Hey Impactiq, thanks for the appreciation. Given this is Tim's first scratch project (as well as his thread), and a sizable one too, I felt John's generosity should go toward him in support of his endeavor - not that I take license to pass judgment on any of this. However, like yourself, I'm a big fan and like to encourage pursuit of the Tipo in any shape or form so my thoughts went out. I don't think Greg's intentions were to necessarily benefit himself - I know him to be a generous guy.

On a related note, I'd really like to know more on the evolution of the Tipo - in its various forms - and see pictures, if you have any, of the various versions you have built and flown. I know you are a connaisseur on the subject.

Cheers, David.

The Tiporare was based on Hanno's Curare. Dick Hanson (designer) and others (Dave Brown, Tony Frackwiac,etc..) all played a roll in the first Tiporare. The first versions of what was to be the Tiporare started to take shape around 1976-77. The first Tiporare had 680 sq. in. wing area. It was very fast! One could only build this Tiporare from plans.

The 2nd Tiporare (or also known as the Tiporare 720) is the one WK kitted. This version of the Tiporare was bumped up to 720 sq. in. wing area with a slight change to the tale moments. This change was mostly in the vertical fin shape. This Tiporare was/is a great compromise between speed and changing "pattern' maneuvers of the time. This Tiporare is the "famous" one of the Tipo line up. The kit saw production in late 1978 by WK hobbies (Bill Elliot). WK produced this kit up to (I believe) 1982-3. Then Great Planes kitted this for a while. The WK glass fuses are 10 times better then the GP one's.

During all of this... Dick Hanson was working on the next version of the Tiporare line while getting his own modeling company (DH models) going. This version is the Tiporare 750(or Tipo +). It came out in 1984. It could be ordered with the 720 wing and stab. The 720 wing and new stab. which was built with no anhedral and had more area. The 750 sq in. wing (double tapered) and original 720 stab or the new 750 wing/stab. The fuse was longer then the original and was narrowed a tiny bit. This version seems to be the rarest one of the Tiporare line up. Not to many people know to much about it. It was short lived do to changes in Pattern and also Dick was kitting this version himself. It is also the platform for the Hippo Tipo.

The Hippo Tipo was born in late 84. It was kitted in 85 and was around to the late 80's. I only seen one myself. It has a longer nose on the fuse along with a long tail section. More "meat" was added on it too. The tail moments were more squared off. The wing had 820 sq in. and was double tapered. The stab was built straight and the anhedral stab was no longer in the Tiporare line up. The fuse also had a pipe tunnel running down the side. It did not have the Tiporare sleek look do to this. This was also the 1st version that showed how to set it up as a tail dragger on the plans. "Long stroke" 61's engines were the top dawg and the speed part of pattern was coming to a end. To be honest... I didn't care for the look but it did fly well. I have been looking for one myself.. to complete my Tipo. collection since it is the only version I do not have. Many people know/owned/flown this Tipo.... just not many around anymore.

The last version of the Tiporare is the Tipo Surpass. It is designed to compete with the 4 stroke 91 pattern crowd. Looks like a early version of the modern pattern planes. Not really my thing... but still cool to have a NIB one.

Well David, I thought about making a hotwire to do the job and in hind sight it might have been easier. I cut the spar slots in the left wing, now I have to cut the retract plate but I'll wait till next weekend. I'll be leaving for Kansas tomorrow to look at a project so I won't post again till late in the week. Aw, heck, I'll go take a photo real quick.
If anyone needs any thing from DFW to KS or visa versa...free trip (I'm driving because my wife wants to go : )

Thanks Impactiq, that was interesting, especially since I'm building it and don't know anything about their history.

David, I think it would be easier to glue the landing gear onto the rails, mark it out, and then use a HWC to remove the foam. Maybe next time.

I think I'll draw the plate on the foam, then use the router to cut it out free hand instead of using the template because I cut everything out of the middle on my template.

ChiefK

You are correct. I do not know the value of any of my old stuff. It is like I tell my wife: "If it sits for years and you don't use it or have even forgot about it...then it is junk"!

Who knows, after reading this forum and a few other threads I might like to build another " classic just for fun. I still have the old OS 58 that was in my Grapner Kwik Fli.

Pict taken in Feb 1970 After I got out of the Army

Nice looking Kwik-Fly. An Air Force buddy (we were stationed in Germany) was flying one when he taught me to fly RC (early-70's). A deBolt "Jenny" was my first RC model. You never know what the future will bring. I was out of RC for about 30 years and got back in about a year ago. Had to start from scratch except for the old Tiporare (and a couple of engines) that I hung onto and carried around in its box all those years.

