Letters to the Editor - 2001/04
Scale World Champs Clarification
The article about the World Championships in the February issue of Model Aviation unfortunately opens the possibility of an incorrect impression concerning Lloyd Roberts' model. My explanation in the submitted text, while clear to me, was admittedly vague to someone not directly associated with Scale competition. As a result, the editing process at the magazine level omitted a phrase that was necessary for a correct interpretation.
Lloyd's model represents a reproduction of a full-scale Fly Baby he built a number of years ago. While it is similar to the more commonly modeled Bauer Fly Baby, there are a number of significant modifications as compared to the Bauer version. The model Lloyd presented for the competition depicts the aircraft he had built, not the Bauer version.
I very much regret the confusion caused by my presentation of the text to Model Aviation and apologize to Lloyd for having created a false impression concerning his model.
- Bob Underwood
St. Peters, Missouri
Famous Modeler
Many legends of aviation, astronauts, designers, and flying heroes had their beginning with model airplanes. Some still enjoy this greatest of all things to do. I have heard that way back in the 1944–45 era a famed beauty built models. She worked for Lockheed Aircraft in its Radio Plane Division. Lockheed's effort was design and fabrication of RC target drones. Norma Jean Dougherty made her contribution to the war effort by helping assemble these state-of-the-art models.
There is no way to estimate how many boys are alive today who developed shooting skills in an inexpensive manner. She did her part enthusiastically. A fetching beauty, this young teenage girl was discovered by photographers while she worked at Lockheed. Great things sometimes happen from humble beginnings. And this was her start to worldwide acclaim. This young model builder became Marilyn Monroe!
I have often thought that if Marilyn had continued with her interest in model airplanes, her life would have been happier and without tragic end. Marilyn would be 74 years old now, with me two years older. I would love to be able to fly Mulvihill models with her today.
- George Perryman
Smyrna, Georgia
They Were Right
The folks at Performance R/C Hobbies told me that if I wanted to learn to fly, the place to go was the local club—the Bell/Air R/C Flyers in my area.
After a small disaster which took some time and glue, I made contact with someone from the club. I had lots of questions, which they were more than happy to answer. I joined and was appointed an instructor who gave of his time and wisdom.
Well, I soloed last week and although my knees still shake a little, I'm having a ball. To all those that are thinking about it, all I can say is, boy, were they right; not only do these people promote their hobby, they bend over backward to help anyone who might ask for their help. Since joining the AMA I have truly enjoyed your magazine, and wanted you to know they were right.
- Joe Galeskas
Bellingham, Washington
Word of Caution
It was a beautiful summer evening. It was about 80 degrees out, with very little wind. We had about 20 club members out this evening, and we were all having a great time.
I was preparing to fly my Goldberg Ultimate Bipe, and I was being strongly encouraged to hurry up and "get it into the air!" (Some people would consider this harassment, but all in fun.) So I fueled up the plane (constantly being "encouraged"), and put the glow driver on the O.S. 120 four-stroke engine and started it. It was running great, as usual, so I reached over the top with my right hand so I could remove the glow driver with the other hand so I could "get it in the air!" And suddenly it happened — game over!
In my enthusiasm to fly, I was guilty of a brief moment of carelessness. I did not reach high enough to grab the top wing and the prop got me! I want you to know that APC props on 120 four-stroke engines have no mercy on fingers!
I got to the hospital emergency room, and the only word used to describe my injury was "mangled!" I had two fingers injured and required an orthopedic surgeon to repair them.
This may sound like a typical "rookie" mistake, but I want you to know that I have been in the hobby for 12 or 13 years, and have flown many hundreds of flights.
My point is that it is easy to become so comfortable with what you are doing that you can easily become careless, be it ever so briefly, and get seriously injured. These toys are not toys! So be careful and have fun.
By the way, my fingers have healed up as good as new. I was very lucky this time.
- Tom Ball
Byron Center, Michigan
Modeling Spoken Here
I just read your editorial in February's edition of Model Aviation. It rekindled one of my ideas that may have merit in the context of the "sport" versus "hobby" argument.
I've given thought to the barriers between modeling and the general (younger) population. One is the initial expense for a sport that is not widely known or recognized.
In an effort to create an inexpensive Control Line model, I've considered the possibility of "whip" Control Line gliders.
Eliminating the need for an engine, fuel, and associated starting equipment dramatically reduces initial expense. Also, without all the demands present for an engine-powered craft (vibration, mounting of a fuel tank, finishes that are fuel resistant, and so on), the design can be built around more crash-resistant materials such as flexible foam over carbon-fiber spars, making for a more durable craft.
The flier would use a fiberglass or carbon-fiber rod strapped to his or her arm, which is outfitted with wire guides (like those on a fishing rod), to propel the model using a whipping action.
From a competition standpoint, events such as "Whip Stunt," "Whip Speed," "Whip Rat Racing," "Whip Scale," and (dare we consider) "Whip Duration" would be possible.
Since the event would probably be flown on a grass sports field, cleats would be required. Now the event can be plugged into existing advertising, perhaps involving high-profile sporting shoe sponsors.
This would be an event suitable for athletic people and, therefore, unarguably a sport. What's more, the common objection of noise is eliminated, and the event could even be flown indoors!
I think the thought of promoting modeling as a sport is a step in the right direction. I currently must travel one and a half hours to the nearest club. Given the present concerns of starting my own club and approaching organizations such as recreation departments, I believe the "sport" approach would find greater support and acceptance.
Thanks for a thought-provoking article.
