goldsticker

No I'm not using the Heathkit. It is still legal since it is on 27 MHz. It has the old 4 wire servos that don't have much torque. I may try it out someday in a slope soarer.

Mie

maxpower1954

One thing you can do since your Heathkit is on 27mhz is use a modern receiver and servos with it. I use the four channel Futaba R-114 AM RX, discontinued - but available on Ebay. Still in production is the HPI RF-2 (actually a R-114 manufactured for HPI by Futaba) works the same, of course. It's a full-range receiver, I have had excellent results flying this set-up in a Sr. Falcon with a 1966 vintage Citizen-Ship transmitter. This arangement is going into my CG Shoestring. I've also used a 1970 Vintage MRC-700 TX with same results.

Since your airplane is so original, it would be cool to fly it with the Heathkit TX. Russ Farris

Spritch

If I could ever figure out how to send some pics up... thought I'd see if I could post some pics of my 1971 Falcon 56 since there seems to be a new interest in the old trainer. Found all the Tx that it has been linked with over the years and decided I'd try and get this pics of the Falcon and the radios for posterity. Never know when it might be in pieces since I'm going to get it in the sky again shortly.

Started this Falcon around the last week of Dec. 1971 and finished it the first week in Feb. 1972. How I know the dates so well... I was finishing the wing the night before I got married to my wife of 35 years. How my Falcon has survived so long is a on-going mystery? The main reason, I would hazzard, is it has spent most of it's life in different moving boxes as life has sent me here and yonder. Of course, if you study the pics... you will see newer Monokote shades of red where several wing holes have been recently repaired. Pulled it out of the moving box... and the holes were already there.. another mystery..??

Still has the original Enya .19 Model 2005 engine that I first put on it. Under-powered would be under-stated..!! But once airborne... it is a very gentle, forgiving bird... just took some time to get it off the ground. It took a little cleaning... but seems to be running just fine.

Stan OKC

maxpower1954

Stan: how about that, the red transmitter on the left is the Citizen-Ship model I mentioned a few posts back! Looks like even the same frequency (27.145). Is it working?

Monokote definitely becomes brittle with age. I have an original Kaos 60 from 1971 that I can poke holes thru the wing covering with my little finger. As soon as the Shoestring is done, I'm re-covering it. Probably use my MRC transmitter with that one, or the Proline. Russ Farris

Spritch

Russ...

Bingo on the 27.145 for the Citizen-Ship. The yellow flag must have been a giveaway. To tell you the truth... I haven't even tried to put a battery to it to see if it would still power up. I assume it might. Still looks pretty good under the case. Wish I could find some of those original metal case servos that came with it... just for show. I had given it to my favorite LHS (All That Flys - OKC) for his "Vintage showcase" in the shop. And after seeing "Goldsticker's" entry to the forum showing his old Falcon... went back to borrow it after I got the idea to post the pics so my old Falcon would be seen... and hopefully remembered if it should depart us in the next few weeks.

The radios... left to right... Citizen-Ship (27.145) - Kraft Sport Series (72.240 - the 1979/1983 era) and the new Spektrum DX7 (2.4 Gig). Talk about a tech jump since the Falcon was built...!!! Spent more time in the Spektrum manual than it took to get the Falcon back in shape. I now have the Spektrum setup for both the Falcon and a brand new MKP Taylorcraft. After about 4 weeks (of evenings) of the Taylorcraft-ing build... it became airborne last Sunday afternoon (Apr. 14). The Falcon is still waiting it's turn. After getting some good "CG" info from this forum string about the Falcon... I think it's ready to go... and probably better balanced than it has ever been. Even bought a Great Planes CG machine to really set it right for a change. Just need the great state of OK to have more than two days of UNDER 25+ MPH winds around here...!!! Gust to 35 MPH this Sunday as I write. ARRRGGGHHH..!!

After being "out of the flying loop" for so many years... I have visited most of the flying fields around the OKC area to find and gain info on how it's done today. And to those I have met, and mentioned, my Falcon 56 "restore" project... it is amazing how many of these guys (mainly the "over 55" crowd like me) have almost all, to a man, had built and flew, either the Falcon 56, or a version of this generation of plane. That says a lot about Carl Goldberg and his kits. That's a long track record...!!! Most are waiting on me to actually get it to the field(s) and let them check it over. I assume the "Falcon" stories will abound that day... and these are the guys that have those thousand dollar plus birds. I guess you never forget your "first".

What is really great about this string... is the info that Bob has brought several of these old birds back to life again. If my Falcon's "expiration date" has run it's course when it does hit the skies... I know where I can "restore" one like it again.