ChiefK

Tim,

I find it helpful to draw centerlines (with a thin sharpie) everywhere on the cores when building - root, tip, LE, TE, top and bottom as well as draw the cutout template directly onto the core. The centerline on the top and bottom in this case is the retract strut centerline or the mid point between the rails (spars). I also draw lines parallel to the root (perpendicular to the stub spars) indicating the wheel center and the gear rotation axis. These lines extend beyond the stub spars (about 4" long in your case) on either side so that I can track the locations once the core has been cutout. The distance between these two lines in a standard configuration is 4". In your case, I believe you've added 1" to this distance to accomodate the larger prop. In making this spacing 5" (rotation axis to wheel center), I would leave the wheel center fixed per plans and move the gear outboard an additional inch.

The stub spars help to encapsule the retract plate structure as well as provide strength to the wing in this area where core material has been removed. Because I'd rather err on the safe side (especially on models this size), I went one step further and bonded CF spars 24" long atop the stub spars and extending toward the tip of the core. The third strip which goes on top of the core between these two acts a bit like a truss to prevent the wing from folding in high G forces when the model is either upright or inverted. I'm probably repeating myself here...

When you say "glue the landing gear onto the rails" I think you might mean "glue the landing gear plate between the rails" - does that make sense? The nice thing about having the stub spars in place is that the inner dimension provides you with the 3" spacing between them (in your case since you're using 2.5" wheels). Your retract plate can be cut to 3" x 4" and the U-shape cutout made to accomodate the width of the gear. Again, I also draw centerlines and so forth on the plate to make sure I'm matching the core lines. Without guides, its easy to misalign something which would make for wonky landings or takeoffs.

I would go about the cutout/install in the following order: spars, plate, wheel well, gear tunnel, strut tunnel. In your case, the gear and strut tunnel is probably the same width so there is only one continuous tunnel. The extra width in the strut tunnel provides space for the strut coil and makes it easier to line. When making the shallow 1/4" cutout for the plate, be careful to not overshoot - if you're using a hotwire, it's very easy to do so. One way to prevent this is to make the hot wire 5/16" deep by bending some flanges into the wire that sit atop your template. The wire then runs along the template (1/16" thick I would imagine) only removing foam to the depth required. If you're dexterous controlling the heat and have a light hold on the gun, you can freehand it. Actually, in order to keep the edges square, I find it helpful to first make incisions in the core with a #11 (or longer blade) to the required depth along the cutout edge. The gun will then actually melt the foam up to this incision even if kept a 1/4" away from it. I find this is the critical part of building foam wings. If your hand drops or the gun slips, you can end up with a nice swath burned out of your core!

Your generous 1/2" around the wheel (when retracted) will allow you to line the well (and tunnel), if desired, first with 1/16" balsa before skinning and then with 1/64" ply after skinning. Lining with ply after skinning flush with the sheeting top has the effect of sealing the 1/16" balsa sheeting edge around the well cutout. Both layers aren't needed but the laminate makes for a more durable well and the ply takes paint a little better. Some modelers actually glass their wells but I'm not as patient.

Attached are a couple of shots of the cores prior to skinning. The offset cutout in the gear plate (and strut tunnel) is due to the off center location of the strut entering the Kraft multicons. Pneumatics typically have the struts centered on the retract body. I also placed the aileron servo "pockets" just outboard of the gear plate - the only reasonable location I could think of. The groove in the wing core top below the forward spar is the servo lead tunnel. My apologies if all these descriptions are overkill.

David.

Impactiq,

thanks for the back history. It would be great to assemble some pictures of all these versions. Do you suppose DH has plans for them?

To what extent are there (full) plans for the versions you have been able to collect? I'm really interested to see how the wing planforms and tail moments have changed from one version to the next. I guess the tunneled Tipo in the pictures below must be the 850. The one beside it looks like it has a larger wing too and what appears to be a concealed pipe in the fuse top. I believe at least one of these belonged to Steve Helms. Both still show what looks like ~2" of anhedral having lost the 720's 4.5". I wonder how much the Tipo+ differed from Dave Brown's Illusion - they both had 750 squares.

On closer inspection, they both appear to have alum backed CB spinners and MK nylon props! The 850 looks like it has a blackhead Webra with a Dynamix carb.

Would you be able to show some snaps of the plans and/or fuses from your collection?

David.

David,

None of the tipos have plans. These were you basic fiberglass fuse/foam core wing kits. Basically just a write up on building and a generic drawing of the plane itself. As far as I know... the only Tiporare to have a full set of plans that one could build from was the first Tiporare.

