the pic. It happened to be the exact one I was looking for- 51" Span, just right for what I wanted. It appears to have been crashed, but not too bad mostly in the nose,and landing gear area. The cowl and L/G was missing, but everything else looked pretty decent. There was a little tag on the wing that said $20.00-both. Next to it was a set of white wings, that looked about the same, and I asked the fellow, what he wanted for the extra wings. He said, " take all of it for $20.00", so I didn't even dicker, and handed him a $20.00 bill. As I picked up the fuse, and 2 sets of wings, he said "Wait a minute, you forgot the rest of the stuff". I asked "What stuff", and he reached down under his table, and pulled out another fuselage-" Low and Behold", an Aeromaster fuselage. He said "The white wings are for that one". I asked him what I owed him extra, and he said "Nothing"- they were "Both" for $20.00. Needless to say, that it was UGLY, but I was absolutely tickled at my luck, and what I thought was a great buy.
I have to start another thread, as a questionairre about the Jungmeister plane, as the fellow didn't know anything about it. He said he bought it to beat around in, and didn't get any other info on the plane. So, I have to find out who made it, if anything is available for spare parts. I'm pretty sure I can repair it, make the gear for it, and get a cowl from Fibreglass Specialties for it. I just have to know who's kit, or maybe ARF it is.
I'm probably going to modify the Aeromaster for bolt on wings, as I really hate rubber bands- they are so detracting from such a pretty plane. Not much to get the Aeromaster in flying condition- some tires, radio gear, motor, and a set of struts. I'll do a recover after I make a few test flights on it. Here's a few pics Dean

deanz406

My Feedback: (28)

Hi again friends- here's a few pics of the WW1 Aeromaster, that I'm doing some engine and muffler mods on. I changed the muffler from the big ugly external stock one, to the Slimline sports style. I have to do a few cuts on the cowl. patch the existing muffler hole, and repaint it. I'm going to add smoke to the new muffler setup. Later I think I'll change to an OS 1.20 4 stroke I have in a box.
The weather up here in W. Pa-"Really Sucks", and we are getting those pesky lake effect squalls from time to time. Seems like this is going to be relentless for a couple more weeks. I guess it's better to be cooped up, and rebuilding than Mowing the grass !! Dean

Free Bird

Nice score on both models! The Bucker looks might it be from a Goldberg kit.

FB

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

I flew my Aeromaster today but all did not go as planned. It flew fine until I did a roll. As the plane went inverted the bottom wing ripped off the plane. Now I was inverted with no ailerons...I did a quick split S and chopped the throttle. The plane was still flying OK with just the top wing and I was able to get it down without a scratch. I guess I need to make the wing connection a bit more solid!!

4dogspete

I suppose that is what you would call being a lucky Duck!
Others have said that the Aeromaster will fly with just one wing, but now you know that it will.
And as far as no ailerons are concerned, many started with just a rudder, so as long as the balance isn't too far off, I suppose that's not too surprising.
My Aeromaster has 2 nylon 1/4-20 bolts at the front of the lower wing and at the rear of the lower wing, and I've never had a problem.
Pete

deanz406

My Feedback: (28)

Radford Well, consider yourself Very LUCKY- that could have been a disaster. Were ur wings bolt on, or rubber banded??. I personally prefer the bolt on, and I do like the look of struts on the wings. I guess it is also a personal preference, but to me it seems to look more like the Golden age of aviation, with a bipe w/struts. I also feel the struts give a little extra structural integrity to the bird, but many have flown them without them, with complete success.
F/B- I didn't know that Goldberg made a Bucker, but as i look closer at the plane, it looks like the type of construction that the newer laser cut ARF's are using. I'll get some pics here. Dean

PSBUN

Hi pd1

May I go a little off the main subject of this topic and ask a couple of questions please on another aircraft designed by Lou Andrews. I have acquired a Mini-Master kit “see photos� One, do you know how old it is? Two, I have a new/unused ENYA 19-6 TV, would this be a suitable engine for the Mini-Master or would a ASP FS 30 be just as suitable?

I will still be building an Aeromaster, though I intend to build the Mini-Master will during the summer when the weather is to bad to fly.

Peter

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

The MiniMaster was one of the latter designs by Lou Andrews that he kitted. Must have been around 70-71 timeframe, though I do not know for certain. I flew one that a buddy built, but it suffers from being smaller than the Trainermaster (but I admit to being biased toward the Trainermaster as the very best 40 sized model of all time). Just keep it light. Use the lightest engine in the .25-30 range, lightest servos and battery pack, light weight wheels, and almost no glue.

pd1

The Minimaster was released in 1971, I think. It was the first kit to be released from the new building.
Look for the address on the end of the box, if it's Danvers , Ma, then it an early one. If it's from the midwest, then it's a Great Planes one, that would be a later one.
If there is no address, look for the box manufacturer on the bottom of the box, if it's from Salem, Ma, then it's an early one.

As HighPlains said, keep it light.
The plane flies great if it's light, if it's heavy and underpowered it loved to snap roll on takeoff.

I have a flying one now and a kit on the shelf. Here's a build thread I did on the Mini.
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/show...ght=minimaster

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

They were bolted on with two bolts in the front and one in the rear. All three wood blocks pulled out cleanly. I installed dowels and rubber bands and flew it again today. The plane flys great but I need to install some wing struts....when I do a fast roll the bottom wing tip almost touches the top wing. That should be all this plane needs to be a steady flyer.

aeomaster32

"when I do a fast roll the bottom wing tip almost touches the top wing. That should be all this plane needs to be a steady flyer."

Something is wrong there. My rubber banded wings, without struts are put through violent snap and Lomslovic type tumbles. They remain firmly in place. Adding unnecessary struts is compromising performance and safety of the aircraft for appearance. Not a trade I would make. Why add drag when it isn't needed. No full size designer would do such a thing. Struts were a necessary evil for them.
Anything bolted, like the landing gear, has no give and can rip the bottom right out of the fuselage. I have seen it happen.

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

Well, from what I have read, the Folker DR-VII did not need struts, but the German military made them add them, since that was what they expected in a biplane. The homebuilt Knight Twister was also designed to fly without struts, but I am unaware of any that actually did.

PSBUN

Hi pd1 and HighPlains,

Thank you for the info, especially to build it light.

pd1, I have posted some more photos of the box that may help to work out when it was made. 1971 looks a good guess going by the box manufacturer on the bottom of the box. I will have a look at your build thread.

Thanks again

Peter

PSBUN

Hi pd1

Thanks for the link to your mini build, great read, great result. Hope mine turns out as good and I can get it down to a simular weight with mine being ic powered.

Peter

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

Yeah, something wrong for sure....I put 10 #64 rubber bands on the wing and it was still doing it. I guess I could keep adding bands until the wing collapses...or add a couple of struts.