For Openers
Emil Agosta's Miss America (pg. 18) is the Ultimate Antique. Do you dig this Old-Timer stuff? In RC, oldtimers and antiques are far more than quaint crates which meet prescribed rules for competition. We tend to forget that most people fly for fun and sport. To watch one of these birds curve smoothly against a blue sky, is "feeling good." Riding the vagrant currents, is like being in the planes. There is a unique "feel" of the air. Sailplane enthusiasts know the feeling.
Kitted by Scientific in 1936, Miss America was designed by Frank Zaic. Unlike other antiques—say the Lanzo and Bassett jobs—it "looks like an airplane." For Agosta it seems to have been the fulfillment of a dream. He recalls what a boy felt as he watched the "adults" fly their gas models in the days before the war. Most modelers of those desperate economic times had no money, no place to build, or even a car. They rode the subways to a city park, carrying their gigantic free flights and tool boxes. More than one wing was shredded in the overhead subway fans. Future great builders came from such unlikely places as East New York or the Brownsville sections of Brooklyn. They were a resourceful bunch. You look up to many of the same people today. Like the guy (hello, Norm) who flew his hand-launched glider in front of the headquarters for Murder Incorporated.
How did young Frank Zaic design, build, and fly a beautiful airplane like the Miss America, down on the East side of New York? (He started Jasco there.)
One wonders how he felt when he opened this month's Model Aviation.
At Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, on the very spot where a powered airplane first struggled into the air on December 17, 1903, there is a small but well-appointed museum to commemorate the event and the two brothers who began the air age. (See Engines That Made History, page 8.) In the museum is a replica of the Wright Flyer, and sobering evidence of the magnificent scientific effort mounted by two bicycle makers from Dayton. Their painstaking approach is fascinating. One is awed to see an actual propeller, parts of the engine, and other memorabilia. True scientists, they had a total systems approach.
Overlooking the spot where the machine took off from level ground, is the great dune—and the famous monument—from which they had made more than a thousand glider flights. They were skilled pilots before the powered machine put daylight between its skids and the sand.
Outside the museum door, markers show the distances of their first four flights that cold December morning. The first three are close to the takeoff point, but the marvelous fourth is 852 feet away. Consider that the chill wind was blowing at 36 mph on the first flight. That the speed of the machine was barely more than that. A modeler can see the machine, like a giant, light model, rising into the treacherous wind, being buffeted, almost stalling, and the pilot fighting to keep it level. Later on that day the wind dropped to 24 mph. The fourth flight was made at a ground speed of about 10 mph, in about 59 seconds.
The Wrights were so far ahead of the world that it would be another 3½ years before another (Santos Dumont) would make a powered flight. In 1905 the Wrights covered 24 miles in 38 minutes. Paul Garber, Curator Emeritus of the National Air and Space Museum, saw them fly. He recalls that the craft did not even sound like an airplane—it made rattling and clanking noises.
Inside the Kitty Hawk museum, the guide suddenly twists a wing tip, and the prone figure of Orville comes to life, sliding the movable platform on which he lies, to actuate the wing warping (aileron) control. Eerie.
Yet, how like a model. When the 16-hp engine heated up, it put out only 12 horsepower. How could the plane fly with so little power? Simple, note the reduction chain drive—just a big Du-Bro prop driver!
If you go on a TV quiz program and are asked which is faster, a powered model airplane or a glider, don't answer power! When Austrian Werner Sitar flew his sailplane to an FAI record of 188 mph (for details, see page 24, Jan. '77 MA) there were plenty of doubters. Amazingly, Sitar, in June of this year, entered another claim, this time for 242.9 mph. And this time the analysts agreed the claim is valid! (The glider was heavier and dived from a greater altitude to enter the traps and a more accurate means of speed measurement was used.) A 45-page dossier accompanying the claim lends impressive support. Dick Weber, who holds a number of FAI records reported this in December MA, page 73, under Competition News. Interesting are the details of the 40-foot wide banks of photoelectric cells which were pointed upward to detect light variation in a small cone when the model flew past, signals from the two banks being combined in a timing computer to measure course duration.
You can believe that 242.9 mph. Since that mark is 29.2 mph faster than the power model record of 213.7 mph, held by Goukoune and Myakine of Russia since September of 1971, we called Maynard Hill, who confirmed that the glider, indeed, is faster than the powered model. Reason? The prop disc—even with the engine winding up to the limit—acts as an air brake. The airplane outruns the engine.
Many modelers take FAI marks with a grain of salt. How can you punch a stopwatch accurately, when even a 1/10th second error means about 30 mph, when speeds get over 150 mph over the 50-yard FAI glider speed course? Well, an FAI record attempt is not just another fun-fly; as Hubert Bitner's account of his successful RC helicopter attempt at speed (page 36) makes eloquently clear. The timing arrangements he diagrams, were those used at the Houston Speed Trials in October 1976. (Reported by Maynard Hill in MA for April, 1977, pg. 22.)