I do not have any pics left of my previous Tipos as they are lost to me (Long story....) But I will be more then happy to dig out the fuses I have and show the Tipo line. The soonest I can get to them will be next week as work has me bouncing all over the place right now.

Mark

David,

I wanted to thank you for your kind words earlier in this thread. Apparently my previous attempt was lost in cyberspace. I also recall that I promised you, some time back, that I would post a few pics of my Tipo build. I've finally remembered to grab the camera and take a few so here they are....

Greg

Mark,

that sounds great. We look forward to seeing the lineup!

I feel that DH might have had some sketches at the very least of how and where to make changes to the design. In fact, I can't quite see how the glass fuses would have been cast without a plug of some sort - this plug must have been builtl probably by Dick himself. I suppose dropping him a line might produce some answers.

Greg,

she's looking like a beauty! It seems like you're pretty much built. Are you planning on paint soon? What's missing?

David.

David,

I seem to be hung up on installing the retract and flaps servos in the wing center section. I have concerns about weakening the centersection with too large a hole so my mind is working on figuring out what the most effective way of putting those servos in might be. I constructed a balsa-ply box to enclose both servos, but it just seems to have a very large footprint and would need a large cutout. I'm beginning to lean toward putting them both in laterally. What do you think? Any suggestions?

Greg

When I built my Tipo I put the aileron servos outboard in the wings. If you'd done that, you'd have a lot more room for the flap and retract servos. It's too late now though.

It's worth mentioning that I swam upstream with a number of design changes on my Tipo besides outboard servos. I also mounted my engine inverted, so it would be completely enclosed in the nose (except for the top of the cylinder head). I think I may have deepened the area at the fuse bottom between the nose and wing saddle to better accommodate the tuned pipe and nose retract. I made this piece into a removable hatch cover for access to the retract and exhaust header area. I built two half fairings onto the bottom of the wing to partially hide the tuned pipe, which rests in a shallow rounded depression in the wing center section (well glassed).

The effect looks good, and it hides most of the pipe when looking from the side. I have wrung out the plane to test the wing,with no folded wings yet. I also increased the wing sweep to a point where the TE is a straight line, and added just a bit to the anhedral from the stab to compensate for the effective increase in dihedral. This was done strictly for aesthetic reasons, and seems to have had little or no adverse effect on flight characteristics.

If anyone wants to see the mods, I'll have to dig the plane out of my spare room. It hasn't flown in years.

Rick

Rick,

Thanks for the input. I do have the aileron servos outboard in the wing. It's only the wing mechanical retracts and the flaps that I need to drive from center section servos. Your mods sound pretty extensive. I'm sure the inverted engine and partially hidden pipe cleaned it up a lot. I did take pains to keep the engine opening snug. Just big enough to get the engine and mount out if I need to. This wing center section issue may be the last sticky issue I need to resolve. I did notice on another post that the wing had two servos lined up parallel to the chord line. I'll have to consider that as well. Everything else should be pretty straight forward. BTW.. am playing around with making my own decals. I've made a bunch of varieties, but my AMA number with flag pattern is my favorite.

Why was your Tipo "retired" from active flight?

Greg

Tim,

before commenting I'd just like to say that if any of these "other" Tipo builds (including my own) are not appreciated by you, please let us know. In my threads, I encourage exchange particularly if they are related to other builds of the same model but others may prefer to keep their thread more focused and dedicated to that particular build.

Greg, the first thought that comes to mind are the center sections one would see in Prettner's prototype models - notably the Magic. He used to fit 4 servos in there plus electromechanical mixers. Needless to say, the middle of the wing was barely existent!

I didn't see any pushrods emerging into the center section for the retracts but, obviously, if you need a retract servo in the wing, you're using mechanicals. I think this is the focal point of the installation. You'll want that servo installed where it needs to go. Also, I've found that the opening in the wing typically needs to extend beyond the width of the servo to accommodate the retract pushrods. Often this is done by cutting out a circle around the servo output shaft but only to a 1/2" depth at most. Some modelers (e.g., Dick Hanson) seem to be able to do without but I find it makes for difficult maintenance in that area.

The layout you planned strikes me as the second best option to go with. I think, in this case, the best option might be to install them parallel to each other span wise in the wing with their output shafts centered on the wing root centerline. Front servo would be retract and rear servo flaps (evidently). The rearward motor area of the servos would then extend outboard along the wing. Removing material span wise in the wing is not so much of an issue as it is glassed all around. Removing substantial material chord wise at the root has a more significant impact as this is the junction of the panels. However, in flight as well as in landing, the main stress on the wing is not at its center junction so there shouldn't be a need for too much concern.

