grimgrinnin

A friend picked this up for the bargain price of free. Can anyone identify it? Phoenix 7?

grcourtney

My Feedback: (1)

p-6 or p7

gary

Gregg G

My Feedback: (7)

I'm going with a P-7 . The vertical fin is shorter and more indicative of a P-7.

Greg Grigsby

Wduck

Don't think it's  Phoenix. The stab looks way big in relation to the fin. The fin does not look to be the correct shape. There is a Phoenix 7 thread and you can see the difference there.

Chuck

bem

My Feedback: (1)

Hi,

Looks like a Phoenix 7 to me:

http://www.hangar-9.com/ProdInfo/Files/HAN4755_hi.wmv

http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Gal...N4755&Index=15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFpl-9a2EKY

Maybe the top of fin is not like it should be for a Phoenix 7 and maybe the nose is slighly short also.
But the restis surevery similar to a Phoenix 7.

/Bo

Paternguy

My Feedback: (1)

I am going to say SkyKnight, very similar to a Pheonix if I remember right.

bem

My Feedback: (1)

Hi,

This is a Skynight 6 (Kitty Hawk Models kit) picture, I suppose it was another plane also - SkyKnight - any picture of that?
/Bo

dhal22

it doesn't look like a skynight.

jrbmoto

I think it was correct in the oldies section....Vertigo


-Johnny-

KLXMASTER14

It appears to be a Vertigo II. The big stab is a dead giveaway. Can you post some pics from a couple of different angles?

If it has a diamond shaped airfoil on the stabilizer, and a chin under the nose, that would clinch it as a Vertigo II.

790

This web page shows a pic of i believe, Mark Radcliff and his phoenix 8. Not a P-7 like it's labeled. I could be wrong on that. lol
[link=http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Gallery.aspx?ProdID=HAN4755&Index=15]http://www.hangar-9.com/Products/Gallery.aspx?ProdID=HAN4755&Index=15[/link]

The vertical fin is definite Vertigo II. Hard to see under the nose, but i'm sure it has a small chin and diamond shaped stab. Note that the rudder/Vstab had an option to key the tip into the Vstab. This gives it more of a P-6/7 look to it. See pic below (borrowed from build thread here)
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_7761143/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm]http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_7761143/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm[/link]

What happened to the aft fuselage? Looks like a tire tread pattern as if someone drove over it.

crankpin

My Feedback: (15)

P-6 Stuff. P-5 and Vertigo II fuselage's mixed in here. Have lot of P-7 & 8 is anyone want's to see picture's. Just took a look, forgot to reduce pixel's.

Crank

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

the fin on the original picture looks like that commerical that has the guys with the Tiny Hands

rrandletn

My Feedback: (5)

I'm the one who has the plane in question, the horizontal stab is diamond shaped like the Vertigo I or II, but who ever built it did not put anti-dihedral (? spelling) in the stab.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

That would be anhedral or cathedral as it was sometimes called in the early days.

anti-dihedral gets the message across though.

David.

KLXMASTER14

I built them both with and without anhedral, the airplane flies fine both ways. The anhedral was a modification that was incorporated later on as the "anhedral craze" of the late 70's took hold.

-Robert

JeffH

My Feedback: (43)

Note on Anhedral...
I spoke with Steve Helms about his Bootlegger and one of the recommendations was NO anhedral. He said it negatively affected the crosswind performance too much. He also said to get as much horsepower as you can in it!!

KLXMASTER14

Yup, anhedral affects different designs in different ways. There would be some airplanes that would suffer some degradation of performance. Anhedral is not a one-size-fits-all design parameter.

bem

My Feedback: (1)

True. On Curare it enhance this plane in several ways. I know - I had a Curare that I flew very much with. And I even "enhanced" a Mach 1 with negative dihedral, anhederal,stab and it worked very good on that plane also.

Hanno Prettner said in Model Airplane News Dec 1975 issue Curare construction article "Many tests where performed to perfect this new design [anhederal] concept. It was found that the airfoil was very critical of the stabilizer otherwise opposite results where obtained."
The advantages mentioned,optimum low and high speed performance:
- Landing performance was improved
- Even bigger advantage in figure M since oscillation after stall turn was eliminated
- Rolls was improved (much better then the Super Sicroly)
- Improved crosswind performance and smoothness in gusty winds

/Bo

790

As i was drinking my coffee this morning i observed something i hadn't noticed before. The birds that were soaring had their wings in a positive dihedral. The birds that were flying near and into trees had their wings in a negative dihedral position. I assume that for simple soaring the positive dihedral keeps them stable and level. Then for rapid turning faster roll maneuvering, the negative dihedral position is easier for them. Of course i could be wrong but it makes sense.

stuntflyr

Wilbur and Orville saw the same and designed the Flyer with anhedral. They quickly changed theirs minds to simply no dihedral, though time would show that humans need the stability of dihedral, especially at low speed and near the ground.
We humans just don't have that innate sense for instantaneous situational awareness down yet.
Chris...

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Except when we program a computer to take care of flying utterly unstable aircraft such as an F4 Phantom or an F18 Hornet.

Gregg G

My Feedback: (7)

I still think it's a *******ized Phoenix 7! I don't see a diamond stab on it?

Greg Grigsby

KLXMASTER14

It is there, (the diamond stab) enlarge the pic and look closely at the paint trim lines. You will see a distinct "kink" in the line at approximately 1/3 back along the chord from the LE. Also note that there is about 1/2" to 3/4" missing from the TE of the rudder. It should extend back further. Look at my drawing on post #11. The missing material makes it look funny.

-Robert

790

The model is sitting on it's tail - pushing the rudder approx 15 degrees left. From the camera vantage point it looks shorter than it is.