|
RE: Skylark 56 and Jr. Skylark Canopies Now Available
I acquired a sad looking Skylark 56 this weekend needing recovering and a canopy. I can bring her back to new but I need a canopy. I see the wingmfg site is closed which seemed to be the source for a canopy. Is there nother source for the canopy for the Skylark 56?
Posted on: 9/16/2012 7:08 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229917
RE: Painting with rustoleum
I have painted a number of glow powered models with Rustoleum with no problems with them being fuel proof. I have used Rustoleum Professional if that would be different from what others are using. The only issues I find in using Rustoleum Professional is having to wait for about a week before recoating for a trim color otherwise the new coat will crinkle. I have Rustoluem finishes that are 6 years old and still look good. I find Rustoleum Professional to be a good looking, economical finish.
Posted on: 8/20/2012 8:14 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Tips & Techniques"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199632
RE: Aeromaster resurrected
Ralph - Thanks for posting the pictures. Really nice looking Yak and Aeromaster. I'm sure a lot of masking tape and paper was used to get that great color scheme. Been there with a 1/3 scale Pitts S2A with a very similar color scheme. What did you use for covering? My Aeromaster is covered with white 21st Century fabric and then the colors are done with Rustoleum. By the way, I like the gnarly pilot!
Posted on: 6/13/2012 8:50 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11117541
RE: Aeromaster resurrected
Happy news. The Aeromaster whose remains came to me in a paper grocery bag won first place at our clubs building contest last night. It is pictured above in my first post. It too was painted with spray can Rustoleum Professional. It has worked well on a number of my airplanes. Now as stated in an earlier post, it is on to the Somethin' Extra I found in the trash barrel at the field. The rebuild is down to the final sanding and covering. Pictures and maiden flight coming soon. I agree with Ralph White that it might take longer in some cases to rebuild rather than build from scratch but the pleasure of building and bringing what was tossed as junk to be a useable, admired airplane is a great feeling and the cost in minimal. Hang around the flying feild long enough and you will never run out of projects - rebuilding trash barrel kits!
Posted on: 6/13/2012 11:16 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11116950
RE: Sig Stratus plans wanted
The Sig Stratus is a fun, smooth flying airplane. Built mine from the it I purchased 30 years ago and just built it and put on the first flight last summer. I believe you will really enjoy this airplane if you build and fly it. I assume no plans came with the kit so I would be happy to arrange to get you a copy of my plans. Let me know contact info and will get a copy made.
Posted on: 6/11/2012 11:47 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11114568
RE: Slimline Showtime Pro Smoke System
A simple solution to reliable smoke for me is a B&B Specialties smoke pump and a DuBro shut off valve, the little red plastic one. B&B also sells a shut off valve which I believe allows flow adjustment. The pump runs off the crankcase pressure. The carb reed block is drilled and tapped for a nipple to connect the hose to the pump to make the pump work. I found it important to keep the line from the carb reed block to the pump as short as possible. A long line seems to effectively increase the volume in the crankcase affecting engine performance. My pressure line is about 1 1/2" long and the pump is clamped to the engine standoffs with home-made mounting clamps. Lines are run from the tank to the pump and then to the shut off valve just before the muffler. When the smoke switch on the transmitter is flipped, smoke is on in about a second and the same for smoke off. I am running this on a DLE 55 with stock muffler and Super Dri smoke oil and couldn't be happier with this particular set up. Real simple and inexpensive. Worked the first time and every time.
Posted on: 6/6/2012 8:37 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "User Product Reviews"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11108660
RE: Aeromaster resurrected
This is to say the the resurrected Aeromaster has had its maiden flight plus 10-11 more. It flys so well it could end up being my "go to" airplane. I am so happy I didn't let the previous owner burn the wreckage. The OS 46 and 12-6 Master Airscrew is a great combo. Plenty of pull for huge, graceful loops, big stall turns, etc. Landings are beautiful, stretched 3 pointers that draw praise. Now, I am on to a rebuild of a Sig Somethin' Extra that someone stuffed into the trash barrel. It had one good wing and a fish-headed fuse. Tail was perfect. Also included 3 servos, two worked and one had broken gears. Just needs a buch of TLC and patience and it will be in the air soon. I will get some pictures and pass them on. Somewhere on RCU some guy put it so aptly, something to the effect of - one guys wreckage is my ARF. And, at the fraction of the cost of a new one I might ad! I love the look of disbelief on the previous owner's face whe I show up at the field with the resurrected wreckage. So many airplanes; so little time.