Personally, my concern is always with the wheel well area as this is the section where the most material is removed and often where wings do fold if they do. I'm just now considering whether to glass the foam cores in the landing gear area back to the root prior to sheeting - something recommended in several pattern built instructions. Others recommend glassing the sheeted bottoms out to this area. Something else to consider is that in all likelihood the retract servo will be installed deeper in the core with the servo wheel inside the wing. For the flaps, this is probably not the case - you'd just have the output shaft emerging from the wing top. This allows you to remove less material for the flap servo and position it further back with two wells separated by an undisturbed center section portion. In glassing, you can also go into these wells chord wise to bind everything together. I would also use epoxy for gluing these wood wells at the root rather than some other lighter glue.

I'm not sure to what extent you glassed your wing center section but on first glance it appears to be a ~2" strip of heavier (2-5 oz) cloth across the junction followed by 3/4 oz out to 2-3" either side. If that's the case, I might be inclined to add another layer of 3/4 oz cloth out to the retract bays on the bottom and likewise on the top extending 1/2" beyond the fuse saddle after you've made and installed the center servo wells. On 60 size models I personally don't use 3/4 oz cloth (too light) on the wing center unless its part of glassing in preparation for a paint finish - perhaps you didn't either (can't really tell).

In short, I think you'll be fine with the center section but might want to pay a little more attention across the well area. The carbon fiber "spars" on the cores shown in the photo above are another nice and concealed way to add considerable strength to the wing with very little weight gain. Because of this and in the absence of flaps and since I'm using electric retracts, the wing center on my Tipo will be continuous and I may actually reduce the extent and weight of glassing. This first Tipo I'm building will be between 8 and 16 ounces heavier than the second purely on wood and fuse weight alone. GP considerably lightened their fuses as well as the wood used in subsequent kits. I think the latter kits, if built light and with lighter components could come in the 7-3/4 lb range (Greg, yours is one of the latter - I can tell by the fuse) while the earlier kits (like this first one I'm putting together) might end up closer to the 8-1/2 lb mark. I don't want to be an ounce over 136 - ideally 130.

David, try to be succinct will you! 'nough said.

David.

A few years ago, I talked to DH to see if he had any info laying around for the Tipos...... but he had nothing on hand. At the time I had a couple Tipo +s that were just fuses with no wing or stab cores. I wanted to see if he had the wing/stab profile for the larger double taper wing. I no luck finding any info on them until I was able to get my hands on another partial kit.

As far as the fuses go..... up to the Tipo surpass..... The mods were pretty basic. When you see the pics of the fuses, the only noticeable difference you will see is a longer fuse and that the nose is a little different. The wing and stab is where the big difference is between the models.

Mark,

thanks for the update. It'll be interesting to see those fuses and cores when you have a chance. If you shoot them in the same plane (pun intended), it'll be easy to compare one with another. I find that kind of photography a little tricky to get right.

So If I understand correctly, GP licensed the "original" (not quite according to your history) 720 Tipo but then DH models produced and kitted all subsequent versions? Further, DH also didn't include any diagrams or "sub" plans with these kits. How about construction notes? Were those as extensive as the 720 GP notes or were they more along the lines of 2-3 pagers? Finally, if Bill Elliot (BE) produced the original glass fuses for the 680 and 720, did he continue producing the fuses for the DH models kits of subsequent Tipo's?

David.

David,

Thanks for the thoughtful analysis. You were correct in your assumption that the retract servo will be forward and the flap servo aft. I'm using a Hitec retract servo which has a "short" case... only 1" deep. The entire servo will be below the top wing skin. The flap servo will, of course, protrude above the wing skin. I currently have a 2" piece of fiberglass tape on the wing join seam and a 6" wide piece over that. The 6" piece is automotive glass and didn't specify a weight, but I believe it to be roughly 2.0 to 4.0 oz cloth. I pulled the wing retract pushrods out after determining that I could get them in again when I needed to.

I will put the flap servo in, in-line and parellel to the retract servo as you suggested, leaving an area of undisturbed glass cloth between them. I'll let you know how it's going as I progress.

Thanks again,

Greg

Excellent Greg, have fun with it!

Quickly, I just glanced at a plan that rainedave uploaded here:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_8704801/tm.htm

It's an interesting alternative which would be more in line with what you've already done. You could use hardwood dihedral braces to join the two wells together as shown. Of course, this could also be done with the servo's installed span wise as discussed. The rear bottom wing bolt plate on the Belaire even looks like the one on your Tipo!

David.

David, of course I don't mind if we discuss other Tipo info here. This is more of a discussion anyway even though I renamed it. It will help me to possibly see something I haven't planned for yet...let the grey matter work it out before I get to it, LOL.