Hill has set 12 RC FAI records, including Seaplane Altitude—still holds it at 18,540—and Airplane Distance; Duration and Altitude—still stands at 26,919 feet; and Speed, and Glider Altitude. In the December '77 issue (pg. 36), the story "The Shark Attacks a Record," related how Dick Weber established an FAI mark of 7 hrs., 56 min., 23 sec. for RC Seaplane Duration. Even as that issue went to press, we added a flash that Dick had set a closed-course RC Seaplane record of 316.565 miles and, on the same flight, a new Seaplane Endurance mark of 9 hrs., 7 min., 37 sec. As the issue hit the stands, he added a Straight Line Seaplane mark of 152.2394 miles. To date he has set seven FAI fuel economy records in four categories, holding three at present.
Why do they do it? Is there a lure? A mystic? Or is it just because the mountain is there? Long ago, "we" were involved in several RC Duration attempts. Some schemes held fuel for a full day but things like pinched feed lines and fiberglass flakes in filters, several times cut power after 2 1/2 hours or so. For us, it started with the yen to do something new and exciting.
Once into the rat race, you can't let go. Devising the overall system is an adventure. The problems are a ceaseless challenge—if you like solving puzzles, this is for you. And the endless flying, hundreds of hours. Strange and intriguing happenings. The planning. The disciplines. On a .15, an 11-pound (gross) airplane having to be taken out of a thermal. And you know the old truism about air rising over hot runways, descending over cool woods? So what would you think of a fuel-loaded plane, taken over the cool woods at noon on a 90-degree day, and left in a tight spiral with spoilers out—holding altitude for almost an hour without a touch of control. A whole new world. We were hackers, compared with the cool scientific approach and thoroughness of engineers like Hill and Weber. Because the mountain is there? Maybe.
THERE ARE TIMES, when considering what next to build that a thin line separates realism from fantasy. So we found ourselves contemplating, of all things, an RC version of a Manhattan model. The vision pleased us—yes, Manhattan is an indoor event for cute little cabin models. Even thought of calling it the Celestial Sampan. Our friends don't seem enthusiastic. They pretend they heard nothing.
It would not be unlike an Antique—one should utilize an extremely simple, open structure (ah, there's a challenge!). One could enjoy the lazy flying, and ride the thermals, just as easily as he might with an early-day Lenzo, et al. Perhaps it would be appropriate if powered by electric, perhaps with one of Astro Flite's prop drivers and a big slow-turning fan. If friends are immobilized by the word picture, one can picture the flying field.
Fantastic ideas ride like the four horsemen. So we are debating an alternate—don't ask what the remaining two are; we might tell you. The eminently sane Wischers report in their Scale column this month, suggestions from talented Bob Lopshire for a scale-like event. One would not strain to duplicate a Piper Cub, a Fokker Triplane, or a Boeing 707, or whatever. Instead, they'd dream up a make-believe concept that depicts the builder's idea of how he would configure an imaginary aircraft to carry real people.
Some may remember that the famous Joe Ott once ran a monthly series of rubber-powered scale-like models in Popular Aviation, predecessor to Flying magazine. The outlines probably were generally faithful, but the framing was elemental—and light. A Fokker Super Universal weighed 1-7/8 ounces. Probably in 20- or 24-in. size. His Nieuport 17, Fokker D-7, and SE-5 (there were many others, mostly WW I), flew like big ROGs. You could almost walk beneath them as they plodded across the field. Scaled up to 30 in., 45 in., and 6 feet—one was scaled to 9 feet, but don't ask about the prop carved from a balsa 2 x 4, or how the stripped inner-tube motor was wound. (Carefully!)
We then fell to contemplating "theme" models. Mind you, this is not a suggestion for an event, but a rationale for finding something fresh and fulfilling to do. Purely for one's own entertainment, the theme model would be recognizable as some real airplane, but not necessarily hard scale in any respect. Maybe a little like customizing. It might not be good for a Cub, say, but who would want to just imitate a Cub?
Sources for theme models are abundant. For instance, there is a fascinating book "Reuben Fleet, and the Story of Consolidated Aircraft," by Bill Wagner, who spent a lifetime in Public Relations for Ryan. All sorts of intriguing pix of various Fleet Trainers through the years. One could use simple wire knock-off struts, copy-cat outlines, whatever dihedral and tail areas he wishes, but would have a life-like treatment of the markings—olive drab fuselage, yellow wings, stars, red-white-and-blue striped rudder. And only three channels, big and light on, say, a 15. Let it fly off the hand. If one guy said, "I know what that is," you'd know you were right on. Heresy? Turn to Ralph Kuenzi's column—guest writer this month, Dave Stott, of the Flying Aces Club. You'll hear Dave talking about fusing things all over the place to produce good rubber-powered flying "scale models," even to fuselage length—but always with the idea that the differences are not discernible to the eye. If it is good enough for those guys...
One might fly the "theme" model in a theme-like way. Climb to pattern altitude, first turn left, break out at 45 de
For Openers
degrees. Maybe fly some figure eights, S-turns on a road. Partial stalls. If you want to loop—OK—if it can roll OK. Overhead approach, or enter the pattern on downwind leg, etc. Perhaps shoot some touch-and-goes. Better than milling around aimlessly. Enjoy the "theme," even in the flying.
Say, did we ever tell you about this idea we have? You take a Manhattan model—hey, where're you going?
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
