pimmnz

Very gentle heat, locally applied with a little finger persuasion. Then cast a plaster mould by filling the inside. That way you can then vac form as many as you want in thicker plastic, and keep this one with the original kit contents. You lucky dog.
Evan.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

I know, and I am grateful. [8D]

Here are some additional photos taken during my visit with Helen. Tom's shop was full of quality tools he used to produce all the custom hardware found on his planes. The hardware we take for granted now was just starting back then...many, (most) pilots fabricated at least some of their own hardware. The idea of an ARF wasn't even a glint in the manufacturer's eyes...you either built your plane or you didn't fly. Even I sewed my hinges on and soldered my own pushrod keepers on my first plane back in the mid-60s.

Tools in Tom's shop included a full-size lathe, and a machine used to bend metal/music wire, (such as the intricate landing gear on the TBX). There were other tools around that I wasn't even familiar with, (I've never owned or used lathes, drill presses etc which would probably help my model building). Later Tom used these same tools to build his homebuilt Pitts Special, (which was not completed).

Inside the box is a "jewler's lathe". Helen told me he used this to build the brake units found on the TBX landing gear. The name tag I believe was his from work at GM. Finally there is a picture of Toms gold-colored silk used on his planes. The whole plane was silked and doped, (you can see the fine weave if you carefully look at the painted sections of the wing and fuselage), but you really see this silk's beauty in the open unpainted areas of the wings found on Perigee, Apogee, Nimbus III, and Cirrus.

Finally, look at the extra fiberglass cowl Helen was describing.

Duane

CHARLES WINTER

Hi Duane and Helen, Still following the never ending saga of Tom and his genius. Keep it going.

Col. Chuck Winter

UStik

Hi Duane, that is all very interesting, as always. Now I'm even provoked to throw in another two Eurocents, or maybe even three.

First, it's good to know that the TBX's main gear swivels. That really makes sense. When you first showed pictures of it I thought it is intentionally rigid. Now I stand corrected.

Second, the shipping label on the kit box is not addressed to some hobby shop, but to the world-famous R/C powerhouse, Ace R/C Inc. These are not my words, my wisdom comes from the well-known R/C Hall of Fame. Look at [link=http://www.rchalloffame.org/Exhibits/Exhibit36/index.html]this page[/link] about the first Kraft proportional, scroll down one quarter or search for "Meet The Runges" to find a short characterization of Ace R/C. Anyway, that might explain why the kit is intended as a contest prize and why it's addressed to Ace R/C (donating such prizes).

Third, for me it's really nice to see the lathe. We (my father, my brothers and I) had exactly the same (in fact, my brother still has it). Cees once showed us his one in the Taurus thread but I just can't find it right now. I think he has even the second model (version) while Tom's seems to be model 1, that is the simplest one from the early sixties.

It was not a "jeweler's lathe" but intended for use in DIY and modeling (not only flying models) in the first place. It's main asset was to be cheap and it was in widespread use here in Europe. I'm just surprised that it was used also in the US, I didn't know that so far. That's why I only now searched for it (Emco Unimat) in the Web and came up with an entry in the [link=http://www.craftsmanshipmuseum.com/oldmachines.htm]Craftsmanship Museum[/link] in California. Scroll down nearly to the page bottom or search for "UNIMAT DB200/SL1000" to find a short description and a picture. The label seems to be more modern but all else is like Tom's copy.

Emco is an Austrian trading company and I don't think that they manufacture anything. Seems the machines are made in Germany, but they are quite simple compared to "real" machine tools. That could have been the way to make the lathe affordable for modelers. Today, they sell [link=http://www.emco.or.at/index.php/maschinen/unimat-4]model 4[/link] of the Unimat line but they claim to be still able to provide all spare parts for the old models.

Thanks again for finding and posting this "stuff" and to Helen Brett so generously sharing it.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Good to hear from you (mein freund) Burkhard, and thanks for the info on the lathe...Helen, (I think), used the term "jewler's lathe", but I suppose you could use it for any small work. Having the right tool really helps doesn't it.

I've got a thing or two more to mention, and a GREAT PICTURE of Tom to post a little later.

