tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

Anyone have any info on the details of the plane shown below what year did Mr. Kraft compete with it? It looks like it might have a fiberglass fuselage it has the Webra engine with flow thu muffler and no hatch or canopy it also has wing fillets and by the size of the nose wheel might have retracts it is the only photo I have seen of his Kwikfli III in this configuration.

Richard Browning

RCDENT

My Feedback: (2)

Probably 1969 or 70. The Slik Fli and Dragon Fli designs appeared in 1971. My guess is that it may have been a sort of stop gap plane to experiment with fillets and maybe retracts to clean up and speed up the Kwik Fli design. This was a time when pattern was moving rapidly toward the more "ballistic" style. Mr. Kraft discussed this transition in his article on the Dragon Fli. Kraft's own retract system also appeared on the market in about 1971-72. Don't know any details on the individual plane.

Dewey Newbold

Jeff Worsham

My Feedback: (28)

Hi Richard,
That pic looks like the one from the 72 Masters article from "I think" RCM. My copy was a pdf file so can't post that as RCU doesn't support pdf, but I've converted a couple pages to jpg for you to see. Unfortunately the jpg's are fuzzier than the pdf version. If you want the full pdf article, PM your email address and I'll send it.
jeff

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

looks like acording to the chart it did use retracts but balsa fus I would like the pdf I'll PM you with my e-mail just wondering if building in this configuration if it would still de ok for VRCS or Seinior Pattern events?

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

The Kwik Fli III was orignally all-balsa with fixed landing gear. Phil was world champion in 1967, I believe, and won with a Kwik Fli III. The list in the magzine article does show he was using the Kraft-Multicon retracts.

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

Yes but it looks like he was still flying the KwikFli III in competion as late as 72-73 with retracts and wing fillets

Richard Browning

Jeff Worsham

My Feedback: (28)

Seems that if you have retracts, they must stay down during SPA events. Here's the SPA rule page: http://www.seniorpattern.com/rules.asp

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

for VRCS cometion it looks to me like the retracts would be ok if Phil Kraft was flying a retract version in 1972 am I correct?

AIRCRAFT:
VR/CS pattern competition is open to any R/C model design kitted, published or flown prior to the date defined by current VR/CS policy which is “35 years old prior to the first of the current year�.
A. Aircraft should be built to the plan form of the plans.
1. Original airfoils should be maintained.
2. Change to bolt on wings instead of rubber bands is OK.
3. Stab location can be altered.
4. Foam wings can be substituted for built up balsa.
5. Strip ailerons may be substituted for “barn door� style ailerons.
B. Unless specified on the original plans, retractable landing gear is prohibited.
C. The contestant is responsible to furnish documentation for any model not on the VR/CS Legal Airplane List.
D. Models entered into VR/CS pattern competition must be original size; no scaling allowed.
Note: No “Builder of the Model� rule is in effect for VR/CS pattern competition.
A contestant is allowed one primary and one backup aircraft per event. Two contestants may not use the same aircraft in any given event.

Michaelj2k

The current official cutoff date is January 1, 1974. FMI on VR/CS pattern maneuvers go to http://www.vintagercsociety.org

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

So what is the verdit? If the desinger is flying a plane with retracts in 1972. Is a replica of that plane OK for VRCS competion? Maybe it needs to be called a KwikFli IIImkII it seems to me that it was just a further development of the Kwik-Fli (Qwik Fli) I, II, III. series of aircraft.

Richard Browning

RCDENT

My Feedback: (2)

According to the strict letter of the rules, it would seem to apply to the original published plans, not what someone (even the original designer was flying later). The original KF III plans did not show retracts, although I believe Phil Kraft mentioned in the text of the article that some had been built that way. As each year goes by, we get further into the retract gear era. 1974 already includes a lot of pattern planes that had retracts in the original plans.

I personally don't see why many of the vintage folks are so afraid of retracts now that there are so many excellent systems and servos available.

BTW, I miss the years when pattern champions published their designs and discussed their aircraft design and competition philosophies in the articles. During the late 1980's it seemed to evolve into an era where somebody won the US Nats, WC, or TOC and never published plans. Later a kit or ARF would be available with great fanfare, but no information except where to buy it. That's one of the reasons I sort of burned out on pattern in the early '90's.

