Hey auto5man,
Where in TN are you located?

MEMPHIS!

If memory serves me correctly, which at my age can sometimes lead to a lot of fun, I seem to remember the original Swizzle Stick as a construction article in RCM. The first one I ever saw was built from the article, but was scaled down by a friend to fit a left over wing, which is how the author/designer came to build his. Several scratch built versions showed up here and there, with all sorts of left over wings. The first kit Swizzle Stick in our area was owned by an RC newcomer who crashed his all Fiberglas semi-scale "trainer" and bought the "Stick" because it allowed him to build it quick and get back in the air. Seems too, that his was bigger than the current kit versions, but maybe it just seemed bigger as it was all white and looked like a big white bird in the air. We used it to teach a few others to fly. All this has reminded me that I have a wing and tail section left from a Morris Big Boy. I may just make an Ugly Stick fuselage to fit and use my old Fox Eagle 60 III for power. It's so easy to do, and materials are easily found. "Waste not, want not," my Mama always said.

Hot Dog! I purchased my Stick Forty and am looking forward its arrival next week! I'm looking forward to getting started with building it. Stay tuned for me to ask plenty of questions. My next big decisions of course are radio and engine...I will probably start asking questions about the engine choice first.... ahhh.....so many choices!

auto5man

This is "the day of ordering". I just ordered an engine for MY Stick 40.

Sandal, which engine did you choose to order?

auto5man

Irvine .25 MkIII

Wow Sandal, isn't a .25 size pretty small? I don't mean to question your choice as I'm totally learning in this sport and don't know what I'm doing, but everything I've read so far about engines for this plane had me thinking of engines in the .40 - .46 range. I'm curious to hear your rationale behind choosing the .25...

auto5man

The first R/C model that my dad built, was as simple as the Swizzle Stick. It had a cigar box for the fuselage body and a roller shade tube for the fuselage boom. It had a single channel, rudder only, escapement type radio. It was an ugly beast but it flew great. That must have been 40 years ago or more. He stayed with R/C until recently and gave it up because he had nobody to fly with. Just last week, he told me that he was thinking about starting back so I am going to complete one of the Stick 4o's that I have an get him flying again this summer. At 78, he is too young to quit. I have no doubts that he will get years of pleasure from the Stick and after being out of the hobby for awhile, he will have the thrill of being a beginner again.

auto5man;
Yes, the .25 is a bit smaller than the recommended size. It says .30 to .45 two-stroke in the instruction manual. I was kind of expecting the question

I chose the Irvine .25 because I want a slightly underpowered plane. With a small engine you can't climb steeply, and you have to be very careful. Too much stick input and the plane will stall. For learning, it is (in my opinion) better to have a little extra power. This makes flying easier because you are well above stall speed most of the time. You can fly harder without the plane falling out of the sky. To me (and a lot of other people) it is exciting to fly a model with the minimum power possible. Flying well with little power means that the pilot understands the physics of flight. All stick input will reduce speed. Coordinated turns, long takeoff rolls and shallow climb-outs are required to fly the underpowered plane, and it looks beautiful to me. I can always fire up the Four-Star when I want to go straight up I had a Stick 40 a few years ago, and I had a 25LA on it one summer, and it flew nicely. I could do loops and rolls with it, but I had to dive and gain more airspeed first. We're going to tow my friend's glider with this Stick, so I think the much more powerful Irvine .25 will be the right engine.

Some people will probably recommend a .46 ball bearing engine for your Stick. This can be a good choice because it is an engine you can use in a sport plane later. To fly the Stick, an OS 40LA would be plenty for "standard" flying and basic aerobatics. It all depends on what you want to do. It could be a smart thing to plan ahead and get an engine that fits your second plane, on the other hand my experience is that the Stick is the kind of plane that people will have for years and fly every now and then. Even after mastering hairy Extras and CAPs. The Stick certainly has personality.

