Yup,

in the 80's RCM published a number of sport pattern designs that would be inline and similar to the Side Pocket. One name in particular jumps to mind - Scallywag, but I don't recall the details.

David

Found it.

It's called the Mini Prohttp://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/atta...mentid=1922485 from the September 1985 RCM Magazine. Very cool looking IMO. The author designed it for a friend that wanted a plane to relace his Kadet

Perfect for you James if you are interested in building.

I'll finish scanning the complete article and post it later. It includes plans. Will be adding it to my long list of planes I'd like to build.

Bryan

Zachery,

The planes Brian and others mentioned above are certainly not as docile as a kadet and I could see your point of polar opposites. I was thinking that maybe he was thinking he was ready for something a little more advanced as he did post in this forum.

I do agree that the planes mentioned would exhibit good slow speed characteristics. John Boren the designer the Mini Pro gave us the perfect transitioning plane from trainer to pattern IMO.

There are others for sure like the one doxilla mentioned the Scallywag, albeit it's a tail dragger.

I like that Mini Pro. It looks like a borderline fun flyer. I wouldn't worry too much about what the OP wants. He hasn't chimed in since this whole thing started. We're just talking to each other at this point.

OP chiming in. :)
I love the looks of those ---rare "planes. I have a stick that is a rocket ship, it seems to make the field shrink. I have a Kadet with alerons that is a blast to fly, it will do most any of the pattern, but it (more likely me) is a little wonky on some maneuvers. I don't mind a plane that flies fast, but to me they aren't as fun, especially if it has a lower speed of mach 3 :)
I think I'll check into the Mini Pro and the Scallywag. Thanks guys.
James

Here's what the Mini Pro looks like in plan form.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/atta...mentid=1923059

I think my most favorite thing about this is the Kraft wheels shown on the plan.

Article+ included. ****Edit**** Not!!! Apparently RCM is not excepting pdf attachments.

If you want the RCM Mini Pro article PM me your email address and I'll send it along.

Didn't mean to lash out James. I'm glad we could help.

Tom

I love Kraft wheels. Elegant look, hidden wheel collars, multiple styles. The only problem was their weight. I would love someone to release these wheels again but lighten them up a lot.

Mini Pro
 

I found the full article here. It is a fun flier.

No.
What you are looking for is analogous to anhydrous water. Classic pattern airplanes are designed to fly best at speed.

I understand what you are looking for in flight performance. I would suggest looking around for a Great Planes Venus II or equivalent. While not a real classic airframe, they are fat on wing area (read fly well at lower speed), easy to fly and will do a reasonable stand in for a classic plane when flying aerobatics. They are also larger and easier to see with our aging eyes.

-Robert

Maxi Pro
 

Here's John' Boren's Maxi Pro. Even better.

http://store.laser-design-services.c...roducts_id=236


The Kwikfli mkIII is one of the last pattern planes able to fly well without going fast at all... It would be even better if you scale it up to a 30 or 50cc sized plane.

Not as slow as a Kadet but appears much slower than the Tipo type planes and from the same era is the Brushfire. A bigger "fatter" plane. Needs a lot of power but rolls better than "almost" anything else out there from its time. As I remember, it looked more like today's pattern planes in the air.

I'm not a pattern guy, but I've had a few flights on the wonderful old Astrohog design and maybe that would be something to consider for the slow and aerobatic criteria? I flew the Bridi Trainer 60 with the symmetrical wing back in the day and it would slow to a walking pace on landing.

Hmmmm, I didn't read every post but the ones I read seem to be missing the OP's point. I think Dave stated it well, a Tipo type or Curare type that flew everything, not just landings, at Kadet speeds.

Take a look at the Kadet specs: around 900 squares of wing hauling around a 4 1/2 to 5 lb weight with a 40. Nothing like that available today that remotely resembles a Tipo or Curare. That doesn't mean that a new model couldn't be created to fit the bill. The guy wants decent precise flight (which these pattern models would provide) but at around 1/2 - 2/3 the speed.

Forget fattening wing sections, squaring off the wing planforms like the U cantdo, and so forth.

Add the power and weight requirements to a model design resembling the Tipo or Curare except get a bigger wing on them and you would have something worthwhile to fit the original suggested requirements

Matt,

I think you struck a key point: wing loading. If the Kadet Sr really has 900 squares and can be RTF at 5 lbs, that puts it at around 8.3 oz/sq ft of loading which is practically foamy class.

I can't think of many classics that would adapt well in terms of super light construction that would yield a reliable aerobatic model. I doubt that a Kadet could be put into a violent snap and recover structurally sound - not that the model would likely enter the maneuver. However, I think that a 40 class model could be built to 4 lbs or so with some 600 squares or thereabouts. Mike on his RCG Sabre build is in that ballpark (although his wing is smaller). At 600 squares a 4 lb model would fly at a little over 15 oz/sq ft which should yield a very docile model and still respond well to aerobatics.

Another classic that comes to mind that could be in that ballpark is the MK Thunder Bird 40. With a light engine and covering, it can probably be brought in at around 4-4.5 lbs on 8 oz of fuel. The wing could be easily extended in span by a rib bay. Not a bad looking model either.