Note: Sorry about the multiple postings of my pics. Have no idea how I did that...??? Any way to get the "extras" off of there..??

Stan OKC

goldsticker

Spritch,

It is interesting to see your Falcon without a canopy. I never considered having it on my Falcon. I didn't like the way it looked. I wonder how many others left the canopy off?

It is interesting the nostalgic comments I've gotten. Some in particular about holding down the wing with rubber bands. If you look closely, my landing gear is held on with rubber bands as well.

Mike

Spritch

Mike...

For the life of me... I don't remember a canopy even in my kit back then...?? If it was offered... not sure how the rubber bands would do the "cross-over" tie-down anyway...?? I like the way you had the plain firewall and the angled motor mount going on. I don't know if that was something you did on your own... or it was a "kit decision" that we had..?? Mine fit into a "nose" section cavity and was mounted on two hardwood "beams" that passed through the firewall, fuel tank cavity and almost into the main fuselage. If the Enya .19 decides to die on me... have a Enya .29 waiting on the bench. Just barely will fit.

You probably noticed mine was only a three channel. I THINK I remember the plans showing how to install alerons if wanted? But this was my first RC build and I kept it as simple as possible. It wasn't until I was repairing the wing... that I could feel a cavity in the bottom, center wing under the Monokote for a servo mount. I totally forgot that was there. Of course... NOW I wish I had gone with the alerons. Maybe later on a "update". You will notice ALL that control surface on the rudder and elevator. About 3/4 or 1 inch. Not much over-control with that. And not much elevator lift when taking off. Also... you will notice the rubber bands holding down the hz. stab. That is actually epoxied on... but I use the rubber bands anyway. Kind of like wearing a belt and suspenders for insurance.

I think you can tell from my pics... but my landing gear was two bent wire pieces that were inserted into a slot under the belly and then two nylon "staps" perpendicular over them that you screwed down at each end. Of course... I epoxied the dog out of mine. The front tricycle gear was hard mounted with a minature "J" bolt through the firewall. No steering with that arrangement. I like the wider looking main gear that you, either got with your kit... or re-engineered later. Looks SO much better.

BTW... a correction on my earlier post... that is a KMP Taylorcraft... not the mess up of the initials I mis-typed earlier.

Stan in OKC

goldsticker

Stan,

If I remember correctly, the beams were not wide enough for the Enya 35. I do remember being encouraged by my mentors to cut the hardwood bearers flush and to use the a metal "radial?" engine mount. The fuselage is not the original fuselage. I had to make a second one after a crash. This one is made of brown kraft paper covered foam board. Very rugged stuff. There was an article in RCM that inspired the process. I have not seen the kraft paper covered type recently, only the glossy white paper covered stuff which I don't think is as strong. Even so, I have a 1"x1/4" balsa stiffener running stem to stern to add strength. I even added the hardwood engine bearers to strengthen the forward fuselage. All constructed with white glue and epoxy. Finished with white HobbyPoxy paint.

The only original parts are the wing and the vertical stab and rudder. All the rest were replaced the first flying season.

Mike

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

The original Falcon 56 was designed to be powered by a .15 to .19 size engine and controlled by reeds or escapement equipped rigs, as you fellows know.

Back then I thought I was being a dare devil when I fitted mine with an OS .35. That was totally out-of-the-box in those days.

All of my Falcon 56 kits came with the canopy. I too never used it. What a sweet flying model the Falcons were/are.


Ed Cregger

Spritch

Ed...

This is where my researching for the original Falcon's CG, and other info, got somewhat confusing. For some reason, my memory remembers the Enya .19 as the lower end of the engine choices in my plans. I thought the motor range was .19 (or .15) up to a .35...?? But after setting the Enya .29 beside the engine cavity... you can see it would be a VERY tight fit... so I tend to agree with you that the .19 was actually the "upper" end of the engine range (plan wise). But I also remember how much run it took to get my Falcon airborne... so I always thought the .19 was just barely enough engine for the 56. But then... my CG might have been so nose heavy, it just seemed to take forever to grab some air. But then... with the Citizen-Ship metal servos and Rx... you were hauling a fair amount of weight during those days. I do remember the plans even showing the Citizen-Ship servos drawn in. Sounds like you have the plans in front of you... so I bow to your engine info.