Duane

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Does anyone have a set of drawings for the Perigee kit? I have a NIB kit with no drawings that I would like to build.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

You can get a PDF from when I had Tom's original plans scanned. From there you can take the file and have plans made. These are Tom's original plans.

I also have the plans from the actual kit if the originals won't help you, but it would be a much more involved, (and expensive) process getting that to you.

Duane

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Does the debolt kit match the originals? Was there also a small manual with it, or am I thinking wrong?

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Tom drew both plans, but I believe they are not identical...the original wing plan is more complicated to build with (I believe), a bent main spar.

There is a small building manual in the kit from Tom...I haven't read through all of it yet, but it is not detailed, and assumes building experience on the part of the builder.

Duane

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

I read the box top and DUH, it said there was an instruction booklet included. I have no problem building it, I just like to know as much as I can before I start. After building a 101" Cessna Bamboo Bomber from Don Smith plans(well not really plans, but merely pictorial suggestions), this should be a snap.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

JeffH

Amazing after all this time there are still unbuilt kits out there. We're talking 45+ years since the kit was introduced. Where did you get yours?. The number of Perigee kits was never produced in numbers close to something like the Taurus. When I build mine I plan on tracing each piece to make templates for future scratch-built models, along with keeping the materials list.

Looks like they included sunglasses in your kit.

Changes were made to accomodate Perigee being produced as a DeBolt kit. Besides the wing spar changes to make it easier to build, (and probably cheaper to produce), notice the typical DeBolt nose gear included with the Perigee. I remember my Dad building two DeBolt high-wing Jenny's with the same nose gear. The gear screws in and out to adjust height. Unlike most planes, this nose gear had a square mount that bolts to the fuselage bottom rather than the firewall. This makes it more susceptible to being torn out in very hard landings...so make up your mind now not to have any. Tom's nose gear in the original Perigee/Apogee was more conventional and stronger. It was home-made with a double strut...similar to the Fults nose gear, (see wheel detail on TBX). DeBolt also included a molded plastic engine cowl instead of the fiberglass cowl Helen spoke of, (and illustrated in the pictures above). As an aside, (and not a change from the original)...like most planes of its day, Perigee used wood motor mounts built into the fuselage.

Send me a PM with your e-mail address if you'd like me to send you the PDF of the scanned Brett plans. "Snap" or not, I'd recommend it....if for no other reason than to make the wing cut-outs easier. Compared to many kit plans, the plans are pretty "busy" with both wings drawn on top of each other, and balsa grain lines that sometimes obscure some of the details.

Good luck and keep us posted.

Duane

WEDJ

I built a Perigee from the PassTime short kit. It's pretty close to the original plans, including a built-up rudder vs the DeBolt flat sheet. Maybe this will help you:http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_65...tm.htm#6590239

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Thanks for the information. I will send you my email. My grandfather bought this plane new way back when. I also have his original Kaos which is the last plane he built.
I will trace everything out as I build. Amazingly, the wood in this kit is pretty good. Other debolt kits that I have seen had less than stellar wood selection. Even the die cutting is pretty crisp on my kit.

Free Bird

Hi Duane (and other Perigee owners!),

Just getting caught up with this thread. You are indeed one lucky dog to come away with a Perigee kit and original silk to boot! BTW - you wouldn't have had to "flip me" for it, given all of the work you've put into this thread, you certainly deserve the rewards!

Regarding the canopy, I'd like to have a mold of it made. My vendor does outstanding work and in all likelyhood can fix the imperfections. No cost to you, and we get another classic canopy saved. LMK what you think. Thanks Duane!

I also look forward to a build thread when you start building it!

WEDJ, Quite honestly, I'm surprised at how fast your Perigee scoots along and would agree about its flight manners. With all of this talk about the Perigee, I've decided to finally finish the radio installation and get some air under her wings! When she's ready, I'd like for you to be there. What say you??

