EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Forgive the brain dump your about to read...

This has been bugging me lately.

Does there seem to be a general stigma against building vintage aircraft as designed (with the rubber bands)? (I harbor no ill feelings to those that prefer to lose them altogether.) I understand that things may look cleaner if bolted on, but there seems to be a part of this hobby that appeals to me that supercedes the necessity of loosing the rubber bands altogether. There is something appealing, to me, with the accessablity of an open engine and a technology that may be old, but works just fine.

Maybe I'm getting older?

Maybe my motivation for what I enjoy has changed?

I must admit, there are some really cool vintage airplanes that look better without the bands, but I still have an urge to start building more as originaly drawn.

Maybe I need to see a doctor about this strange behavior...

What say you? (Not about the doctor!)

Brian

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Holding the wings on with rubber bands also provides a measure of protection in the event of a "rough" landing. However I have found that the bands you can buy now are a little fragile. I purchased a bag of bands and a lot of them were breaking when stretched. Is there a way to store rubber bands safely?
Regards

pimmnz

No general stigma, Brian, everyone left bands behind because (camlocks, originally) bolts seemed to be better. The fact that the bolts we use do not shear as designed, instead tearing the inside bits out and rendering the model instantly unserviceable, is not seen as a retrograde step. I prefer bands on my vintage and classic R/C aerobats, if the original had them. Interestingly, most banded models were designed for engines up to .40 size, .60's and bigger went to bolts. There could be an argument for the increased speed/weight of the higher powered models and bolts, but I have been using a single 10-32 nylon bolt on .60 aerobats for around ten years, and there is no sign of any problem...Perhaps the 'two 1/4" bolt' types need to do a bit of a rethink...
Evan, WB #12.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Hmmm here's my banded wing Corsair:

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Now THAT'S interresting...

How's it perform for you?




TommyWatson-

I usually store my rubber bands in a zip lock bag. I don't know if there is a "proper" way to break them in so they aren't so brittle, but I generally stretch them a few times before I install them on the airplane. This usually tells me if what I am using is any good.

I have also been told that I can re-use oil soaked rubber bands if I stored them in kitty litter. I have even been told to use flour. I generally disgard them after each flying session. Personal preference.

I hoped I helped, but I don't think I have a good answer for how to properly store them to keep them from getting brittle.

Anyone else?

Brian

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Brian I built the corsair from a kit in the early seventies and for the life of me cannot remember which, I want to say Midwest but not sure. I do remember the first engine was Merco .60 and since the airplane was a far lighter type structure from something modern she was an enjoyable and somewhat stately 'warbird'.

The next engine was a K&B .61 and the final permutation she got a nifty YS .91AC. That picture was three years ago on the day of her last flight before I donated it to the local full scale air museum.

John

gene6029

All but the Kaos have rubber bands holding the wings on, no problems...Gene

Avaiojet

Not sure if ALL vintage models had rubber bands.?

Certainly I've had my share of models which used them.

But, I would rather make changes, even with the Vintage, and sans the rubber!

pimmnz

No Charles, not all vintage models had them, but the Tigershark was originally a Stanzel monoline model (one piece) was it not? I don't remember many C/L vintage types with bands, but there were a few. Most of the old F/F's would have had them, wonder how the bands used to hold up? The modern ones seem to have a very short life...
Evan, WB #12.

Jim Thomerson

I use rubber bands a good bit. I use the HobbyCo #64 bands mostly, and find them very good. Oil soaked bands will rejuvenate in lacquer thinner. Discard any suspect band, of course.

Back in the early '80's I was flying free flights. I lived near St Louis, and twice went out to fly on days with ozone alert. I was unable to fly, because I couldn't get the wings rubber banded on (not HobbyCo bands) for the bands breaking. I understand that ozone meters use a stretched rubber band.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Gene,

Are the Trainermaster and the Sportmaster the same airplane? I have the Aamco plans for the sportmaster. I was thinking it would make a good low wing trainer, but a great sport plane as well. Beautiful airplane for sure!!! Is yours plans built or from an Aamco kit?

Great looking airplanes!

More pictures everyone!!! Tell us about them.

How many layers of rubber bands does everyone usually use. I seem to use 3 layers of 4, + 2 more. Probably overkill, but just being safe...


pimmnz-

I have plans for the original Lou Proctor Bolero. Some day, when I am insane, I will build it. The wings were bolted on. No rubber bands.