After getting the good info (from you and Bob) about where the CG was supposed to be... and putting it on my Great Planes CG machine with it set to the proper distance from the leading edge... truth be told... I stripped enough lead weight out of the under-nose engine cavity to build a small race car. It was, more or less, still setup for the old Citizen-Ship, metal cased servo days and I had never changed it, even when I updated to the Kraft Sport series in early '80's. After the Spektrum update with the "weigh nothing" AR7000 Rx... the "nose heavy" problem really became big-time noticable. I don't think I had ever had the CG dialed-in correctly since the early '70's. That probably explains why I went through so many 9-4 props when landing over the years. So nose-heavy... it "whammed" in quite often on landing. Especially dead-stick with only that 3/4" wide elevator control surface.

Only excuse I have...

Hindsight is always 20/20... age does not always mean wisdom... but I'm learning... Thanks to this forum...

Stan OKC

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Glad to be of assistance.

I built the original Falcon 56 kit once for the wife (two times for myself) and equipped it with a then new Fox .25 plain bearing engine. The wife preferred three channel flying, so I didn't include ailerons. She wanted her new World Engines Blue Max rig (1972) in the model.

Even as light as it was and as strong as the Fox .25 was, the model would not ROG from our grass field. I was surprised. You are right in that it took a hefty hand launch to get it airborne.

Our field wasn't very far from the Delaware Bay on the Jersey side, so we had a fairly constant breeze blowing off the bay and river. Once airborne, we could point the nose toward the southwest and perform overhead 8's with the nose pointed in the same direction throughout the maneuver, so it could fly slow. It just puzzled me why it took such a good throw to get it flying. If you didn't toss it hard enough, it would simply land.

As the original Falcon 56 was modified by Goldberg to the Mark II and Mark III versions, the recommended engine displacements kept creeping upwards.


Ed Cregger

Spritch

Ed...

Never even thought about a hand-launch back then. I wasn't even sure it was do-able. That's the first I ever heard of someone doing it... but it makes sense. The two places I got to fly the Falcon were both paved. The first in OKC ('72) at a south-side RC field back then... and then in the late '70's/early '80's... was working at a autopilot manufacture in Mineral Wells, Texas, right on the local Metro airport doing the electronics on the old Century IV systems that Edo-Aire Mitchell were building for the private plane crowd; Piper, Cessna, KingAir, Mooney... etc. We were in big time competition with King Radio during that era. This was when Ft. Walters in Mineral Wells was being "phased out" after 'Nam... and all the helicopter training that had been done there was moved elsewhere. And with several hundred helicopters based there over that time... you can imagine how many acres were asphalted over for thier LZ's. There were 5 acre sections ALL over the base that were just setting there empty... so here came the RC crowd. Of course... we LOVED it...!!! It started out with about 4 or 5 of us showing up... after about two years... it was almost standing room only. Even with all that pavement to use. They started showing up from the Dallas/Ft. Worth area and all places in and around. The word apparently got out. And, quite honestly... it got dangerous as well.

Then the "Scales" started showing up... and even the home-builts. Saw my first chainsaw powered bird there and it was massive. Or it was to me anyway. It was a J-3 Cub with a (to me) 100 foot wingspan. I'm sure it was only 6 or 7 ft... but to a Falcon 56 owner... it was a jumbo jet. I do remember it was LOUD...!! Even a quarter mile away.

Carl Goldberg kits were represented in just about every generation, make and model you can imagine for that era. These are the guys that need to see what Bob is doing now.

All that story... to explain I never hand-launched my Falcon because with 5 acres of pavement... I could roll it forever.

Good days...!!

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

The Falcon 56 that everyone is calling the "Original Falcon 56" was most likely the second version of the airplane. The very first Falcons were designed for smaller engines in the range of .09 - .15 - .19. It had a very narrow nose that was made wider by the late 60's for larger engines.

Spritch

HighPlains...

After I read your post about the width of the nose cavity for engine mounting... got curious and measured the one on my Falcon. It shows to be 2 1/4" (width - inside dimension) at the firewall and reduces to 2 1/8" at the nose... and approx. 2 3/4" from firewall to nose tip. The Enya .19 fits it well... and the Enya .28 would be a very snug fit, but would still mount. Will probably do the engine swap in the future just to have a little more "uummphh".

Maybe the engine cavity dimensions would be a good way for us to tell exactly which version of the Falcon we actually own...?? Along with the different vert. Stab. shapes that I keep seeing in photos on the Net.

BobHH

My Feedback: (18)

Guys, the original Falcon 56 pictured below was setup for the .19 size engines. I remember guys flying them with 3 channel reed systems and .15s! The MKII and III had the sweep back tail and wider nose. Also they changes the airfoil slightly for better performance?

Bob Harris

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

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


We used to fly .60 powered pattern ships with KPS-9 servos without a problem. Of course, we didn't use nearly as much control throw then as we do now.


