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.
Likes the Weekender
Hats off to Mr. L.F. Randolph, who designed the plane called the Weekender featured in the November 1985 issue of Model Aviation. After reading the article I decided that the Weekender was the perfect transition plane to bridge the gap from my slow 72-in. powered glider to a more responsive aileron trainer. Mr. Randolph claimed it would do just that, and his Weekender is everything he said it would be.
As stated in the original article, the plane is a really good project for the newcomer. I had never built a plane from just the plans. The plane went together without any problems.
I must admit that I was a bit nervous on the first flight, having never flown a taildragger before. So I began to taxi the plane across the grass to get a little "ground time" as suggested, when I noticed the plane was airborne at half throttle! Needless to say, I was a bit surprised. The plane flew beautifully with absolutely no trim adjustments needed. Before long I was attempting loops, rolls, and a few other nameless maneuvers. As I write this letter, it has five flights to its credit, and it's still one piece!
Again, thanks for a wonderful trainer that seems to be a perfect match for the little O.S. Max FS20 four-stroke.
Ted Lucas Chambersburg, PA
Waco S3HD-A
I am not one to write letters to the editor. In fact, I am 58 years old, and this is my very first. But when I thumbed through my May issue of Model Aviation (MA), all that changed. When I saw Mr. Robinson's drawings of the Waco S3HD-A and Don Berliner's article, I nearly had a heart attack!
I am a scale fan (mostly Rubber and some Free Flight and small RC thrown in) and specialize in lesser-known and unusual aircraft of the Thirties and Forties, particularly military. When I saw the Waco I was ecstatic. Back in the Forties and Fifties leading model magazines were filled with three-views—some great and some not so good. Now you don't see that much any more. The Waco drawings and article certainly were a welcome surprise. Not only are the drawings highly detailed and accurate, but they are in a workable scale even after reproduction in the magazine. Amazing! Everyone involved can certainly take a bow for the effort put into the artwork, research of history and detail, editing, and reproduction.
I assume that articles and drawings such as these are published with the modeler in mind and may be transformed into working models without permission. However, if permission is needed to use the drawings to develop a Flying Scale model and to reproduce some of the text and/or photos for documentation, I hereby request such permission. I for one plan to see a Waco S3HD-A flying the friendly skies of upstate New York.
Model Aviation is always packed with good stuff, but the May issue outdid itself. Congratulations on a fine job—and thanks for this special issue!
Robert H. (Bob) Young Penn Yan, NY
Editor’s note: We have already responded directly to Bob that he doesn't need any special permission to use such drawings and information in developing a model or for contest documentation purposes. We print the same information here so that if anyone has any doubt, that thought will be laid to rest.
More Robinson drawings of great aircraft are in the works, and we hope to print them with fair regularity—together with interesting text by Don Berliner.
Center-Spread Drawings
I would like to thank you for the addition of the scale drawings in the center of the September issue of Model Aviation. This is by far the best way to present the largest, easiest-to-remove scale plans in a model magazine. Here's hoping this will continue to be a feature of Model Aviation, as it should be of much help to many modelers.
Raymond W. Schwind Louisville, KY
RC Trainers
I have experienced a problem which I believe affects all aspects of model aviation. It seems that many manufacturers of kits, ARF planes, and RTF planes are listing too many fast, highly maneuverable types as "perfect for the beginner." The result frequently is that a novice selects one of these planes for his first model, attempts to learn to fly it, crashes on every try, and is discouraged by his failures.
Example: I saw someone trying to learn to fly Control Line with a ready-built plastic model. He was having difficulties, so I stopped to help. I have flown many CL aircraft from .020s to twin .35s. I had difficulty getting this plastic plane to fly level. It was underpowered for its wing loading, had insufficient control movement, and was excessively affected by light wind. After opening up the fuselage and reworking the controls to get more throw, it did fly well, and the beginner was able to fly it without much difficulty. But most such beginners don't get this needed help to solve a problem.
I have had many "RC trainers" which I attempted to fly. The result was three radios and about six airplanes destroyed. No. 1 was an ARF Cessna 172; it never got off the ground! At least I salvaged the radio and engine. My next was a T-20. It was so fast and unstable that my instructor, a Pattern flier, had trouble. (Yes, it was built straight and light.) It crashed after about five flights. It had about 45 minutes total time in the air, about five minutes of which I had the controls. It was a total loss.