Posted on: 5/18/2012 8:07 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11086340
RE: TOC Laser
Your build is looking really fine. Thought I would update my "prebuilt" auction Laser. Removed the ABS turtledeck back to the leading edge of the stab and built a film covered former and stringer turtledeck. Replaced the vinyl Red Bull lettering that lapped over the old removed turtledeck with Ultrcoat letters copied from the original by doing a pencil rub transfer on paper over the old letters. Came out really nice. Put the rudder servo under the wing and put the throttle, choke, and smoke valve servos behind the firewall. Radio and ignition batteries are just behind the servos. With 1.5 lbs less engine weight compared to the G62, I was worried that there would have to be lead in the nose but it balanced per the plan. The sad part of the report is that the airplane still weighs 22 lbs. Whoever built the model might have built heavy, or perhaps the wood that came in the kit was heavy. Each wing complete with a servo weighs 2.75 lbs.The aluminum landing gear and wing tube account for a lot also. The point I am touching on here is that careful selection of wood, eliminating non-essential structure, carbon fiber parts and light fiberglass parts make a world of difference when it is put on the scale. You are certianly going down the right road on your build. Regardless of weight, I am sure my 22 lb'er will get up and scoot. I am looking forward to playing with the smoke system I installed more than doing 3D with this one. The next one will come out considerably lighter with the above points in mind.
Posted on: 3/15/2012 10:14 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11002143
RE: TOC Laser
Speedracerntrixie, the Maury you knew moved his shop from St Paul, to Burnsville, MN where I lived and knew him briefly. Sorry to say cancer took him a few years ago. Regarding the tail heavy Laser, it was powered by a heavy G62. I will power it with a DLE 55. Rudder and elevator servos are mounted under the stab. Extra weight up front will come from the ignition battery which the G62 did not have, plus the radio battery was monted behind the wing in the turtledeck so that can be moved forward. I will mount the throttle and servo as far forward as possible. I could also move the rudder servo forward and set up a pull-pull cable to the rudder. If that all doesn't work, I will put a bag of helim somewhere back by the stab. If all goes well with the Laser next summer, I will strip the covering and install lighter components or go with more power. I have considered a DLE 111. Either way it will be fun. Thanks for the offer of help. I will keep that in mind. Nice work on your build! There is obviously skill and patience working through you.
Posted on: 2/20/2012 9:50 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10968603
RE: TOC Laser
I have enjoyed this thread a lot and have been gathering parts and materials for my Laser build. Then, wouldn't you know I found a quick fix to my Laser desire. Went to the Twin City Radio Controllers huge auction a couple of weekends ago in Minneapolis, MN. There before me was a Lanier Laser all built and looking very nice. For a high bid of $265 I took it home. It came from an estate buy out as I understand it and is a clean, no scuffs airplane. It is apparant though that it is not a light weight like is being built in this thread but it is a starting point. The light weight will have to wait for sometime in the future. Fuse, wing and wheels weighs around 16+ pounds and should come out around 21 pounds ready to gas up. Got the servos ordered and the DLE 55 is waiting to be installed. It will serve the purpose for the flying I enjoy.
Posted on: 2/20/2012 6:15 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10968323
RE: American Aircrat Modeler Plans
The picture on the magazine caught my eye and I realized that I have one of those in my basement. I bought it from a friend 30+ years ago. The project of getting it in to the air got slowed to a halt because I had no way to launch it and had other projects that were of greater interest. Now with electric power and folding props, it looks promising to get the project going again soemetime in the near future. The wingspan on mine is not 16 feet; it is 14+ feet. I have eliminated the polyhedral and made the wing to have dihedral reduced appropriately for aileron control. The nose has been changed to appear more scale-like rather than the short pointy nose on the original. Imbedded in the nose was a hunk of lead that must have weighed a pound or two. The longer nose will help balance with less weight. All up weight as I recall was around 7 pounds. I will be watching to see who else has one of these biggies in the works or in the air and will see if I can get a picture posted of what I have at the time.
Posted on: 12/20/2011 7:27 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10869137
RE: New to electric power
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction in this forest of knowledge. I knew someone out there could shorten the learning curve. It is appreciated very much. Also, thanks for the picture of the mag cover showing the enlarged Nomad. I liked Straders "design eye" years ago and am still attracted to his work. I'm off to the electric forum. Thanks.
