BUILDING AND flying CL Precision Aerobatics (Stunt)
airplanes is very serious. It is not a leisure-time activity. How
good you are will determine your future and the future of your
entire extended family. You will be held forever accountable for
everything you ever say or do. You can have fun as long as you
keep it a secret. Finally, and most important, you must always
worry about everything all the time. Not!
When my new boss (Aeromodeling Editor Bob Hunt) asked
me if I would write this column, my first thought was, “How will
I find the time?” That was not easy. My next thought was,
“Where do I start?” That was not easy either, with everything
going on these days.
Now I’ll introduce
myself. This part
might make you
drowsy or actually
induce sleep. As
you trudge through
the next part, it
might be a good
idea to have
someone you trust stand by with smelling salts and oxygen.
In the past 50 years I have won some contests, designed and
built some airplanes, and am probably personally responsible for
consuming an entire forest of balsa trees.
Once upon a time, in 1971, I had my first construction article
published in Model Airplane News. It was a Combat design.
(Editor’s note: Phil is far too modest. It was a National
Champion Combat design: the Tarantula.)
Three years later I took on the job of the “Round and Round”
column editor for that same magazine. Next I became editor of
the Precision Aerobatics Model Pilots Association publication
Stunt News in 1992, and, along with the tireless efforts of Tom
Morris, we changed the look and feel of it from a typewritten
newsletter to that of a magazine.
Let me confess. I march to a slightly different drummer when
it comes to aircraft design, power application, painting, finishing,
and the future of our event in general. I have always thought of
what we do as a sport rather than a hobby and published my
reasoning 35 years ago.
• Definition of sport: A game or competitive activity. Sport can
be for pure fun and enjoyment.
• Definition of hobby: A favorite leisure-time activity or
occupation. A hobby can be for fun or enjoyment but does not
involve competition.
We commonly refer to what we do as CL Stunt or Precision
Aerobatics model flying. To me, our sport is remotely controlled,
miniature, aerobatic flying aircraft. Those are just words you say,
and you are right. Consider it just my different drummer warming
up.
This sport has been and continues to be exciting and
adventurous. I have been fortunate to meet, befriend, and learn
from some incredibly bright, interesting, and adventurous people.
Among my favorites are such notables as Howard Rush, Bob
Hunt, Bill Netzeband, Larry Scarinzi, Bob Palmer, George
Aldrich, Carl Goldberg, Vic Cunnyngham, Tony Lopez, Sandy
Norton, Ed Southwick, Bob Gialdini, Darrol and Rhonda Cady,
Chuck Rudner, Bob Carver, Mike Tallman, Riley Wooten, Duke
Fox, Les McDonald, Art Adamisin, Mike Keville, and Bart
Klapinski.
MA’s newest columnist introduces himself and relates his Stunt philosophy
[email protected]
Control Line Aerobatics P.T. Granderson
Also included in this column:
• Mr. Clean Magic Eraser
sponge
Bob English proudly holds his Al Rabe-designed Mustang. This is
becoming a popular Classic Stunt design of late.
Larry Fernandez prepares to start the Aldrich Jett .50 in his
Checkmate original. Cliff Denchfield holds.
The new columnist’s latest is this Skinny Diva. It features a thin-tip
airfoil. A Magnum .36 with pipe powers it.
July 2006 135
Also Ted Fancher, Brett Buck, Jim
Aron, Windy Urtnowski, Shareen Fancher,
Tom Morris, Gordan Delaney, Bruce
Perry, Chris Cox, Bill Rutherford, Dan
Rutherford, Gary Stevens, Ron Scoones,
Charlie Johnson, Henry Nelson, Randy
Smith, Rich von Lopez, Phil Cartier, Doug
Barton, Bill Lee, Will Naemura, Don
Anderson, Mark Satterely, Don Shultz,
Walt Schroeder, John Anderson, Dave
Fitzgerald, Paul Walker, Bill Werwage,
Wynn Paul, and Dick McCoy.
I could probably fill this entire column
with the names of people who have
contributed to this big adventure. You may
not recognize some of them because not all
of them fly Stunt, or even CL for that
matter.
For the most part I am not conversant
in theoretical analysis. We often make
things much more difficult than they really
are. You will not find me camped in the
sea of mind-numbing analysis, revolving
contradictions, fear of failure, or hesitation
to act. My preference is to meet the
challenge head-on, solve the problem, and
keep going.
When it comes to performance, there is
only truth. The real proof is in the
application. To be sure, much of what we
do is not easy but it is not impossible. In
the coming months it will be my mission
to present methods, products, and
techniques that work in actual practice.
That having been revealed, please keep
in mind that there are many ways to
achieve good results. So if what you are
doing works, keep doing it. If you are
looking for a better way, maybe you will
find something published here that helps.
Although my preference is for CL
miniature flying aircraft, I have
participated in and remain an admirer of
FF and RC. I have learned much from
those disciplines and continue to learn
through observation and passive
participation.
At the risk of slightly upsetting the
apple cart, I will ask, and even challenge,
you to take a close, honest look at where
we are as a group and where we are
headed. Maybe this is the natural order of
things and we should just relax, enjoy the
rest of the ride, and let our sport move into
peaceful nonexistence.