Brian

pimmnz

Bryan, you might like the Jester then, too. It uses plenty of bands...Someone asked how many per wing, I use six on most everything, 4 diagonal and 2 front to back (or back to front!), usually #64's unless it's a real small model.
Evan, WB #12.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Googling it now.

I like your Tiger shark. That will be an attention getter.

Brian



Not finding it. Could you guide me to one?

maxpower1954

John - didn't Cliff Weirick build a reduced-size full-scale Corsair like the one in the picture? Either that or you're a really big guy

My Goldberg Shoestring, designed in 1965 uses a very clever internally hidden 4.40 bolt and a small rear dowel to mount the wing. I think this is one of the very first R/C models to lose the rubber bands.

On my Twin Skylark 56 I kept the rubber bands, in the interest of orginality.

Russ Farris

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

The Andrews Trainermaster and Sportmaster are similar designs, but of different sizes.  The Trainermaster was a .40-size model, and the Sportmaster was a .60-size model.  The name "Trainermaster" derived more from the fact that the canopy showed places for two  "pilots" in tandem, similar to Air Force trainers, and not because it was an actual trainer-type of airplane.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Cool. Thanks Bax!



I really do not hold any sort of grudge against anyone that doesn't like this method. Of course, I am also not trying to push a preference over bolting a wing either. I was just curious over what I have experienced as some taboo when using rubber bands.

I also think my motivation inside my hobby has evolved as well. I like some of the older designs as they are. But I also like them "upgraded" as well. The Aeromaster and Sportmaster are a prime example of this. Personally, I'd like to have one of each with and without the bands.

Here is a current airplane my daughter and I plans built. Absolutely LOVE it!

Brian

PSBUN

Hi,

Reference how to store rubber bands. I have found the best way is to dust them of in talc power in a zip bag and then put them in a drawer, cupboard, or tool box so the light cannot get to them. I have some wing bands that I have had for 5 years plus and are still as good as new. Also allways wash them if the get any oil on them with washing up liquid and dry with talc again before putting away.

squeakalong

My Feedback: (8)

Back in the '70's I used rubber bands all the time and never thought twice about it. Today, I too enjoy seeing the vintage designs with the bands attached as it brings on the memories. That said, I'm now building two SIG Kavaliers. One is from the kit and has the bolts for wing attachment and the other, scratchbuilt from the plans for me, will most likely use rubber bands...though the Kavalier canopy design may defer that idea. One thing I've always done is place the used rubber bands in an airtight container with corn starch and shake the container to cover the bands with the starch. Next time out just stretch and snap the rubber band to get rid of the excess starch, inspect, and you're good to go. Generally I use the bands a couple of times. If the bands add to the vintage "look" of your model and you are comfortable using them, than go for it.

Soft landings,

Joe

Dave Harmon

I use the Hobbyco #64 bands too but only once.
At the end of the session I cut them off with flushcutters.
IMO its not worth the risk of the wing coming off when a couple of pounds of these rubber bands are only a few bucks.
These things are degraded by sunlight (UV rays), ozone, oil and probably more things that we don't know about.

Dr Spark

. When a model has been designed with rubber banded wing, it seems only correct to duplicate. This family of C/L stunters was designed by Ron Prentice in England, starting in 1949. All are variations on his original "Small Fry". He then designed "Big Fry". I expanded the series to include "Fox Fry" (Fox 35), and "Tiny Fry" with a little .020 diesel.

Gum-bands being unreliable, I also cheated somewhat and glued the wings on. But the gum-bands are still there! They just don't do much.

Floyd Carter

subarubrat

My Feedback: (1)

I use them on the vintage Cox ARFs I have other than on one I added flaps and ailerons to, they just look more authentic.

Zor

Hello All,

Here is a Cessna 170 and the wing is held by rubber bands.

The bands are not visible because they are inside the cockpit.

The appearnce is improved( perhaps ???) but their function still exist by allowing the wing to move in a bad landing.

Zor

pd1

Nice job hiding the rubber bands.

I was just at the local hobby shop and they're out of bands.
Looks like I'll be flying the planes with the bolt on wings this weekend.

squeakalong

My Feedback: (8)

Buy the bands at an office supply store.

Soft landings,

Joe

pd1

Thanks Joe, I'll try that.

Paul