My first CL plane in 40+ years

GermanBeez wrote:i especially like the little toot-is that a hard plane to build?
and it seems to fit only the space bug...

I've built several and they are EEEEE ZZZZZ to build. I built the first one with my now 46 year old son when he was a kid and taught him to fly C/L. It survived until he went to college and crashed it in his dormatory paved parking lot SPLAT! End of plane but the BW survived and will be used on the plane that I'm building now.

They look very sharp painted white w/red trim and the ailerons outlined with trim tape. The proveded decals only add more to the effect. The plane is an absolute C/L classic .049 performer with a strong engine and a stunt tank; inverted flight is entirely doable (if you have some C/L experience. BTW, experience only come as a result of a few crashes.) "No pain,no gain." is a cardinal rule rule of model aviation.




Regards,

Dave

yeah, i don't know which one i like better.
the pt-19 they have, or the lil toot.
which one is easier to fly?

Beez:

I sense a bit of timidity in your responses. You might "buddy up" with some C/L pilots in your area (and I sure there are some) and see how they are flying and what they fly. Seek out their assistance in any attempt that you might make. Most often your questions will be glady answered. (That's how I learned much of what I know about aeromodeling)

Part of the enjoyment of most anything is the association with others of similar interest. Knowledge is gained thereby. Flying is no more a solo activity that tennis.

SuperDave
Certified Coxaholic

i'm not sure if anybody flies control line around here. i've never seen em.
and the only model flying club in the region actually has membership waiting lines!
so yeah, i have no idea if anyone- especially my age- has even heard of c/l.
the only thing they know is probably these stupid styrofoam "planes" by silverlit, that
are rather popular over here....although, my neighbour likes models and stuff( he has a 1500$ hpi baja)
so maybe i can ask him...i mean, whats the trick flying it? there are two lines horizontal to each other,
and you control the elevators by pulling on either one of the strings for up and down, they are both connected
to a handle so you just have to slightly turn it either towards the planes flying direction or against it.
that's pretty much it, right?

beez:

Control line (CL) flying is also know as "U-Control" because the flying handle is "U" shaped and is held vertically when flying. The upward line causes the elevator (not elevatorS) to move upward and the plane responds by rising; the downward line the opposite.

If there is a "trick" to this it is NOT to overcontrol which causes an extreme reaction from the airplane which usually causes a major crash.

The length of the flying lines used depends on the type and size of the airplane: i.e. when I hlew .35-.40 w/ 40" plus wingspan stunt planes I used 60 foot fine cable control lines. An .049 stunter would best be flown on lines half (or less) that length. Further braided Dacron is better suited to 1/@A planes because it's lighter and creates less line drag.

It is also critical to add a small amout of weight to the outboard wing tip to compensate for the drag created by the lines while it motion. No weight then the plane will come in an meet you in the center of the circle. HELLO! CRASH!

The plane's bellcrank may also be adjusted to either increase or decrease the plane's reaction to control inputs. The beginner should start with less rather than more graduating upward as confidence increases. (ditto the control horn on the elevator)

All this is best witnessed and not explained. Metaphorically, it's like learning to ride a bicycle; difficult at first, instinctive with mastery. Once learned, never forgotten.

SuperDave

wow, thanks!
ya know, with 25 $ per kit its not such a big loss if you crash it...
i'm thinking about buying the pt-19 sometime. it looks easy to build and easy to fly.
i know how to control normal model airplanes, so i'm sort of used to very small control inputs.
the only thing i can't stand is seeing a model plane crash- especially when you've built it yourself...it gets me all worked up. like i said earlier, theres no one round here i know who flies c/l. actually, there is only one specialized c/l field
left in all west germany! but we have a nice big fairground with a large flat pavet area, and a large clear meadow right
next to it. so i actually have a good space to fly these planes. so what do you think? should i just try it?

"Schwarzenegger is a Cookie!" - If his he's a "BROKE" cookie especially after his divorce. His ex got him "big time". Reportedly over $36 million.
-----------------------------------------------------
U-control is best done with a partner/coach that can work you through the steps and uncertainty. You'll at least need someone to hold the running plane until you can get out to the control handle in the center of the flying circle.

I consider ALL my flying models expendable and remind you that a "crash" may lead to little more than a broken prop. Very often a "wipe out" may be readily repaired sometimes on the spot especially "slab" balsa wings and profile fuselages may be pieced together to fly again. (CA cement is wonderful for this purpose). Flying off pavement is not a particular wise option; launching maybe, but actual flying, no. Grass is most assuredly more forgiving in a crash scenario. (A "nose-in" on pavement can destroy an engine. I once pulled out a bellcrank coming up from an outside loop. ARG!

Just going to a flying club as spectator/visitor can be very educational.

SD

SuperDave wrote:beez:

Control line (CL) flying is also know as "U-Control" because the flying handle is "U" shaped ...

SuperDave

I thought it was U-control because YOU controlled it, as opposed to free flight or tethered without any contol.

My handle is D shaped, BTW.

I thought it was U-control because YOU controlled it, as opposed to free flight or tethered without any contol.
My handle is D shaped, BTW.[/quote]
Yes, that's the way I remember it too. Jim Walker had a patent and so other kits were sold as Conrtroliner, etc.
Al

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHU80WWTfVs

PV Pilot wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHU80WWTfVs

That's too bad! 2:58

ok guys, i've slept over it and i've come to the conclusion that i'll just buy the pt-19 kit and go for it.
i'll buy some old babe bee from ebay so the loss isnt that great if it breaks on impact.
http://miniglowplanes.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=463
do i need some covering material like monokote, to give it some colour?
and last but not least (sorry if i'm annoying you- i just want to get it right ):
what hardware do i need besides control line and the handle to finish it?