- Marty Cwiakala
Irmo, South Carolina
Congratulations and Swoose
Congratulations and good luck in your new position at Model Aviation. I enjoyed your editorial in the January issue.
Your modeling career kind of parallels mine. I've been building model planes for as long as I can remember. My father built a few models when I was very young and I was hooked. He stopped and I took it from there.
In the past 60 years there have been very few days that I have not been cutting, gluing, sanding, or painting balsa wood. It's a great hobby that can develop many skills.
It was nice to see two photos of the Swoose in "Decal Page 71." I'm not sure of the date but the Swoose is not my design. I don't want to take credit away from the original designer Captain A. Stolzenberger. He had this beautiful design published in the October 1964 issue of Model Airplane News. It was a 32-inch wingspan Free Flight seaplane model with an Atom .09 ignition engine in it. I built one the size in the late '50s with a McCoy .09 size. It flew great. In 1967 I doubled the size of it and made it Radio Control. This also flew great. In 1989 I built the one that was published in the October '89 MAN. I still have it and fly it with the same Fox 50 and Expert radio. It seems every 10 years or so I need a Swoose fix. I'm overdue.
Again, congratulations.
- Nick Ziroli Sr.
Little Falls, New York
Modeling as Performance Art
Just read the subject article. As a 70-year-old aeromodeling builder/flier, I think that a lot of people writing for and writing in to modeling magazines (including the "President's Perspective" article and also some others) are really not addressing what we do from the point of view that what a lot of us do is "art."
It's obvious to those of us who view the results of our handiwork and what we have accomplished. The fact is, it is really "performance art." That is what makes it difficult for some outsiders to understand and to attempt an involvement.
However, there is a small segment of the population that still does view airplanes as something other than for public transportation or military use, and hence they enjoy a good show when they encounter one. No matter whether it is full-scale or on a smaller scale.
- Joe Wozniak
Laurel, Maryland
Flying Aces Nats
I should like to take this moment to congratulate Mr. Fernando Ramos for his excellent coverage of the Flying Aces Club Nationals this past summer at Geneseo (see January 2001 issue).
The photo coverage as well as the written description are excellent. Mr. Ramos depicted the events as he saw them unfolding and the photo story matched his written-word description perfectly.
To those in attendance that piece refreshes the memory of all those who were fortunate to have been there, either as spectators or competitors, and should make those who could make it try and come back again, and those who missed the great show resolve to get to the next big one.
Model Aviation also deserves a big thank you for running the photos and the article and for giving that many pages to an event which has always had an international flavor, besides bringing modelers from all over this great country. This coverage by Model Aviation and Mr. Ramos can only point up the fact that flying Scale Rubber is not dead and is thriving due in no small measure to the guidance of groups such as the Flying Aces Club, with its many squadrons as well as many other similar-interest units.
Certainly the myriad of models depicted is but a small part of the fantastic number and variety of flying machines to be seen. It is truly difficult to see everything, because there always seems to be something going on at one location or the other, usually down the field from where you may have just left. The fellowship and ambience have to be witnessed and felt firsthand to be appreciated.
So, once again thank you Mr. Ramos for your great coverage and to Model Aviation for publishing same. Well done.
As one who was there and tried to see it all, I was glad to see in print some of what I may have missed.
- Fran Piastkiewicz
Tonawanda, New York
Transmitter Issues
In the January issue of Model Aviation magazine, Gary Shaw recommends turning on your receiver before your transmitter in his "Safety Comes First" column.
I understand Gary's reasoning in using this as a way to see if anyone else is already on your channel. In reading it I also think Gary didn't mean it as a big thing and kind of mentioned it in passing.
The problem is, it has come to my attention that modelers out there are taking his statement as being, "Model Aviation says you should always turn on your receiver before your transmitter!" Now, that isn't what Gary said, but it's the way some people are interpreting it.
For the record, you should always turn on your transmitter first. If you don't, you can ruin your servos by having them overrotate in one direction or the other. You can also damage control surfaces or your carb by excessive pushrod travel. And, if you're an electric flier, you can suddenly have your motor jump to life and someone could get seriously hurt by the prop.
Gary might want to clarify this point in a future column.
- Larry Sribnick
President, SR Batteries
While flying RC aircraft, I have experienced a number of occasions where the contributing factors to erratic in-flight behavior, sometimes a crash, could very well be attributed to someone else turning on a transmitter with the same frequency as the one in use by me.
So many other factors are present that would result in the same end that it is almost impossible to identify the true cause. Vibration, radio frequency generated by some other component on board, a bad switch and a cell going bad in a battery pack are just a few.
However, there are solutions that would detect or prevent anyone else turning on a transmitter with the same frequency as someone else flying.
- Provide an electronic switch on each transmitter that would detect a signal of the same frequency from some other source and prevent the master switch from activating the transmitter.
- Provide an indicator or sound device on each transmitter that becomes active if a signal is received that does not match the position of the control sticks or switches on your transmitter while you are flying.
These are by no means the only possible solutions to this problem. Yet they illustrate at least two ways that the AMA and the manufacturers of these transmitters could be proactive.
- Ronald A. Testa
Bridgeport, Connecticut
Model Aviation Archives
Yesterday I received my copy of the Digital Publishing archives of Model Aviation. As a past Control Line Scale columnist, it was sad the day I had to dispose of all my past copies of all my magazines. This effort by Digital Publishing is so well done I must recommend this to all modelers young and old.
It gives you access to information that would take hundreds of hours to find. Not only can you read every magazine, page by page, you can look up specific subjects using a single word or multiple words.
What a country.
- Dick Byron
Grand Prairie, Texas
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