The first plane that worked for me was an Andrews Big B-Ray with an Enya .35 running three channels on a Kraft KP-5 radio. I put it together and flew it without any help. After three months and about two gallons of fuel, I converted it to five channels (added ailerons and bomb bay). After another two months of flying, it crashed when I flew it until the receiver battery died in flight (another novice-type error). If I had had an instructor at any time tell me how long to expect the battery to last, that plane would still be around. Old Ni-Cads do wear out.
There are some legitimate beginner's planes around, but a lot should be labeled "advanced beginner" or "perfect second plane." I think the industry would be a lot better off by telling buyers the truth—and quit chasing away people who are interested in the hobby.
For RC: start with two or three channels and a large, slow airplane.
For CL: start with a kit that has solid balsa spars—any 1/2 A monoplane. Or start in the A or B engine class with something similar to the old Flite Streak Trainer—the only solid-winged plane I found in this size.
Let the beginner learn how to tell which way is up before trying a Stunt or Speed plane. And learn how to build straight before trying a complex Scale aircraft.
I learned the hard way. I am now 27 and have flown Free Flight Rubber and 1/2A Power for 18 years, Control Line for 15 years, and RC for 11 years. I'm disgusted with Free Flight because all my good ones never came back.
Frederick H. Huber San Francisco, CA
Cat-Fish (A True Happening)
I presently do my weekend flying at a cleared area for a future shopping center. Next to this is what is known as the San Diego River; the river consists of several small ponds which make for some pretty good fishing.
On Sunday, the Fourth of July, a friend and I had just finished up our afternoon flying when a little girl (about four years) and her father asked us if we had seen a little gray kitten. I could see that the little girl was brokenhearted over losing her kitten, and it hurt to have to say that we had not seen it. My friend and I went our way. When I got home I mentioned the little girl and her lost kitten to my wife. We both understood how the child must have felt, as once we owned a tabby cat of our own (Charley); he was lost during a move.
The next day I decided to go flying again. As I unloaded the van and started walking toward the airstrip, I heard a cry coming from the cattail foliage around the pond. I stopped and put my wing and field box down. Again, I heard crying and a splashing noise. I decided it was not a duck, as ducks quack. This noise was clearly a meow—and a wet one at that.
I walked closer. Sure enough, there was a very waterlogged little gray kitten. I fished him out. He was shivering and appeared to have great difficulty walking. It must have been in the water through the night.
I proceeded to dry the kitten off and thought I would let him go at a nearby park. As I set him down at the park, he seemed to catch sight of the apartment complex across the way. He made a beeline for the apartments, and I think if he hadn't been so weak, he might have scorched the grass!
It was a real good feeling to save the kitten. The question I still don't have an answer for is whether "cat-fish" and the little girl found each other. I sure hope so.
Ed Gaeta San Diego, CA
A.J. Smith's AJ-2
Enclosed are some photos of A.J. Smith's full-size AJ-2 and my one-third-scale model I made from your article in the September 1983 issue of Model Aviation.
Drawing and construction of the model are from your three-view drawing. The main difference is the wing. It was made from a modification that Mr. Smith will use on the plane after it retires from competition.
I also used the NACA 2412 wing section and built the wing around a 1/4-in. plywood main spar. The fuselage is balsa-sheathed over formers and stringers. The model's power is a K&B .049 with a 6x3 propeller and an O.S. .15 for the third model. It flies well and handles like the full-size aircraft.
Construction of the full-size AJ-2 is of Styrofoam, fiberglass, and epoxy resins. Total weight with radio and engine (Supertigre 3000) is 21 pounds.
Frank J. Fershin Warren, MI
Both the full-size and one-third-scale AJ-2s are beautiful, as seen in the top picture. In the lower picture with the model, we think Frank Fershin is on the left and A.J. Smith on the right (identification wasn't provided). The AJ-2 was designed for the EAA's Lowers-Baker-Falk Competition, better known as the Oshkosh 500. Three separate judging aspects are average speed (with limited fuel), fuel economy, and speed for a single lap. The AJ-2 set new records in its first outing in 1981.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
