RE: WACO YMF
 

WOW, this is almost like the AMA forum. I can't remember who said what about what, but I'll throw my hat in the ring, FWIW.

The WACO YMF kit that Pica produced must have a good reputation as both a good builder as well as being a good flier, so why worry about making changes. I think pimmnz makes a good argument for leaving things like Platz, or whoever, designed it. Yeah, a bipe is inherently dirtier aerodynamically than a monoplane, and you have to look at when this plane was designed and built originally. There was no CAD/CAM, calculations were done on slide rules and a great deal of the design was empirical (it just "looked" right). This plane was state of the (biplane) art for 1935. Cowls and wheel pants did what they could to smooth airflow and decrease drag in order to give marginal powerplants whatever power edge they could so that the plane would have some measure of performance. As for the flying wires and tail braces, wings did not have the inherent strength to stay on the plane without them. We add that stuff because we want our plane to look as realistic as possible, and in some cases, to make them more durable.

I. for one, am leaving my tailplane alone. I decided not to make it a two-piece unit; the change in appearance is minimal, I wasn't going to make it adjustable for trim anyway. I will have all the flying wires, and I hope I can figure out a clean way to add the spring struts to the ARF landing gear. Maybe my WACO will be a "fatherless child" as the Master Chief so eloquently euphemized, but it will be a substantial improvement on the ARF as it came out of the box, and if I'm the only one satisfied with it, I can live with that.
Both this plane, and this thread are learning experiences for me, and I'm enjoying the hell out of both. Keep it going!

RE: WACO YMF
 

Gee Wiz and Darn, I thought we were building a scale airplane!. Don't get mad at me Ron. Just kiddin ;);)

RE: WACO YMF
 

Stickbuilder,
Your so in love with this model it must pain you to see someone change it in any way. I can understand that.

My model looks wonderful. Go to my profile and look at it. I changed it a bunch and it still looks good. That says much about the integrity of the design. I change some things on my model as I like and your infering I have a basterdized waco? And no, I don't excuse the expression, Bill.

Your really over the top. I think if your going to be that mean spirited you should close down the thread.

I thought this site was for people working on pica wacos, which mine clearly is.

I did not know it was a site where people should all view there waco the same way with the same ideas or they were basterdizing it.

What I am finding out about you however, is you have very little patience with people who think differently than you do.

That's kinda sad.

RE: WACO YMF
 

Stickbuilder,
Your so in love with this model it must pain you to see someone change it in any way. I can understand that.

My model looks wonderful. Go to my profile and look at it. I changed it a bunch and it still looks good. That says much about the integrity of the design. I change some things on my model as I like and your infering I have a basterdized waco? And no, I don't excuse the expression, Bill.

Your really over the top on this one. I think if your going to be that mean spirited about ideas that differ from yours, you should close down the thread.

I thought this site was for people working on pica wacos, which mine clearly is.

I did not know it was a site where people should all view there waco the same way with the same ideas or they were basterdizing it.

What I am finding out about you however, is you have very little patience with people who think differently than you do.

That's kinda sad.

RE: WACO YMF
 

I told all of you earlier that my Grandfather had a YMF, and I have flown in it many times as a child. Yesterday, I watched another YMF fly from the airport across the street from the Dealership. I noticed that there was not much pitch up on takeoff, nor was there much in the way of forward speed. It was like watching someone attaching a wire from the C/G of the plane, and elevatoring it up to altitude. They don't fly as modern airplanes do. The throttle does more for altitude than the elevator does. The one that I was watching has a Jacobs 275 7 cylinder radial, and it goes for altitude in a hurry, but not much in the way of nose up attitude. This guy leveled off at about 500 feet, and turned north over me. The nose looked low, but it was really that the plane flies tail high. I think that we are getting out of control with the minutae over the trim.

As to the lack of flying wires, the model does very well without the wing wires, but the tail braces are needed (trust me on this one).

Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1

RE: WACO YMF
 

As a licensed private pilot and also a licensed Master of Ocean vessels. I've flown many aircraft and piloted small tug boats to very large ocean tankers. What I know, is that flying these models for me is more difficult than the full size ones. I found with my experience, that identical aircraft and vessels do not handle or fly the same. I'm also not a gifted builder like you fella's. But I love biplanes and I really enjoy reading and learning from all of you.

Doug
Waco Brotherhood #11

RE: WACO YMF
 

I probably shouldn't do this, but I must bring it up in hopes that one of you guys can suggest a reason. My 1/6 UMF-3 plans show top and bottom wing incidence of +2 degrees, H-stab at 0 degrees. Also the plan shows 0,0 engine thrust. How about them apples!. I would appreciate any thoughts on this.

RE: WACO YMF
 

My guess, just a guess, would be that the greater incidence on the wings with a 0 tail would increase the relative angle of attack, increasing lift at a given speed. It would fly at a more scale speed and attitude without having to have a lot of wind over the wing. What type airfoil does it have?, and does it tend to balloon or need increased down elevator trim with added power? What kind of stall characteristics does it have with both wings at the same incidence? Usually the top has just a smidge more than the bottom so it will stall first. I don't know why there's no thrust line changes; the full scale doesn't have them, really all it's good for is less rudder on takeoff, and with no down thrust it would seem to accentuate any tendency to climb under power. Of course, the full scale does that, as the Master Chief noted in his post. Another article I read about the YMF said that take-off was a non-event. It just accelerated until it picked a speed it liked, and left the ground.

I must say, sort of response to ronj10, let's keep this thread as non-accusatory and "politically" neutral as possible. I enjoy the exchange of ideas, and althought I don't agree with everybody's thoughts on what to change, what to leave alone, or how to go about building their plane, the operative word is THEIR plane. As far as I'm concerned you can mount the wings backwards if you feel it's necessary. Opinions vary on any subject you can think of, and I will be at the front of the line saying that I'm as opinionated an SOB as there ever was; I don't try to shove it down anybody's throat unless their life is in danger:) I'd really hate to see this thread shut down, by its originator or the moderators, but if it degrades to a flaming match, I'm outa here. I can get that on a lot of other threads.

RE: WACO YMF
 

Thats kinda what I thought. The UMF-3 is identical to the YMF. The only difference is the engine size. I can't tell you how it flies as I haven't built it. I am using the plans to trace and enlarge to 1/5 or 1/4 UBF-2. Maybe I should ask via this and other forums to see if anyone has built and flown from this plan.

As to my response to ronj10, I did not intend to accuse him of anything. I thought I was just having a little fun. I am truly sorry if I have offended him or anyone else. I'll try real hard not to do that again. It's hard to resist!.

RE: WACO YMF
 

Ron,

I have all the patience in the world. I'm just wondering why anyone would make so many drastic changes away from the scale fidelity of this great model, rather than using some other platform. Not bashing anyone (as I previously said) just a question. It's yours, so enjoy.

Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1

RE: WACO YMF
 

Close the thread down? For what? If someone gets their toes stepped on, then that person needs to take it offline with the person who he thinks is insulting him. This thread is too much fun to just kill off. I didn't start it out to be just an intelluctial discussion on the WACO YMF. It's about the hobby part of this craft. It's not life shaking decisions.

Ron, If I have insulted you, or in any manner, hurt your feelings, please accept my apology. That was never my intent. As before, build what you wish...After all, It's your airplane. I do feel that you are over-reacting in suggesting that the thread be shut down. If, however the majority of the Brotherhood wants the thread shut down, I will gladly do so. I could easily spend the time working on my own, rather than attempting to help others with theirs. It's your call. You are a grown man, and can make your own decisions. I will honor whatever you wish to do.

Skinny Bob...What is the designed wing loading on the 1/6 version? I wonder if the loading is heavier than is the 1/5th version. That might have some bearing on the incidence change. Of course the designer was probably a different person. That change is not that large a departure from the normal incidences found in biplanes. The Cox 1/5th ARF uses an altogether different incidence setup from the kit version of the same model, and seems to fly extremely well from what I hear. Could it be that we have bought into a rule that has no concrete basis in fact?