Ed Cregger

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

The very first Falcons were designed for smaller engines in the range of .09 - .15 -.19 specified on the box. The later versions of the original kit called out .15 - .19 - .35 engines. They also had a wider nose to accomodate the bigger engines. I don't have a kit of the earliest version of the Falcon 56, but do have the early version of the Skylark with the very narrow firewall. The inside dimention of the firewall is 1 7/8", and the 1 5/8" at the nose.

Navy_Flyer

Oh the memories! I built a Falcon 56 as my very first R/C back in 1975 at the age of 15. I remember saving up for that kit from the local hobby shop, and when I finally got it, I began in earnest and would go at it through the night. I saved and saved for an engine, and bought a Fox .25 from "NY's Hobby Shop" newspaper catalog that used to come in the mail monthly. That engine flew it fine, and it would ROG (the original model came with fixed nose gear, but it would still ROG fine). I worked all summer to save for a radio too, and when I finally got that I was the one neighborhood kid who thought he had it all!

Even covered with orange silkspan and dope, I loved that plane - and flew it for many seasons. My fondest memory is of the very first flight, when I hand launched it for my instructor pilot - and it began to rise and fly - my creation (at age 15) was flying! Wahoo!!! 3-channels, and it flew superbly. One night, my instructor told me to bring the plane over to his house - and we added ailerons and a steerable nose gear. He never asked me, he just did it - I guess he thought I was ready for the added capability. He never asked me for a nickel, he just did it and handed it to me with a smile. Those were the days.

Well, many years have passed, but I still have the engine, the radio (an MRC 765 5 channel on 72.320). Haven't tried them to see if they still run/work, but I am sure they will...

Thanks for the memories!
Tom

8178

My Feedback: (17)

My first low wing trainer was a Sky Lark 56 that I built in 1966. I was able to fit a Super Tiger G21 40 in the nose with a Kavan carb OK but there was no room for a standard 40 size fuel tank. I ended up using a plastic bag for a fuel cell that was inside a second safety bag. With the removable front hatch I was able to monitor the fueling process as I removed all the air from the cell and then added fuel. We didn’t use mufflers or muffler pressure back then so it was easy to do. It worked quite well and I flew the wings off of it.

buzzard bait

That's interesting--I have a Skylark 56 that was built in 1966 that I'm still flying. The original owner flew it with a Cox .15! It weighed 4 lbs at the time and must have taken good toss to get going.

When I got it, the biggest engine I could fit from my collection was an OS .25FP. It's really not enough. I'm surprised you could fit the .40. But my main problem is length, and I bet the old ST was very short front to back. I bet it would fly a lot better with more up front.

Jim

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

I flew mine with a OS .19 and three channels of an Orbit in 1970. I upgraded it in 71 to the forth channel and changed engines to a ST .35. It did fly better with more power, right up to the day the wing folded..........

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

My first R/C airplane was a Falcon 56...
1974, I was 14, and my mom saw an article in the paper about a demonstration at a local shopping center parking lot. We went, saw, and I was hooked! There was a guy who was selling his almost completed Falcon 56 and a World Engines Blue Max 4 channel radio for $125.00...and all I could think of was how many papers I'd have to deliver, and how many lawns I'd have to mow to get it!
Anyway...my mom said, if I could come up with half of it, she'd match it...(God bless her[8D])

The guy who built it must have been one of those "build 'em to survive a crash" guys, instead of "build 'em to fly" guys, cuz he used 5 min. epoxy everywhere, and he sheeted the stab w/ 1/16" balsa, etc. etc.
A mentor offered his Enya .19 and that's what I used...but it took almost half a pound of lead in the nose to balance, and it weighed just about 5 lbs. It flew, but thanks to the fact that we had 10,000' of Griffiss AFB's old (un-used WWII) runway, the T.O. roll was not an issue.
That winter of '74-'75 I installed an Enya .29 and stripped the sheeting off the stab, and took almost all the lead out of the nose, and it flew MUCH better.

quepasa

Bob, I'm in for a Sr. Falcon kit when one becomes available if not already. Thank you for doing this.

BobHH

My Feedback: (18)

quepasa, I sold Early RC Models to Wing Mfg a little over a year ago. I still am doing designing and such on the vintage models for Dan but he is manufacturing and selling all the kits. I believe he has Sr Falcon and Original Falcon 56 kits in stock ready to ship. His address is www.wingmfg.com

Thanks,

Bob Harris

quepasa

Well Bob now ya know why its quepasa. (means...whats happening) Got the pm. Thanks again!