FB

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

I've got one more observation from my visit with Helen, and a more detailed look at Tom's planes. This might seem like a small thing, and I don't know if it's something we should all be doing, but it's something I've seen on the TBX. After years of storage without being touched, all Tom's planes (while looking great), had a stuborn layer of dusty grit on them that comes from 30 years of storage, but it was easily cleanable with a little TLC. Back in 2009, Willie McMath and I carefully spruced-up TBX and Apogee before taking the photos posted early in this thread. It took a while, but it was like dusting off Alladdin's lamp to me. The painted finish cleaned up so well that they looked like new pennies with a little 409/Windex. You can see from the photos just how well they cleaned up. Note the interior shot of TBX that shows what looked like patches of blotchy mold on the interior balsa. Still it wasn't too bad for all the time in storage.

During this latest visit, Helen and I took another look at the INSIDE of TBX...the balsa interior looked its age...again, not bad, but not pristine either. For whatever reason we decided to get out the 409 again to try to clean up the inside dust without hurting anything in the process. I wasn't expecting much success on the 40 year-old, bare balsa, but lo-and-behold, the inside cleaned right up to reveal a nicely honey-colored wood interior that looked a lot like Ed Kazmirski's "Unfinishd" fuselage which had been silked and doped...ready for painting, (see photo). It turns out Tom had coated the interior of TBX with something...I don't know if it was coated in dope, fiberglass resin, varnish, or even thinned epoxy, but whatever it was, it perfectly preserved the balsa all this time. You can see a little shine on the interior balsa pieces. My best guess would be that he used a couple coats of clear dope which is light in weight, yet hard...and it seals the wood.

All this, while a small thing, again reminds me of Tom's attention to detail, and meticulous building style.

Nice picture to come[8D]

Duane

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Finally, a year ago Helen allowed me to go through her family album of Tom and all his R/C achievements...about four inches thick. She let me photograph the scrapbook page by page, (Helen's patience was to be admired), but I've observed on each visit that she always seems happy to take the time when it comes to Tom, and sharing his memory with others. I have posted many of the interesting photos from that afternoon a year ago, but there are still some I haven't gotten to yet. I was going through those photos the other day and came upon one particular photo I really loved. Tom was posing with his pride and joy in the ready box before a flight.

Forgive me if I posted this photo earlier, (I don't think I did), but even if it was posted, it never hurts to see a good photo again. To me the picture illustrates his personality and meticulous nature that made Tom such an accomplished engineer, designer, builder, and pilot.

Till next time

Duane

pimmnz

I dunno Duane, but this stuff is all your (U.S.) R/C history. Given the amount that was forgotten in the short time since Taurus was designed I would like to think that some sort of archive of this stuff was being carefully considered, cause we ain't got time to go through all this again...It all needs to be preserved and published, just to make sure that the facts are plain and it's all in one place. Sure as eggs, someone's gunna ask again...As for Toms' airplanes and reference materials, well, someone will have to make a decision, hard as it will be, but that too needs to be preserved somewhere safe before it gets lost or scattered. Is this stuff important enough to spend the time/money to do this? Again, a question that needs to be considered by the U.S. guys themselves. Given the undoubted influence of these fellows throughout the aeromodelling world it should be an easy question to answer, but you just don't know, prophets without honour, and all that...
Evan.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Evan,

I can certainly appreciate what you're saying. The natural first place to think of for us here in "the States" is the AMA Museum in Muncie, Indiana, and they are trying to archive R/C's past, but their resources and space are limited. I'm not sure if a formal bio on Tom has been submitted to AMA, as of a few years ago, it hadn't. Helen reads this thread, and can comment on that. I'd be happy to do it if it hasn't been done.

R/C Universe (maybe without really intending to), has made informal documentation on R/C's pioneers possible through these threads. A "keyword search" will bring up a lot of information. The text and pictures from this thread, for example can be printed and kept, which is a lot better situation than we had just a short time ago. The thread on Ed Kazmirski's Taurus is another example of excellent informal documentation on Ed. In fact AMA took a distilled version of the thread. I wrote for it for them for an accompanying document to go with the Taurus when it was donated to the museum. The Kaz thread badly needs to be culled and edited into a booklet on Ed.

As long as RCU maintains the forums, the information will be preserved. If they discontinue this service someday, I hope they will give us ample notice so that those of us who care can take steps to preserve on paper what's there. I don't know what the demand for historical information will be in the future, but I'd enjoy preserving the memory of those pilots I have a particular interest in.