Bill, AMa 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1

RE: WACO YMF
 

Here's a definite "nay" vote for shutting down. I've come to look forward to, and get a perverse pleasure, almost, from one of the Master Thief, I mean Chief's, witty comments regarding the best branch of the military, the one with all planes, no boats.

There ya go, Bill, as good a setup as I can think of.

RE: WACO YMF
 

No, let's not shut anything down, as stated before, there is to much valuable information passing back and forth, from all the parties that contribute. For myself, this thread has been a huge learning experience, particularly since my WACO was partialy built and as I discovered from the postings on this thread, there were things done that could have had resulted in a poor flying aircraft.
Besides, where else could one post pictures of an airpline in the "bones" and have everyone else tell you how great it looks !!??

Just my 2 cents

RE: WACO YMF
 

You mean the branch with all the purdy helicopters... I'm with khodges. This is one of my favorite threads on the entire RC Universe. Granted, most of it's over my head at times, but I've been enlightened in a lot of grey areas and am appreciative. You want to be great at "something"? Hang out with those that are great at "something"

If I don't get to post a picture of a SHINEY Doggie built WACO on this thread due to it's demise... I just might have to take up RC helicopters[:'(]

Full Speed Ahead - Aye

Todd

RE: WACO YMF
 

Bill, I don't know what the wing loading is. All I have are the plans ( I bought on E-bay ) no manual. Don't know the planes weight. The plans are about 30 years old. I have been web searching for any info on Robert C. Sweitzer, but nothing yet. I think you may be right, that we have bought into a rule that has no concrete basis. A small difference in incidence is not critical. Hence, the variable H-stag, engine thrust, etc. To guote Evan WB#2, (I think you guys are getting too wound up about this flight atitude/trimming issue. You can't force these things to fly `at this pitch attitude' at some cruise speed `cause that just isn't the way it works. If you have ever flown full size you will know that to fly at a straight and level cruise speed you first set the horizon at the right place with elevator, wait until the ASI tells you that you are at the aispeed you want, set the correct RPM (power) then trim the stick forces away with the elevator trim. The angle the fuselage flys at is set by the relationship between the rigged angle of the wing/fuselage, and the angle of attack required to provide enough lift AT THAT AIRSPEED to maintain height. If you want to fly faster, then the new trimmed attitude will be `tail high' (less AOA), conversly if you fly slower then the attitude will be tail low (more AOA). The trick with your model is to choose the correct rigging angle of the wing to the fuselage to give the right flight attitude at your chosen cruise airspeed. Tailplane trim is only an airspeed control, not an attitude control. If you now fly your model faster, you will have to trim nose down to stay S&L (tail high) etc, etc. A heavy model with the same rigging angles will seem to fly tail low compared to a light version with the same set up. I prefer to set my models up to fly S&L at around 50% throttle barrel movement. This way to climb I merely open the throttle, and to descend just close the throttle a bit. This eliminates, for me, the necessity to re-trim for differing airspeeds as I aint going far/long enough to need to worry about stick forces present at cruise for hours at a time...:-)

RE: WACO YMF
 

Heaven help us if something does go astray! It's a whole new frame of mind when you are scratch building, some questions have to be asked, especially if you want it to turn out better than average.

Let's get back to building!

RE: WACO YMF
 

Hughes, lets get back to building for sure but, I don't have a whole lot of experience building or flying. Only been at this for about 4 yrs. I belong to a small RC club and we exchange a lot of tips and tricks. There are a couple of old timers in the club who have many years in RC, but the truth is I have learned more in the short time I have been a member of this brotherhood than my few years with my fellow club members and buddies. I intend to keep asking questions and fully appreciate any and all responses to them. For example, we beat the daylights out of wing incidence until Evan ( a pilot of full size aircraft ) couldn't stand it any more :D and came in with an explanation. You can't feel stick force flying a model, but you can sure understand what he meant by that.

