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.
Stryker's Electrostreak
I've been flying R/C for six years and have been a reader of your magazine for 10 or more years. I've always wondered if the models in your articles really fly as well as the authors say when built per the plans, or if the builder used some tricks in building that he kept secret.
Several months ago I stuck my foot in my mouth at our monthly club meeting, and that led to a chance to find out firsthand how well those planes in your articles really fly. I also got involved in something that has intrigued me for a year or so—electric-powered models.
At the meeting I commented that modelers have a moral obligation to use whatever technology is available to cut down on the "noise pollution" we cause in our communities, and that we should be switching to electric power. After a moment's silence and a charged reaction of "Well, go ahead—put your money where your mouth is!" I decided to act.
I dug through old magazines for information on electrics, and then your November issue came. I read and reread Tom Stryker's Electrostreak article, ordered the plans, and built the plane. I installed an Astro Cobalt .05 motor for best performance. The completed plane weighed 35 oz. I charged a seven-cell, 800 mAh battery, bench-ran it a little, and went to the field.
The first launch was disappointing: the plane flew about 50 feet, gained some altitude, then got sluggish, dropped, and landed. My heart sank. It turned out I had tried to fly on a charge that had been sitting around for an hour with more ground running than I thought—the battery was almost dead. Live and learn.
After a full charge, a second launch showed the real answer. The Electrostreak flies like a dream! Those of us who flew it for the rest of the day agreed it was the smoothest R/C airplane we'd ever flown. Since then I've logged 43 flights on it. Obviously I'm having fun! Thanks for the article, and thank you, Tom Stryker, for the design.
Dave Nofziger Lebanon, OR
Ed Schnakenburg: 1928–1988
The Free Flight fraternity is reduced by one more. Ed Schnakenburg died in February after a long battle with the big "C." He had just turned 60. He was a Purdue aeronautical engineer and had retired from Rockwell with over 30 years' service.
A more avid model builder would be hard to find; he was first-rate at both construction and flying. He was also a real gentleman, with lots of friends around the country.
I had the pleasure of driving to the 1987 Nats at Lincoln, NE with him, where he competed and placed in Class A FF Power. Winning that plaque was a great joy to Ed. He received much pleasure from modeling.
While we have lost one of our numbers who was interesting and creative, I am sure he is now riding a good one in big, gentle circles. He sure deserves it.
William G. Morez Santa Barbara, CA
Refinement of an Idea
Hooray for John Hunton. His article on modular silencers in the April issue was a step in the right direction. I have done some work in this area as well and came to some of the same conclusions.
I do find one problem with Hunton's design, though. As you know, a model aircraft engine puts out quite a bit of oil with the exhaust. This oil must be eliminated or it will fill the muffler to a certain level and add weight to the aircraft.
The answer is simple: drill a very small hole at the bottom of each module, and exhaust pressure will force out the excess oil. Of course this will leave some residue on the exhaust system.
The only other way to have the oil completely through the system would be to have a taper on the rear of each module so that oil would not have a place to collect.
My thanks to John Hunton, Duke Fox, and others who are interested in helping this great hobby of ours. We need people like this who are thinkers and doers.
George Ardwin Sabina, OH
Cessna Airmaster
I have just received and read the May 1988 issue of Model Aviation, and as usual I enjoyed it very much. However, in the interest of historical accuracy I must take exception to some comments made by Reid Hull in his article "Airmaster Peanut."
First, Clyde Cessna did not design the Airmaster; his nephew, Dwayne Wallace, did. Second, the airplane was not designed in the early '40s—it was designed earlier and first flew on August 10, 1934. At the time it was not known as the Airmaster. That name was first applied to the 1938 models (the C-38) and has since been applied to similar models: the C-34, C-37, C-38, C-145, and C-165. The last Airmaster rolled out of the factory in 1941 after a total of 186 were produced.
I also disagree with Mr. Hull's opinion that the Airmaster was prone to ground looping. Having flown an Airmaster a time or two, I cannot see where it is any better or worse in this respect than any other four-place cabin taildragger. The ground-looping stories are mainly hangar talk from those who have never flown the type and often give an airplane an undeserved reputation.
I would suggest anyone interested in learning more about Airmasters and early Cessna products procure a copy of Cessna: A Master's Expression by Edward Phillips.
Brent Taylor Executive Director, Antique Airplane Assn. Ottumwa, IA
Dandy Article
I want to express my praise for the dandy article on Wasserkuppe by Byron Blankeslee in the May issue. I enjoy these articles on aviation history, general information, and nostalgia that you run from time to time. I seem to remember similar articles on air racing which I also enjoyed. I do hope to see more like them in the future.
Barnet Frommer White Plains, NY
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