GermanBeez wrote:ok guys, i've slept over it and i've come to the conclusion that i'll just buy the pt-19 kit and go for it.
i'll buy some old babe bee from ebay so the loss isnt that great if it breaks on impact.
http://miniglowplanes.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=463
do i need some covering material like monokote, to give it some colour?
and last but not least (sorry if i'm annoying you- i just want to get it right ):
what hardware do i need besides control line and the handle to finish it?

Not sure what hardware comes with the kit...many have the pushrod wire included, as yours probably will. There are drawings and diagrams of the bellcrank / control horn set-up on the internet but I'll try to find one and post it if needed.

If you'd like, I can photograph an original Cox 1/2A handle ("D" shaped like Super Dave's), next to a scale, and you could cut out your own exact copy from 1/4 ply if you have access to wood-working tools.

If it's a sheet-wing model, you could paint it instead of Monokoting it. The area behind the engine must be painted anyway, to protect it from soaking up the Babe Bee's castor oil.

Maybe you could start a new thread, dedicated to your PT-19, and members here could walk you through it, making it a partnership project.

I think it'd be great fun help someone get going in this great little hobby.

[quote="Kim"]

GermanBeez wrote:.

Maybe you could start a new thread, dedicated to your PT-19, and members here could walk you through it, making it a partnership project.

I think it'd be great fun help someone get going in this great little hobby.

good idea.

Uncertain WHICH PT-19 is being referenced here. The common plastic one by Cox is a mediocre performer at best; exemplary of the "crash and trash" genre. (It has no airfoil)

SuperDave

we are talking about the balsa pt-19 at miniglowplanes.com.
it has a profile fuselage, and it looks REALLY easy to build. thats why i like it.
heres the link again:
http://miniglowplanes.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=463

Yeah...loks like you get all of the hardware needed for the plane itself. Think it'd be a cool project.

you probably just need the lines, the handle and these clips that you use to connect the control line to the bell crank.

The PT19 is a variant of the Musciano Golden Hawk kit, which I have at my shop in Mariposa. I'll be back up there later today and will look at it, but according to the Blackhawk homepage, they are pretty complete (the Sig kit did not include hinge material ) and should have all the hardware.

These are known as "hollow log" kits where the fuselage is a solid block of balsa With a cavity hogged out of the block to reduce mass. There is a section on the BH website about them making a kit that shows this, but I can't find it at the moment. But be prepared for a lot of sanding if you want a decent appearance and for it to fly well. The lighter the airframe, the better it flies. So, you are also going to want some sort of a sanding sealer/filler for the final sanding process so the pores of the balsa fill in and you get a relatively smooth finish when you do paint it. I should have use more filler (I used Aero Gloss because my LHS had it and I was familiar with it) but I am sure others will have different ideas on what to use. I should/could have used more filler but I was concerned about weight. While the finish looks smooth on my Beech, it isn't.

So besides filler and sand paper, you are going need adhesives. I used epoxy for the firewall to fuselage. The rest was CA, or on the wing to fuselage joints, a thin bead of yellow Titebond woodworking glue in the middle then CA along the outside of the joints to hold it together while the Titebond cured.

As for paint, I did some research on the net. Fuel proof colored dope was 3 hours away from me, or it had to be shipped. Research yielded that success was possible with automotive paints covered with clear lacquer. I tested it by painting the 2x2 I pressed into service clamped to a table for a test stand to run the engine, and it seems to be OK.

Because of the structure of a biplane, I figured it would be difficult to paint fully assembled, I test fitted everything then masked off where the glue joints would be before applying the sealer/filler and subsequent paint/lacquer. You probably won't have that issue with this model since it is a monoplane and things aren't in the way of where you are trying to paint.

If you look at the picture of the Cyclone kit ( which I also have) on the Blackhawk site, I think it gives you a better idea of the raw fuselage and how much sanding is going to be needed... I think the trick is going to be to remove as much balsa as possible to create a fair and light structure while not making it weak.

I would also think about looking for a Golden Bee or a Black Widow. Those have slightly larger tanks with "stunt" venting. On a Baby Bee, the vents are both out the top of the back plate,m so if you try to fly inverted, all the fuel runs out when the engine is upside down. Stunt venting eliminates that problem.

Good luck. We're here for you.

i have a black widow, a babe bee and so on. but at first i want it to fly as tame and slow as possible to actually get used
to flying c/l. and if i want, i can still sand it and make it lighter, once i've mastered. i think i'll
use my babe bee first. i don't want to start flying inverted right away
but i think coating at least the wings in monokote (which i think they did with the one on miniglowplanes.com)
makes for a shinyer and smoother surface.

Ignore my talk about hollow log. I thought this was a different Blackhawk kit. It is profile fuselage, so a LOT less sanding.

The also show it with a sure start which would take an external tank... You may have issues getting it to balance with. Baby Bee, more so with a Golden or BW.

meh, i'll just weigh the equivalent of fuel that fits in the space for the tank, and put something of equal weight in there.
and if the tank would be almost empty, it would get lighter back there anyway so i bet they calculated that in too.
i'm happy to hear that there is a lot less sanding to be done. although i wouldn't mind.

I think the problem is getting it to not be nose heavy with a BB as the crank case is a good 3/4" farther out coupled with the weight of the tank/backplate ( and of course, the small weight of a little fuel). It's all about levers. Think teeter-totter.