Posted on: 11/18/2011 11:29 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10818280
New to electric power
I am building a balsa glider from a 1961 Flying Model article/plans. It is the Nomad designed by Ted Strader which I have enlarged from a 48" to a 64" wingspan. I intend to power it with an electric motor mounted on the pod above the wing. I know little about electric power other than I need a motor and prop, esc and batteries. What I need to know is what kind, size, and where to buy of all of the equipment required. Your help would be appreciated.
Posted on: 11/17/2011 4:52 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10817156
RE: Aeromaster resurrected
I appreciate the good advice. Actually had considered a OS 55 but I looked at the price and borrowing sounds like a good option. Actually a 12-6 prop is a recommended prop for the OS 46 AX but I could prop down in diameter or pitch if necessary. If all fails with the 46, I have a RJL 61 that I could drop in with very little trouble. Some day I will have the new Aeromaster built that is still in the kit and it will be the super performer that I would really want with the big wings and big engine. So many airplanes; so little time.
Posted on: 11/1/2011 6:55 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10792886
RE: Aeromaster resurrected
I agree that the 46 seems a little underpowered but the former owner of the airplane flew it OK with a less powerful 45. I flew my first Aeromaster with a ST 56. It flew fine but I suspect the power in that 45 year old ST is about the same or less than the new hot OS 46 AX. I am only expecting a simple, relaxing airplane. I have other airplanes to give me the vertical thrills. However, I am going to build the next Aeromaster from my kit and do the extended double swept wing and power it possibly with my Saito 90. That should perk things up a bit. Good looking Aeromaster, by the way. I see the picture was taken 10 years ago. I hope she is still flying well for you and will give you many more years of service. When things go wrong, save the pieces and rebuild her. An Aeromaster is a terrible thing to waste!
Posted on: 11/1/2011 10:00 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10792090
Aeromaster resurrected
A couple of years ago, a fellow club member was going to burn his crashed Aeromaster at the annual fall bash where a crashed models from the past year are fuel for a bonfire which is overseen by the "grim reeper". I was horrified. I called him and told him that he wasn't going to burn it; he was going to give it to me to rebuild. He complied and the Aeromaster lives again. I had an Aeromaster 40 years ago and have wanted another one since but never got around to building from the kit I have squirreled away. When this wreck came my way, I saw half the work done but it was more work than I thought it would be. The fuse was destroyed to the trailing edge of the lower wing but big pieces did remain. The lower wing was repairable and the top wing had to be built all new. The landing gear was in good shape as were the fin and stab. The only change I made to the model was to make the rudder bigger for better appearance. She is all set to go except for receiver, battery and balancing. She's powered with an OS46 AX and a 12-6 prop. With winter setting in, it will be a model ready for the next season.
Posted on: 10/31/2011 8:36 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10791504
RE: On board glo driver
After spending too much time hooking up and adjusting the onboard glow drivers, I moved to using an onboard D battery (60+ size airplanes) with an external switch. Flip the switch on to start and leave it on through the flight, or flip the switch off after start up. Weight is negligible and no messing with a glow starter around a flesh-eating prop. orks for me.
Posted on: 10/22/2011 10:11 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10778280
RE: Stabilizer - flat or symetrical airfoil
Very nice job on the build of the the Laser. You are an insspiration for me to do as well. Keep the pictures coming.
Posted on: 10/16/2011 8:58 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10768874
RE: Stabilizer - flat or symetrical airfoil
Thanks for the good info. I am currently gathering ideas, parts and supplies for the build so anything else that comes to mind from anyone will be appreciated. Pictures would be fun. Did you use a foam or built up wing? Also, do you custom make fiberglass parts from your molds for others? Is there a reason you wouldn't use parts from Fiberglss Specialties, i.e. weight, cost, etc?
Posted on: 10/15/2011 8:01 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10766381
RE: Stabilizer - flat or symetrical airfoil
Thanks for comments. Flat is easier so flat it will be. I am encouraged to hear that the Lazer is an excellent airplane. Lost my Yak 54 to wing failure and wanted something to replace it that not everyone else had from the cookie cutter. I am looking forward to the build. Pictures of your Laser 200's and other thoughts and ideas are most welcome.