RE: WACO YMF
 

This is a matter of different goals. There are builders that are willing to sacrifice a little performance for scale accuracy (as I am) and others that are willing to sacrifice a little scale accuracy for better performance. Just two different schools of thought. I know many guys in both categories and we all get along fine. To paraphrase an old saying..."Build and let build". But let's not close any issues to discussion. They are all informative in one way or another. This is a great thread. I think it has helped us all to some extent.
Keep it rollin'!

Bill Hogue
WACO Brotherhood #21

RE: WACO YMF
 

For anyone who is interested; 'Bipes' by Harry Higley is full of tips relating to the construction of a variety of popular biplane kits. It's a little hard to read so you should take it in small doses while taking notes or highlighting the things that you like. The book is full of construction photos and 'in the bones' shots.

From the publishers of Model Airplane News, Basics of Model Airplane Design by Andy Lennon can be very technical but should be required reading for RC builders and pilots. At the very least they may pick-up on some basic aircraft terminology. From the same publisher is RC Pilot's Handbook. Again, this book should be on your nightstand if you are into RC airplanes.

To echo the sentiments of others; This is one of the best forums on RCU, entertaining and informative. I agree that sometimes the content has gotten screwy, especially the debacle on whether positive is up or down! I was attracted to this thread because, at that time, the info presented was seemingly very straight forward and is (was) focused on one thing, the PICA WACO kits and its scratchbuilt descendants. I think the goal is to perpetuate not only the 1/5 scale WACO build as presented by PICA but also to help motivate builders whether they are doing an ARF bash or their fiirst or 50th scratchbuild. That being said, I hope we can concentrate on the building part.
To paraphrase STICKBUILDER; lets not fluff up this thread with a bunch of intellectual debate matches. There are other places to discuss which way is positive or whether Monokote belongs on WACO's. I am pretty opinionated, too, and it's easy to fire off a couple rounds from the keyboard without thinking too much of it, but, I'm gonna try being nice most of the time. If your goal is to 'doll up an ARF' (good job KHODGES) or 'dumb down' a classic, go for it. Just remember, when you run with the big dogs (old scratchers like STICKBUILDER) you'd better expect to get snapped at from time to time.

RE: WACO YMF
 

Hey that was just a test ;):D

RE: WACO YMF
 

Ken and all,

Stopped by the Historic Aircraft Restoration Museum at Dauster Field (Creve Couer Airport) to day and took some photos. Unfortunately for us they do not have a YMF or UMF on site, but I did get a lead on 2 located near St Louis (near where I live) and am making plans to go see them once I contact the owners. The HARM has 3 hangers and the first is almost all WACOs (about 10, but that can change as most if not all are in flying condition) where I took a bunch of pictures. Hangers 2 and 3 have another 30-40 between them (not WACO). Many pictures are close ups of some details, trying to be genetic in scope and stayed with a 1931 QCF2 or A WACO UBF (Texaco 17) for most of them. In an earlier post, khodges (post # 1509) applied corrugated plastic to his ailerons and wanted some close ups, so here are a few of the QCF2 to compare too. Wheel/tire diameter was also asked about and I have a shot of the QCF2 wheel with a dollar bill in front for scaling (forgot the tape measure). My calculations end up with an approximate 20.25” wheel diameter (I couldn’t read the sidewall for size) which equals a 4" wheel in 1/5th scale. Also have pictures of interplane strut and rigging wire attachments, forward fuse panels, hatch, cockpits, lights and other details to give an idea of the typical way WACO did things. PM me if you want some pictures. Remember these are of a QCF2, not a YMF/UMF.

RE: WACO YMF
 

Stickbuilder,
My vote is No



George
WACO Brotherhood # 5

RE: WACO YMF
 

Agreed, keep this thread going.

RE: WACO YMF
 

I vote NO,keep it as it is.




Waldo
WACO Brotherhood #22

RE: WACO YMF
 

Course you can't close the thread down, I believe only the moderator can do that. And I have decided that my UPF needs a flightline companion so I will be designing a 1/4 scale U/YMF to keep it company so I will need somewhere to post the process pictures. And I believe that WACO rigged both their airplanes' wings at the same angle, leastways in the manuals I have been able to get a look at.
Evan, WB#12.