JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

This time its a nose strut assembly mystery.

Late this summer at our biannual auction (these have been enormously successful since we abandoned the old swapmeet format) I picked up the last item of the auction and one no one else bid on for the princely sum of one dollar.

It was a forlorn old Goldberg Skylark Twin, no engines or electronics and was quite rough but otherwise undamaged. Don,t let the horizontal tip plates fool you those were obviously added by the original builder.

Now what attracted me to this thing was the nosewheel especially since I am a fan of Fults nosewheels I figured I,d pay a buck for this one. Well three weeks ago I put this thing out and took a close look. That is no Fults nosewheel I have four others in use but never seen one with this moulded plastic wheel yolk and the yolk has six moulded embosses for screws and four screws in place serving no use. Also the yolk has moulded in markings: IM R/C.

So while no real need but curiosity has got me by the trim sticks The best thing I can think of was some sort of nosewheel brake accessory, Anyone see this particular unit??

Oh ya the airplane took only a mild refurbishment, modern electronics and a nice matched pair of OS .15FP's had just waiting for such a project she is flying very nicely indeed.

John

skylark-flier

NICE plane!! Looking forward to a flight report, especially with those "Conny" fins. Y'er right too, that does look like a nosewheel brake mount. My CG Sr Falcon originally had a nosewheel brake but that was simply a "L" rod soldered over the nosewheel with a curved brass sheet over it. Still have the I-bolts inside the plane for the actuator string - never took them out when I re-built the nose last winter.

latinRClover

Is a kavan nosegear with brake

http://www.kavanrc.com/IndexText/0106E.html

http://rchungary.unas.hu/en/spd/8001...-max-O-70mm-Ka

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Wow outstanding LatinRClover that certainly is what I have and heck might even see if I can fabricate missing brake component now that I have an idea how this one worked, even though the the airplane really does not need one. I did do a home made unit two years a ago on a different airplane that works pretty well.

Any way thanks agine LRC I appreciate your effort to share.

Dave I was kind of hoping you would respond and understand that you are quite the Skylark fan I had achieved about six flights before I started this thread and did two more this morning and boy was it cold with the windchill. I did experience the first inflight engine stoppage on the second but I was able to identify ang get full rudder into the good engine which restored control with power up. Managed almost the full circuit to land but I say she handled well if good rudder technique is used and can even climb albeit slowly with just one of the little .15's going .

I think perhaps the ideal engine would be a .20 glow engine but heck those are even harder to come by in these parts than the .15's

John

Michaelj2k

What a coincidence. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Landing-Gear...oAAOSw44BYcAKN

skylark-flier

Hey John! Yeah, I'm a Skylark fan - both the RC and CL Skylarks. While I've had 7 CL Skylarks (3 of which are still active) I've never built the RC Skylark. Got the plans, just haven't built it yet. One day, though, it's a sure thing. Got a pair of NIB OS.25's just sitting around that would go into it nicely - would just have to make sure I kept them powered-down a bit.

Actually, what I'd REALLY like to come across are the plans for the Skylark-70. That one would get built almost immediately.

Geez, I'm glad you're having so much success with your twin. It's good that she can stay in the air with one engine out too - makes it a whole lot more fun, knowing that you're not going to "automatically" re-kit when an engine quits.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Yes indeed Michael quite a coincidence also curious I notice the bids starting .99 cents and thats what I spent the buck on figuring I didn,t care about the old airframe.

Yup dave she is a little sweetheart But I am thinking a pair of .25's might just be a bit much as its already got hotrodding at heart even with just the .15's. She is completely controllable but only if you identify and get full rudder into the good engine and not just aileron into the good side. Otherwise there is no reason to just bail out gliding onto the rough, wherever. Course that applys to all the multis I have done.


John

kcc

When I was about 13, my dad entered a pattern contest with an orange Skylark twin. It was powered by two Veco 19's, "guided" by an Orbit radio. I know guys, I'm old��. It sounded really cool, and flew well.

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Hey thanks for sharing the story of your pop and his Skylark I enjoyed that. It even sparked some good old memories of mine when you mentioned he used an Orbit with it. I purchased a new Orbit 6 in 1970 and used it until it became illegal still on the old 72.40 (now an industrial ch) . Could never bear to dispose of it until about five years ago when a very sharp young man helped me convert to 2.4 and it now flys maybe several times a year in a period correct Midwest Aristo Cat. It may be six channel and have trims but nothing else not even servo reverse.



John

fizzwater2

My Feedback: (61)

I remember that sort of "servo reversing" - either move the linkage, or swap the pot wires, the motor wires,and re-center the servo....

buzzard bait

I had a Skylark 56 I also refurbished from someone's very old build. Surprisingly, I felt that Goldberg didn't quite get this one right, if built stock with no ailerons and the small fin/rudder. Mine had the correct stock dihedral, but it was not enough. Every turn was a nail-biter until I sawed off the rear of the trailing edges and turned them into ailerons.

Once I had ailerons on it the plane turned pretty well, but there was quite a bit of tail waggle coming out of the turns. Therefore I was very interested to see those tip plates on the stab, because I suspect the original owner had the same experience. I added some rudder area to mine, but that didn't solve the problem. Eventually I moved the CG forward and that did the job. I didn't need it for pitch stability, but I needed more side area aft of the CG and less forward.

Mine was powered with an OS 25 FP, and it was quite good with that. I agree that two of them would be a lot for this design.

You can get a short kit for a "Skylark Senior". I don't think Goldberg ever kitted a Skylark bigger than 56 inches, but the plans are out there.

Jim