David

KLXMASTER14 - Robert,
I really like that venus II. Two things I didn't like were 1;ARF, and 2; discontinued.
I kinda thought that I may have been looking for a combination of incompatable opposites but I wasn't sure. I figured if anyone would know
the members here would.
I'm only 54, but I didn't like to fly those super fast back when I had a lot better eyesight and reflexes. They just weren't as fun for me. I was looking
at the Scallywag and guess what - it looks very close to a gp Super Sportster. and Tower has a .60 in kit form in stock. I have seen the ss60 fly
and while they may scoot purdy good, they can fly fairly slow. All in all that would be a nice wide speed envelope to have in a pretty nice
lookin plane. (not as sexy as a Tipo or Curare, but close) :)
I may have to see if some of the newer pattern planes catch my eye, but I'm thinkin more and more that the ss60 is my next bird.
James

The Venus II, when it was in production, was less of a classic pattern plane, and more of a reduced size F3A plane. Something like the World Models Spot On 120 is in the same general size range. Still on ARF though.

Maybe you should look at some of the modern F3A designs as they have much better wing loading than the early pattern models. How do you want it to fly? do you want something precise that just goes slow? or do you just want slow? Thickening the wing and lightening the plane may make a lot of lift but can kill how it flys if you like precision. The UCD flys like a crap compared to any decent extra, edge, or yak with a decent wing loading.. I dusted off my favorite old profile hots with its thick wing and flew it a couple years back and was like omg I cant believe how poorly this flys compared to more modern designs that are lighter with a thinner wing section. Your best bet would be to find an old pattern kit, or plans, and build it with 1/2 the wood IE KEEP IT LIGHT... then it would fly slow and wouldn't screw up the flight characteristics..

James,

That might not be a bad idea - the GP SS. My only concern with GP kits is that unless the design and construction has been revised, they tend to be somewhat overbuilt. I suspect the ARF version of their kits are lighter since they are cost optimized and obviously more current, but,... I don't know much about ARF's.

I think you'll find a similar flight envelope in the Sig 4 Star at less weight and you can reduce weight further yet. A Kaos, Thunder Bird or Side Pocket can be built very light, perform better than the SS or 4* and are more attractive in my opinion but they would require a plans build and some customizing. I think the trick is to stick to sheeted hollow lite ply or thin balsa formers and 1/16" skins. You could use 3/32" sides and keep those as small as needed. Anything that calls for a 1/4" or 3/8" slab of balsa is a no no and needs to be axed and addressed.

at the end of the day I think its a matter of how much time you want to put into it. A SS or 4* kit is an easy quick frame up. You could build a lighter nicer looking model with some plans and ingenuity and as always..., good old fashioned patience and diligence.

David

Dave, exactly....power loading also. Power should be just enough for extended verticals on a 15 mph wind day. Not unlimited at half throttle in 30 mph wind as some of the stuff available today is doing.

5 lbs and a 40-45 go together like peanut butter and jam. Many moons ago I scratch built a 40 sized Curare from a plan appearing in MAN or RCM, I just enlarged the drawing, fattening the fuse and increasing area, removing much of the thick wood. As I recall, it came out at just about 600 squares and around 4 1/2 lbs. It flew great with an old trusty KB40 on muffler. Talking about putting around at 1/3 throttle...really kool.

Back then we had large clunky servos of minimal tork and slow speed too. With today's gear, the same model would shed 8 ounces easy. Of course the model is long gone, destroyed in one of my moves. Maybe time to design another??

I don't understand why doxilia thinks that a super light classic pattern ship wouldn't be aerobatic. I probably missed something.

Since I read this thread it's actually gotten my wheels turning. The only difference between how I would build a super-light pattern ship and my Great Gonzo would be to strengthen the center of the wing and airfoil the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. It would be very aerobatic.

I think precision would suffer a lot because it would move around a lot in anything less than perfect air but weight has nothing to do with aerobatic ability. Basically we're talking modern 3D construction but a pattern ship planform. So what did I miss?

http://www.airfieldmodels.com/galler...c/great_gonzo/

That's one thing the rocket ships have going for them. They're immune to wind. Most of my planes are only fun in dead calm conditions. Granted they're mostly parkflyers.

I don't think I said that nor do I think it; on the contrary.

What I commented on was whether the classic could be adapted and built reliably to approach foamy class wing loading other things being constant. I'm thinking more along the lines of structural integrity. I could be wrong but I don't think there are many aerobatic pattern designs using a 40 size glow engine (which I've taken as a given) which have sub 10 lb. wing loading.

But..., I don't think it's needed or even desirable. Get it in the 14-17 lb. loading ballpark and the classic should then exhibit pattern like behaviour while still being docile if wanted approaching the manner of a Kadet.

I believe there is an intersection point between a classic and a Kadet that yields what the OP had in mind. I think we're all naturally looking at the solution through our own eyes.

David

The only solution is weight control. Weight limits both the max and min speeds 'all else being equal'. If you can build your Curare down to 6 lb it will be able to fly as slow as a trainer, quite comfortably. Given that you are using a .60 up front, it will also be able to accelerate quicker, and have a higher top speed than (say) an 8 lb example, 'all else being equal'. But it will still be a Curare, aerodynamically. The trick is getting that airframe weight down, some internal redesign will be required, and real careful wood selection. Best I have done with a Curare, built to the original (wood) specs is 6.75 lb with HP 61 and muffler, no pipe. Landing speed, with flaps, is pretty slow....
Evan, WB #12.