I have a question about the flap install you guys are working out. If you put the flap servo in the center and connect both connecting rods from the flaps to only one side of the servo (let's say the right side) and connect both the right and left flap to this arm, wouldn't the fact that one connecting rod is longer cause the flaps to be at different angles once they are deployed?

Dave,

It was not so much as a license deal..... but more of a DH letting the WK and GP (I guess you would call it "Rights") to produce the kit. Bill did due all the glass work for the first Tipo from mold to production. Then, for what ever reason the rights we given to GP. As far as I know Bill did not due any other glass work for DH after the first Tipo.

The later Tipo instructions were building instructions with just the basics needed to put the plane together. No where near the detail the the WK or GP manual (GP basically took the WK instructions and change the name on the first page and copied the rest word for word) has.

The Tipo 680 was only offered via plans for the scratch builder to build. The 720 was the refined version of the 680 which had a slight change to the tail section and the wing was a little longer. The 720 was the one WK did then GP took over. I have the 680 plans that I will lay the 720 fuse on to show the difference.

Rangerman,

If installed the way you have drawn it, there certainly would be some difference in the travel of the two pushrods. I planned all along to offset the servo enough to center the servo arm and I also plan to use a Dubro reverse splitter to enable a single pushrod to actuate the flap control arms. The dual clevises will be minimized very close to the control arms. I believe that Dave Brown also sells a larger reverse splitter to support dual elevator actuation from a (mostly) single pushrod, but I'm going to adapt the Dubros for both jobs. In essence, it will be a single pushrod from the elevator servo to the exit holes at the rear of the fuselage, split there to the control horn on each side of the fueslage.

Greg

Greg,

This is the center section cut out on Prettner's own Curare. You can see, however, that there are also ply dihedral braces extending some distance into each wing panel.

Ray

In the mid '80's (at the age of fifteen) I built a Norm Page Mach One from plans. I cut my own foam cores for it. Being young and immature I wanted all the cool stuff from that era on a plane that wasn't designed for it, so I modified it with a half-enclosed tuned pipe along the top of the fuse.

Not having anyone around who could advise me on painted finishes and foam wing sheeting, I made two big mistakes which led to my model being grossly overweight: My prep for the paint on the fuse was grossly overweight (don't ask), and I used the wrong glue to sheet the wings (ditto). I think the all-up was close to 5 kilos (eleven pounds) which included about a quarter kilo (half a pound) of lead in the nose to get the CG back where it was supposed to be!!!

But I did get one thing right which could be useful background info for your build. My wing root joint and main retract mounts were massively strong. And I too had two servos in the wing root - for flaps and ailerons using a concentric torquerod setup a la Hanno Prettner's Curare of 1977. I simply made a rectangular servo cutout in the wing root big enough to take both servos side by side.

The strength was proved conclusively when the Mach One pancaked in on approach and met its demise (thanks to the added weight no doubt). The nose gear collapsed, the main gear wire legs were bent back almost flush to the wings, the fuselage split right behind the wing where the ply doublers ended, but the wings and main gear mounts emerged completely unscathed.

So heer's my two cents' worth about how I joined my wings and mounted my retracts.

My retract mount plates were just a bit bigger than yours, recessed into the foam, glued in with 30 minute epoxy and faired with balsa block. No rails, but I did make sure I had a good fit over the whole area of the joint. I reasoned, correctly as it turned out, that an impact on the retract leg would likely crack the whole wing or fuselage before it could tear a retract mount out of five or so square inches of epoxy joint.

I also did not glass the wing root joint because I didn't want the edge of the glass showing under my Monokote (Solarfilm actually - the British version), and also worried about the adhesion of the covering to the glass. Instead, I cut a spanwise slot in the top of the already sheeted and joined cores for a 3mm (1/8in) thick plywood spar extending to just 200mm (8in) into each wing. Spar depth tapered from about 25mm (1in) deep at the root to about 8mm (1/3in) at the ends. I inserted the spar from the top and glued it with 30min epoxy so that its edge was about 2mm (1/16in) below the wing sheeting, and built it up to the surface with balsa which I could sand flush with the wing sheet for a perfect surface. Again, I reasoned that any impact strong enough to either tear the spar out of about ten square inches of epoxy joint (in shear) on each side, or split the spar, would likely destroy the airframe anyway. My servo cutout was about an inch behind this spar as far as I recall, and it didn't seem to have affected the wing's capacity to absorb such a terrific impact.

Hope that was of some use so you can get back to making your servo cutout and stop worrying...

Best regards.

Thanks for the info guys. I'll stop worrying and get'r'done (a Southern expression).

Greg