Posted on: 10/14/2011 6:46 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10764789
Stabilizer - flat or symetrical airfoil
I am preparing to build a 33% Lanier Laser 200 from plans. The plans show a flat stick built stab and rudder and from what I have read, it is a great flying airplane. The question comes to mind - what is better for this giant scale aerobatic airplane and why - the flat stick built stab or the a stab with a symetrical airfoil? Thanks for your thoughts.
Posted on: 10/13/2011 9:04 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10764391
RE: sig stratus
John, thanks for the compliment. Free Bird, I do have plans for the Stratus plus all of the wing ribs traced from the ribs in the kit. I need an address to send the plans.
Posted on: 9/14/2011 6:40 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10717065
RE: sig stratus
Thought it would be fun to show my "new" model - the Sig Stratus. Apparently the Stratus was not too popular back in the mid-60's and I m not sure why, so there isn't a lot out there on this airiplane. During the summer of 1964, I saw one fly and was stricken by its performance and looks. I kmew I had to have one but was unable to afford the $29.95 to buy it plus engine, etc. Ten years later I found the kit in a local hobby shop and was able to purchase it. It stayed on the future build shelf until 5 years ago when I started to build it. Many things interruped the project but now am happy to say it is finished and flying. I am totally happy with this airplane and wish that I had built it sooner. 40+ years ago I built and flew the Sig Simco which is the same airplane with a conventional tail. It ws a greeat flying model which died an early death due to a broken elevator linkage. The Stratus has the same sweet flying characteristics as the Simco. The Stratus too almost died an early death due to a bad elevator linkage which showed up on the maiden flight take-off run. Thankfully it never got off the ground before it showed up. I was puzzled why Sig had a goofy looking open air cockpit/windshield on this racy looking airplane so I changed that to a simple bubble canopy. Also the strip ailerons had a chord of 3/4". It was designed during multi-reed days and the small narrow ailerons probably dampened the pulsing inputs from "beeping" the transmitter aileron switch. This is a fun airplane. It does all of the basic manuevers well and has a wide speed range from screaming buy to stooging along nose high. Landing characteristics are great. Basically set up the final leg and let it descend. At about a foot off the ground, I start to flair and it sets down on its mains. I am curious to know if anyone else has had this airplane in the past or present and what you thought of it.
Posted on: 9/11/2011 7:58 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10712146
RE: CG for Sterling Mambo Special
ZOR, Nice to see an airplane being restored and kept flying. I have a Minnie Mambo on the bench waiting for covering. Would like to have the Mambo also but don't have plans. Your Mambo looks so much like my Minnie that I am wondering if I couldn't just enlarge the plans to 48". Do you or does any one know if they are the same in design and only different in size? It would be fun to have one with rudder, elevator, and motor control for calm evening flying. Still having fun with the R/O Mambo Special flying slow with the electric foam glider guys at the field.
Posted on: 7/29/2011 11:00 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10645123
RE: CG for Sterling Mambo Special
Update on the Special is that the CG has been moved back 1/4". At 3" back from the leading edge, it had a fairly steep glide angle with the engine at idle. Landing was done best with an advance of the throttle to level out the glide. That small change allows for a softer landing. I might move it back a little more or ad a thin shim at the leading edge of the stab for some up trim. I also added a small amount of down thrust to compensate for the CG shift. It is a fun flyer and amazes the guys at the field that it can fly without elevator control. What amazes them more is when I tell them that back in the 60's, control was commanded by a single push bottom on the transmitter for this type of model. We have come a long way. This is my first attempt at including a picture. If it doesn't show, I'll try again later.
Posted on: 7/25/2011 11:30 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10639156
RE: CG for Sterling Mambo Special
The Sterling Mambo Special FLIES! ! I built it as a rudder only model with throttle control and balanced it a 3" behind the leading edge as instructed. The color sceme is as it is on the box. Fired up the trusty OS Max 15 with an 8-4 prop and gave it a toss forward and a little up. It lost a bit of altitude as it gained speed and then started to climp. At a comfortable altitude, I throttled back to about 1/3 throttle and flew gentle circles and 8's. To keep it at the same altitude, I power up as I tighten the turn and power down as I began to come out of a turn. Reducing power brings it down for landing with a bit of power to flatten out the glide slope. COnstantly changing throttle settings makes the airplane a graceful flier. On the third flight, I attempted a loop by spiraling down and then giving opposite rudder. It made a half loop and fell out. Probably moving the CG aft will help and a little more down thrust. I did a touch and go plus a power-on landing with a taxi back to the pits (steerable nose gear). 47 years ago I would have flown this with my single channel equipment with an escapement. I am sure one successful flight after the other would not have been the program back then. Then it was more like - fly, crash, rebuild. Now I stop flying this airplane for the day with no damage because it is time to go home. Aren't modern radios fantastic? I am glad this model came back into my life even though it took over half a lifetime. I hope you all can find that model(s) that turned you on years ago and live the past in the present.