Jeff Worsham

My Feedback: (28)

Hmmm, found the VR/CS Pattern Rules here: http://www.vintagercsociety.org/docu...rn%20Guide.doc

which contain this:
"A. Class l (Port): Planes controlled about the Yaw axis, by rudder control only. No auxiliary aerodynamic controls are permitted (flaps, spoilers, etc.); no auxiliary non-flight controls are permitted (brakes, steerable wheels, etc.)
B. Class ll (McEntee): Planes controlled about the Yaw and Pitch axis, by rudder and elevator control only. Auxiliary non-flight controls (brakes, steerable wheels, etc.) are permitted without limitation. Auxiliary flight controls (flaps, spoilers, etc.) are not permitted.
C. Class lll (Brooke): Planes controlled about the Yaw, Pitch and Roll axis, by rudder, elevator and aileron control, with no limitations or restrictions on primary aerodynamic controls, auxiliary aerodynamic controls or auxiliary non-flight controls.

AIRCRAFT:
VR/CS pattern competition is open to any R/C model design kitted, published or flown prior to the date defined by current VR/CS policy which is “35 years old prior to the first of the current year�.
A. Aircraft should be built to the plan form of the plans.
1. Original airfoils should be maintained.
2. Change to bolt on wings instead of rubber bands is OK.
3. Stab location can be altered.
4. Foam wings can be substituted for built up balsa.
5. Strip ailerons may be substituted for “barn door� style ailerons.

B. Unless specified on the original plans, retractable landing gear is prohibited."

So it seems from this that if your plans show retracts, you can fly in Classes II or III. For Class II--That is if retracts are considered an "Auxillary non-flight control." However, since retracts enhance flight, I can see how they'd allow them only in Class III.
jeff

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

And if an original plan of the plane he was flying in 72 does not exist?

Richard

onewasp

Do not forget that Phil also had two Mark IV's he experimented with. Both were taper wings, one utilized a -15% section and constant percentage while the other a 20% section at the root and a 15% section at the tip.
Both were rejected by Phil as they each lost the constant speed characteristic of the KF I, II, III.

As far as trying to "qualify" other A/C based upon the "FLOWN" wording-----lots of luck. There were m-a-n-y.
The two Mark IV's were pre-Corsica. Sometime during 1967. The data I've presented here is from Phil's article published in the Feb. 1968 MAN. (starts on page 28)
The picture could be one of the Mark IV's fitted with a constant cord wing for comparative purposes.
Of the two taper wings the 20% root/15% tip example was the considered best but neither was considered a match for the KFIII in the constant cord/constant speed contest advantage.
Phil also pointed out that the aileron response on the two taper wings became touchy around neutral even with a very slow roll rate.
Not good for contest flying.

If you are truly interested there are members of the group still alive. Jerry Nelson (Nelson Model Products---now located in Texas).
Jerry was the Team Manager in 1967.
Also Jim Martin (he was Multicon's designer/owner) and presently is Pres. and owner of Sherline Products in So. California.
He was often referred to as the 'West Coast' Jim Martin to establish the difference between "Jersey Jim" and himself.

A little 'minutia' from the past ----It's hell to grow old!!

tweedy

My Feedback: (1)

I am a Sherline user and was not aware of the of Jim Martin connection thanks for the info My only reason for being curious about this is that I have always been a fan of the Quik-fli and thought a replica of the plane in the photo might be a fun project.

Richard Browning

rv7driver

My Feedback: (105)

Does anybody know what the colors are of Phil's Kwik Fli III that Tweedy posted, I'm finishing up a III and would like to paint it the Orginal colors. Thanks ahead of time. Pete

RCDENT

My Feedback: (2)

Mr. Kraft's planes were usually orange. I was told many years ago that the trim was usually dark metallic blue (aerogloss dope) with silver or white pinstripe. Color photos that I have seen so far bear this out.

mbarry

My Feedback: (7)

Phil's airplanes were finished with Randolph dope. After clear dope, one coat of silver was applied. Areas that were to be blue were masked off and then his airplanes were painted with Randolph Orange. Tape was removed, leaving silver blocks( for lack of a better description) in the orange. The silver was then remasked as to allow for about 1/8", or whatever looked appropriate, pinstripe and then the blue was applied. After the tape was removed you had an orange airplane, blue trim separated by a silver pinstripe.
The reason his airplanes were always orange is because he claimed he could see that color better than any other under all conditions.