Letters To The Editor
All letters will be carefully considered; those of general interest will be used. Send to Model Aviation, 1810 Samuel Morse Dr., Reston, VA 22090.
Mathews' 4-60
The picture is of my daughter, Amy, holding the 4-60 I built from MA plans. The plane is powered by an O.S. .61 four-stroke. It can take off from our grass field in 50 feet at half throttle.
This is my first tail-dragger, and I have yet to nose-over or dent up the plane in over 80 flights. Alterations include many lightening holes on the fuselage sides and bottom, a fiberglass cowl that I made, and a Vortac bomb release.
The 4-60 flies great, and I would recommend it as the perfect sport flier.
Jack Hoying Fort Loramie, OH
Beautiful & Ugly Airplanes — George McAleer
I enjoyed the article in the February issue of Model Aviation. For the most part I concur with the author's choices.
In particular I thoroughly endorse the choice of the Republic Rainbow as the #1 best-looking aircraft. Probably most people had never heard of or seen it. I am among the few who have seen the Rainbow. I was in the Air Force and stationed at Wright-Patterson AFB in the late 1940s when the Rainbow was there. It was, indeed, even more beautiful in reality than the photos would indicate.
Two years ago I met a man who dealt in aviation art, and even though he had a drawing of the Rainbow in his collection, he said I was the first person he had ever encountered who had heard of the Rainbow.
I do, however, take exception to the comment about the P-82. There were several P-82s at Wright-Patterson at that time. With the wheels up, the P-82 was a beautiful airplane. With the wheels down, however, it was something else.
By the way, my son is presently working on a radio-control version of the P-82.
I have enjoyed both of the "Beautiful and Ugly Airplanes" articles, so I hope Don Berliner will keep up the good work.
George McAleer Roselle, IL
Beautiful & Ugly Airplanes — Robert Wynne
Don Berliner is either a very brave man or a glutton for punishment. Maybe both! At least he is not afraid to make a positive statement—and how!
Before going any further, a question of philosophy: Is any airplane really ugly? Every airplane has to have a certain amount of grace and lightness—airiness, if you will (no pun intended)—or it can't fly. Of course some airplanes are more beautiful than others. As to what was called "ugly" airplanes, how could he have overlooked the A-10 Warthog (a really well-named airplane)?
On beautiful military airplanes, Berliner completely passed over the Douglas O-46. It is true that it was built at an unfortunate time, a classic example of the wrong airplane at the wrong time. It was expensive to manufacture and maintain. When it came out, military planners were finally beginning to realize that one didn't go stolidly about in hostile air, willy-nilly making reconnaissance photos without immediately attracting the attention of a very hostile crowd of fighters. They should have learned that from the 1914–18 war! For these reasons the O-46 tends to be overlooked, but it was a beautiful airplane nonetheless.
In the military biplane category, he completely overlooked the P-6/P-12 series of Curtiss and Boeing airplanes. The P-12 might better be called out instead of beautiful.
Don did even worse in the civilian group. He ignored the Fairchild F-24 Ranger, the Beech Staggerwing, and the Howard cabin series (DGA-15, etc.). In the original article a couple years ago, he did mention the Waco Model E, but someone crossed up the pictures to show a different Waco. Without doubt, the Waco E was the most beautiful of all Waco cabin biplanes. If you want an ugly Waco cabin plane, I suggest the Waco QDC of 1931. Nothing really seems to fit anything else.
I thought the above was a lot of fun. I trust we can do it again sometime.
Robert Wynne Mercer Island, WA
Beautiful & Ugly Airplanes — Comment
Mr. Berliner's research must have been faulty! He overlooked the Fokker T-2. He didn't even mention it in the "Beautiful and Ugly Airplanes" article in the February 1987 issue of Model Aviation. The Fokker T-2 is the ugliest airplane ever built—no doubt about it.
Beautiful & Ugly Airplanes — Ted Winston
Although Berliner seems to have a fascination for "stuck-on engines," he missed the Armstrong Whitworth Argosy. It is the prime example. It should also get honorable mention for the ugliest. Also, what about its "stuck-on pilot"?
I applaud his selection of the beautiful airplanes. But he left out one important category: gliders. Any one of the most beautiful gliders could easily take the most beautiful award. They are, after all, the most beautiful objects ever built by man.
All in all it was a fun article on a fun subject.
Ted Winston Burbank, CA
Hangar #13 Reunion Coming
Pay your 10-cent weekly dues and get all the balsa, glue, dope, tissue, and yes, bamboo you will need to build your flying model plane. We'll teach you how. That's how it was at Hangar #13 model airplane club back in the Thirties.
Hangar #13 in Beloit, WI was organized in 1928. It often had a membership roll of 60 or more, and it ran under the direction of Conrad W. Hansen. "Connie" masterminded buying the balsa planks, 5-gal. cans of dope and glue, and generally kept things on track. Bill Bates, the late Eldo Howard, and Alfred "Bud" Heim were early officers. Connie also promoted the fine saw to cut the planks into usable sizes for rubber-powered models and eventually gas jobs.
Members made it to the Nationals in Akron, St. Louis, and elsewhere, as well as holding contests with nearby towns.
In 1984 we held our 49th reunion in Beloit. Over 60 alumni attended. There was a lot of talking and some flying. Some models were over 50 years old, as were their owners.
Coming up in September of 1987 will be Hangar #13's 52nd reunion, again in Beloit, WI. Old-time modelers from the surrounding areas are invited. For details contact Conrad W. Hansen, 424 Volusia Ave., Dayton, OH 45409.
E.F. Lindsley Delafield, WI
Static Suppression
I was reading your article in the January issue about concern of static electricity causing a spark and igniting flammable materials. I agree that nothing can replace careful storage, but I thought that this hint might help.
There are many antistatic sprays on the market now. These are good but can be a little costly. There is one that anyone can mix that will do the same thing. Just put 1 oz. of any fabric softener (Anti-Static, Cling, etc.) in a spray bottle with 10 oz. of water and mix well. Then mist your carpet with the spray and let dry. This will hold down static from your carpet for 30 to 60 days (depending on wear).
Joe Ruminski Fairview, NC
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