Posted on: 7/8/2011 9:58 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10612881
RE: CG for Sterling Mambo Special
Thanks! Appreciate the info. I figured it would be somewhere in that area, but with no elevator control to compensate for incorrect balance on the first flight, I thought it would be nice to know the actual spot. Now, can you tell me if it is a good flying airplane on rudder only. Had a Midwest Esquire built from plans on rudder only that was a lot of fun. I hope this goes as well or better.
Posted on: 6/12/2011 8:40 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10570619
CG for Sterling Mambo Special
During Feb 1965, I saw for the first time an ad in Model Airplane News for the Mambo Special. Being fairly new in R/C at the time and using single channel equipment, I thought this airplane was the answer to all my flying needs. The price was beyond my means at the time at $11.95, so I had to pass on the model. Fast forward to now, the Mambo Special had been an intriguing model to me for all these years. Then, recently, at an R/C club meeting there was a room full of giveaway from an estate of all kinds of modeling stuff for a donation. There against the wall, unceremoniously placed on other stuff was a bare bones model. I instantly recognized it as a Sterling Mambo Special, and it was mine for the taking!! Yes, a I left a generous donation and tucked this dream plane under my arm and growled when anyone got close to it. I finally had my Sterling Mambo Special. Silkspan and brushing lacquer with Rustoluem for color put a finish on the model. An OS Max 15 R/C engine will pull it throught the sky using rudder only. Ironically, the radio will be a Hitec Aurora 9 to control this simple right/left control. Who would have thought 47 years ago we would have such sophisticated radios. I was amazed back then of kick-up elevator and blip motor control by a separate escapement. And now, to my concern. I do not have the plans which would show the CG for this model. I could guess and hope, but I would rather insure my success of flight by knowing the correct CG. Can anyone out there provide the correct CG location for this model? Thanks.
Posted on: 6/12/2011 9:27 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10569621
RE: SIG Cap 231 rebuild
I don't see a bump by what the picture can show but the wing should be rebuilt to original. What I see as a greater concern is the angle of the servo to the aileron hinge line. Originally the Sig Cap was set up this way but it had a big issue with aileron flutter. When the aileron pushrod is at an angle to the hinge line, there is a possibility of flexing which is an invitation to flutter. Also the supplied control horns were flexible which contributed to the problem. I experienced flutter with mine and have read others have had the same problem. At first, I just put in stronger servos and heavy duty plastic servo arms without changing the angle and still had flutter problem. The servos held up but the plastic arms literally shifted on the output arms. I crashed twice due to the flutter problem. The fix was to straighten out the line of motion of the pushrod so it was 90 degrees to the hinge line of the aileron. Second a metal gear servo was installed with metal control arms, 4/40 pusrods and links and nylon reinforced control horns screwed into a sturdy base on the aileron. Also, the hinge gap, regardless how small, must be sealed. The servo will have to be repositioned with a new mounting set up but it is worth the effort. I am flying my Sig Cap with a Saito 180 and have had no sign of aileron flutter. Still it makes me "gun shy" every time it come screaming out of a split S or backside of a loop thinking it will happen again. I hope never to hear that hideous buzz again on my Cap. Hopefully, you never will either if you make the mods. Good luck with the fix and mods.
Posted on: 6/9/2011 11:29 AM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10565160
RE: Walt Mucha Mahler PJ295
The PJ 260 and PJ 295 are interesting modelling subjects that I want to build. I am wondering if anyone has built one and what their experince was/is with it. I am thinking of scaling up plans from a 1969 Model Airplane News construction article for the PJ 260 or doing the Moucha version. Would like to hear your comments.
Posted on: 3/28/2011 8:47 PM by Author "heggen"
in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10429329
| 
