My first CL plane in 40+ years

I don't particularly enjoy sanding. I used a Black and Decker Mouse sander on the Beech and it worked well. To shape the "log" on the Golden Hawk and Cyclone, I am going to try an oscillating vertical drum sander that I have in the shop (hooked up to my 5HP dust collection system). This beautiful Cylone is by one of the members of the local club.



Hard to believe that fuselage started as a block of balsa and if you compare it to what you see here, you can tell a LOT of balsa was removed.

wow, it must be hard to sand it so it isn't lopsided...is monokote a good way to coat the wings?

Kim wrote:A note about the Babe Bee. If you block one of the filler tubes (you have to open it for fueling, of course) with a plugged piece of tubing when you fly, the engine won't lose any fuel regardless of the plane's attitude.

This is also a good idea for the stunt tanks, because the prop blast tends to siphon fuel from them as well. Just peak the engine and watch the spray of fuel from the tube. With one tube blocked, the draw is one-way only--through the unblocked tube. It is a little more trouble, but your flights will be longer, because you're using ALL of the fuel you loaded into the tank.

I forgot about that trick with a BB.

I'll have to try that on the stunt tank too... I extended the tubes with short pieces of fuel line and beveled the ends so they face forward and there is some pressure, but I like this idea better. Plug the top one and leave the bottom vented as I have it.

I think you (Kim) made the observation about .010 being "slobbering"... An apt description if I ever heard it... It seems as much fuel or more gets flung about as is being burned.

GermanBeez wrote:wow, it must be hard to sand it so it isn't lopsided...is monokote a good way to coat the wings?

I haven't done monokote in years either, but I did use it successfully to cover foam wings and a sheeted fuselage in the disposable 2 Ch RC 1/2A "Sticks" that I used to build years ago.

I think you (Kim) made the observation about .010 being "slobbering"... An apt description if I ever heard it... It seems as much fuel or more gets flung about as is being burned.[/quote]

Yeah, they are nasty enough without also throwing precious fuel down the side of the plane ! It also (I think) makes life easier on the paint because you're not dumping nearly as much nitro on the finish. Most of the airplane paints can handle oil, but nitro and the other flammables can really attack it.

alright, then i'll buy some yellow monokote too. i'm just trying to find all the stuff i need so i can place it in one order,
as it has to be shipped to germany. i guess i should pain the fuselage, i know some hobby shops around hhere who have good paint and dope.

Having a Blackhawk "Pitt's Special" Bipe "hollow-log" kit I must comment that they are NOT an "easy build" as implied here. The fuse takes a lot of sanding to achieve the effect shown here.

IMO, "profile" kits go together in much shorter time and will FAR less effort. In my mind they are much better choice for the beginner in CL flying; a "total wipe-out" is less of a loss of time and money.

Crashes, and crash you will, are just part of the learning curve in model aviation. My first CL plane was a Sterling "Ringmaster": legendary in it's time. It had a profile fuse and a very solid built-up wing structure; both were easily repaired meeting it's demise flying "blood and guts" CL combat flying. My competitor did an outside loop and came up under my Ringmaster and "chewed" off the tail with his prop..

In combat CL competition their are TWO types of pilots: the "quick" and the "dead".

SD
Older 'n dirt (but with a LOT of experience)

SuperDave wrote:Having a Blackhawk "Pitt's Special" Bipe "hollow-log" kit I must comment that they are NOT an "easy build" as implied here. The fuse takes a lot of sanding to achieve the effect shown here.

IMO, "profile" kits go together in much shorter time and will FAR less effort. In my mind they are much better choice for the beginner in CL flying; a "total wipe-out" is less of a loss of time and money.

yeah, that's what i thought of the pt-19. it's THE classic cox c/l plane, and it has a simple to assemble profile fuselage.

No, beez, the classic Cox plastic PT-19 has formed plastic fuse not a profile one.

SD

oh i'm sorry!
i was talking about the one by black hawk models
sorry.

Out some months I plan to build a "Baby Flite-streak" done up red/white/blue "retro-style" w/BW power.

I suppose, that with age, I'll need to fly with longer lines, because spinning around in circles isn't is easy as it once was.

"Time wounds all heels"

SD
Older 'n dirt

is 60 feet considered long?

For an .049, 30-35 feet is best, depending on the plane and engine health.

Another suggestion (hope I'm not making too many): When you get your kit, if it doesn't include full-size plans, make yourself some by tracing the parts on some poster paper (measure and mark each piece' thickness). You can then crank out additional planes using balsa stock wood. AND you can experiment with slightly larger wings, longer/shorter nose and tail moments, and other great stuff!

You can also make your own bellcranks from 3/32 ply, and sleeve them with a brass or plastic tube from a ball point ink pen. If you treat them with a little CA (make SURE it's cured before installation!) they will last the life of the plane and beyond.

One more...you can install "stitched hinges" using medium carpet thread. It's an old-timers trick and involves a little more work, but, once broken in, have practically no resistance or play, and allow control throws to any degree without binding. They also will last the life of the plane.

thanks so much for the tips! i appreciate it!
i've got another one:
dacron or steel?
i tend to buy dacron because it's cheaper.

GermanBeez wrote:is 60 feet considered long?

Not for a Class C (.35-.40 engines) CL planes; they're required in CL stunt competition by the AMA.

SD

I still fly some dacron because of my personal "nostalgia" thing, but steel lines are WAY better because of the greatly reduced drag.

But more than either of those, I've almost completely switched over (thanks to advice from some of my buds at the other .049 forum) to a brand of fishing line sold here under the name of "Spider Wire". It's super light, doesn't stretch, and the 15lb test will NEVER be broken by a 1/2A plane! AND, it's cheap !

It IS easily tangled but you can manage this with some care and practice (just as the steel cables are vulnerable to failure from kinking if not handled carefully).

Here are the stitched hinges on my little "Poolboy" biplane.

The poor airplane is just about shot, and needs some serious rebuilding if it's gonna fly again, but it's still got great hinges !!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, but steel cable lines ARE heavier than dacron and DO create more drag from their weight.

I know this from over 60 years CL experience.

I always stored my steel lines on wooden spools that I built for that purpose.

Remember the "looping" a CL plane creates a twist in the lines; when they become excessive plane control become more difficult. Good pilots count the loops as they make them and unwisting the lines by looping in the opposite direction in equal number.

SD
Older 'n dirt

The .015 gauge, 60' cable used on .35 size planes IS a lot heavier than dacron lines, but the .008 gauge X 35' used with 1/2A, although still heavier, can still be a better choice as they don't have the "parachute" effect of the lighter dacron lines.

Still, it's as much a personal preference as anything, and most of this gear is cheap enough to allow a person to buy all of them and figure out what they like best.

My dacron AND steel lines (for 1/2A) have all been gathering dust since I started using Spider Wire.

Sorry Cz10...didn't mean to high-jack your topic...we just got going. Maybe we can take this to a new thread.

Yes, lets.

Several months back on RCU we were discussing what the best line for a .010 model Was the general opinion was that Dacron was for more sraggy that the thin steel lines.

Kim wrote:Sorry Cz10...didn't mean to high-jack your topic...we just got going. Maybe we can take this to a new thread.

Doesn't bother me...