As for Tom's planes and original plans, Helen will make that decision. They mean a great deal to her, and I'm certain she will make sure they have a good home.

Duane

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

While preparing to send JeffH a PDF of the Perigee plan we found by accident included with Tom's TBX paln, I wanted to take a closer look at the difference between them, primarily the wing plans, and the way the spars were drawn. I had always thought that "someone" (whoever that might be), once-upon-a-time had said the original Perigee plans were different from the kit that Tom's Perigee employed, (more complicated) bent spars, while the kit didn't "for ease of building". Upon closer examination of the original article plans from American Modeler (Jan-Feb 1963), (in miniature), compared with the De Bolt kit plans and finally this plan, THEY ALL APPEAR IDENTICAL TO ME. They all use gently bent spars toward the center.

You can tell these three plans were all drawn at different times. One way you can tell is that Tom used different designations for W-1, W-2 etc. (perhaps this plan was the preliminary drawing for the De Bolt kit because the designations are the same). There might be some subtle difference between the three plans, but except for the aluminum cowl hold-down ring, and nosewheel details Tom used not being included in the kit, I don't know what they are off hand. If anyone (for example Evan, who has a particular knack for pointing out tiny differences as he did when studying differences between the Meyer vs Taurus kit plans), can find any, this might be a good time to point them out. When I actually build the Perigee kit, I'll make a closer comparison between them.

I have decided to include the PFD here. In truth, they are actually much easier to follow than the original kit plans which contain the balsa grain lines that tend to hide details of the plan.

WEDJ

>
Free Bird, do you agree?[/quote]

WEDJ, Quite honestly, I'm surprised at how fast your Perigee scoots along and would agree about its flight manners. With all of this talk about the Perigee, I've decided to finally finish the radio installation and get some air under her wings! When she's ready, I'd like for you to be there. What say you??

FB
[/quote]
I'd be honored!

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Bad news,

I think I figured out why the plans are missing from my kit. I printed the plans from Duane yesterday and noticed there were no stab drawings. No problem, I can wrangle those up somewhere. Well I got to looking for stab ribs....no dice. I think my grandfather must have started on the stab and never finished the plane.
I may have to get creative on the stab build. I have the root shape from the plans. I just need to get the tip shape and overall size and I am golden. It might not be how it was done originally with the 45 degree ribs, but only we on this thread will know.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Jeff;

I didn't notice at first, buit it looks like Tom didn't finish the stab plan in this rendering...only the outline. We'll fix it.

You build the rest, and I'll furnish you with what you need for the stab. Let me look at the plans and kit again and we'll figure out the best way to do it. After all, we want the whole plane to be accurate. I'll take care of you.

We need more Perigees in the world.

Duane

Free Bird

Jeff,

I believe that in my plan stash I have a copy of the Hobby Helper Perigee plans. I don't know how close it is to the kit version, but I'b be happy to furnish a copy. LMK.

FB

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Thanks guys for all of the help.
My next hurdle is engine selection. I have green head .45 that should run good as it has great compression and low internal wear, but modern engine are so much more reliable.
One thing I cant do nostalgia is radio gear. I wouldnt trust the old non-propo even if I did know how to fly with it. I do have two Proline Comp 6 channels that I couls convert to 2.4

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

The K&B .45 in the nose would sure LOOK good, but one thing I discovered when I was trying to find an authentic engine for Ed Kazmirski's Taurus II is that looks and authenticity isn't everything. I located a ST .56, and it looked fine, (but it never RAN fine when coupled with the obligatory muffler). The muffler messed up the way the engine ran, and it tended to run hot and unreliable. We had to richen the mixture to keep it running, and I never felt completely comfortable with that engine in the nose. Maybe the K&B is better in this regard, but the engine will always look "funny" with the muffler, even if you have the right engine. Back then these engines came muffler-less with baffle plates, but unless you fly in the middle of nowhere, you can't get away with that anymore.

I'd DISPLAY it with the K&B, and FLY it with a modern engine.

Duane