Thanks Sandal for the explanation...that makes perfect sense. My plan now is that I would like to buy an engine that will stay on the plane and not be moved to another plane. I want it to be ready to fly if say, for example, I want to introduce a friend into flying later on down the road who doesn't have a trainer. (without having to reassemble the engine and electronics)

Economy is important to me so the OS .40 LA sounds very attractively priced, but on the other hand I've read lots of negative reviews and comments on RCU regarding this particular engine. I want the engine to hold up for awhile so maybe I need to spend a little more and get a BB motor instead of sleeve bearing.

As far as size and power are concerned, I don't want a plane so docile its boring after getting the hang of flying down a little bit. So I'd like to get as powerful an engine as is feasible. In other words, I want to be able to be a LITTLE sporty but not be so powerful its beyond the capabilities of the airframe and rip the firewall off if I "put the hammer down". Having never flown I don't have any idea how a .40 vs a .46 would feel!

auto5man

Some people hate the LA engines, others love them. My friends' 25LA and my 25LA are both great engines. They are not as powerful as most other 25 engines, but they are very reliable. Mine has survived 4 serious crashes (broke the needle valve assembly once). I bought it in 1997, it has been in use regularly and is still going strong. I run 5% nitro and 18% castor oil in it. If treated properly, it is nearly impossible to wear out an engine. But if you run it (too) lean and try to squeeze every rpm out of it all the time, it's not going to last for very long.

It sounds like your expectations are in the OS 40FX-46FX range, or perhaps an Irvine 39? Most engines that are sold today are good engines. If you buy a well-known brand like OS, Irvine, Enya, Magnum etc you WILL get a decent engine. It could be a good idea to buy an engine that other people around you have. If you need help, there will be someone with experience with that particular type of engine.

The most important thing (in my opinion) is that you buy what YOU want, not what everyone tells you to buy. [sm=thumbup.gif]

LA40 is fine.

This is not a suggestion, but... in Real Flight, the PT-40 flies fine with a Norvel .061. It even climbs In the real world I don't think it would get off the ground, except perhaps off a really smooth paved surface. It would probably stay in the air if one is careful. The Lift/Drag of a model like it is, I'll guess, around 10-15. If it weighs in at 60 ounces, then at best L/D speed you only need 60/10 = 6 oz of thrust to overcome drag and keep flying.

Maynard Hill's 11 lb model flew across the Atlantic with an engine running at about .2 HP. Which is about 1/4 what an LA-40 produces at full throttle - and that, typically flying a model that weighs 1/2 as much.

I would not put a BB 46 on a stick 40. The plane flys on the wing so good it just doesn't need much power. My instructors club used Sticks for their club trainers for years and he had one with an old Super Tiger 29 on it. He said my 46 LA had more than enough power for it. I have put eight gal of fuel through mine and never deadsticked it. Lots of people don't like LA's because of the lower power output but they are good at what they were made for ,cheap easy to use powerplants for trainers. Lots of people say the GP series from Thunder Tiger are good engines. They are also a plain bushing engine.

I had a Thunder Tiger GP40 on a trainer and now how a GP42. These engines are inexpensive, easy to start (once broken in), reliable, will outlast the airplane. I highly recommend this engine. It would be an excellent fit for the Stick 40+.

Um, no - don't add to the surfaces themselves. The plans/instructions call out control throws. Use their maximum, OK? Then tape the gaps, too. They're pretty sloppy as built. THEN get maximize the throws mechanically (bvia the linkagers and selected holes in the arms. THEN get bigger servo-end arms.......LOTS of throw after you're content with the plane.

I'm building a Stick 40 Plus right now.I've got the fuselage and half the wing done.The outer nyrod sheaths for the aileron pushrods go between the spars at the 3rd and 5th rib bay do I need to run the shear webs out that far if i also glass the center section?I'm going to use some glass gloth I got at a marine supply store that I used to do some body work on my car,not sure of the weight but it's not very thick.willit do the trick or should I use glass cloth designed(?) for models?

Here is a slightly bashed Stick 40 Plus.

It flies well.

I am in the process of starting to build BaslsaUSA stick 40 plus from plan. The only thing that is holding me back is the rib template. The rib template can be seen in the attached file.I like to have flaps and ailerons on the wing and I would really appreciate if some could scan the rib template of Stick 40 plus plan for me and email them to me at [email protected]

Thank you
Syed