You might say, “At my age I really
don’t have a problem with that.” Actually,
neither do I. In fact, most of the time it’s
hard to imagine how I could get more
enjoyment from our sport. I truly enjoy the
challenge and satisfaction of
accomplishment while continually setting
my goals ever higher. I am happy and
pleased to be an active participant.
Whether you are a competition builder,
a designer and pilot, or simply enjoy
maneuvering your ARF to the best of your
ability, I hope you will find something
helpful in this column.
Many wonder why we can’t seem to get
more people involved in our sport. Maybe
it’s because we don’t welcome change.
Let’s take a look at another segment of our
sport with high spectator appeal and newpilot
participation.
At the risk of having you rip out this
page and toss it in a paper shredder, I will
use the term RC. Why has it grown so
spectacularly? I believe that the single
most important factor in its growth is that
it encourages change and innovation.
To illustrate this, let’s go back 30 years
and compare CL Stunt to RC Aerobatics.
They were comparable in popularity and
similar in execution. The CL Stunt pattern
was a solid tradition that hadn’t changed in
more than 20 years. Although the RC
pattern was evolving, with new maneuvers
being added, the overall presentation was
similar. The big difference was that at the
same time the idea of creativity and
improvisation was welcomed and
encouraged in RC.
Now let’s fast forward to 2006 and
compare the two disciplines. Our CL
pattern is more than 50 years old and still
hasn’t changed. As a group we don’t
encourage change and certainly don’t
appreciate improvisation when it comes to
maneuvers.
RC has not abandoned its traditional
pattern, but it has made changes as designs
and equipment have progressed. The
biggest difference is that several new
events and venues have been created in RC
that not only encourage creativity and
innovation but also reward them.
Our strongest argument for keeping our
pattern is that no one has ever flown a
perfect one. Be that as it may, I believe we
have missed several opportunities to
broaden our appeal to prospective
enthusiasts.
Consider the fact that Jim Walker
performed the “Saber Dance” with his
Fireball in the early 1950s, long before we
had the “modern pattern.” I can remember
watching Charlie Mackey flying a diskshaped
airplane 40 years ago at Whittier
Narrows in Southern California, and his
entire flight was a series of improvised
maneuvers. It was cool and spectacular.
Today in RC there is 3-D and
something called 4-D. It has huge
spectator appeal and motivates new
people, including kids, to get involved. My
point is that CL did this kind of stuff first!
Instead of promoting and encouraging
development of new events and venues, we
treated these things as novelty and
unworthy of serious consideration.
Why is the BiSlob the only design of
note that can perform highly stylized and
creative flight? Why don’t we have events
and demonstration teams flying these types
of aircraft in formation and freestyle
maneuvers?
Think about it. We require less space,
so we can set up and perform at other
sporting events and local parks. It has
spectator appeal because it is extreme
when compared to our modern pattern.
As a designer and builder for 50 years,
this next statement might surprise you. I
have a hard time understanding why there
is so much resistance to RTF and ARF CL
airplanes in competition.
I can’t imagine ever abandoning the
satisfaction of designing and building my
own creations, but it doesn’t bother me
that someone else might prefer skipping
those things and going directly to flying.
Not only does it not bother me that others
don’t build the airplanes they fly, but as a
longtime competitor it doesn’t bother me
to compete against them.
The argument heard most frequently is
that some gifted pilots will have an unfairadvantage over those of us who prefer to
build what we fly. When you think about
it, it has always been that way. Some
people learn quicker and are able to
develop high levels of skill more readily.
Requiring competitors to build the
airplanes they fly will slow a rising star
and eliminate many others who, for a
variety of reasons, don’t think building is
important or necessary for that matter. The
idea is not to slow or eliminate
participants. The idea is to motivate and
encourage more people to get involved.
Nothing would please me more than
flying in contests with 100 airplanes
entered. Imagine that 95% of those entries
are RTF or ARFs, and most of them are
expertly built and finished. There are
hundreds of spectators with local and
possibly even national news coverage.
A news reporter with a camera crew
notices a group of spectators that is
particularly enthused about my airplane
and comes over to get the scoop. His
opening goes something like, “Your
airplane looks and flies incredible, your
last flight has put you in contention for
winning, where did you buy it?”
My answer is, “It is an original; I
designed and built it from scratch, and it is
not for sale.”
It just doesn’t get any better than that!
Okay, so it’s only a dream—or is it?
By now you’re probably thinking, When
do we get to the other stuff like building
and flying? That’s a huge elephant to
consume, so let’s eat it one bite at a
time. Designing, building, painting, and
flying are my strong points. Theory,
analysis, politics, and conjecture are my
weak points.
I’ll start with a product you probably
won’t find at your local hobby shop: the
Mr. Clean Magic Eraser sponge. I was
introduced to this product by my wife
Kathleen, who really likes to entertain. It
seems as though every time we have
people over, especially those with kids,
there are scuffs and marks left on the walls
and baseboards. After years of touching up
those marks with paint, she found the
Magic Eraser.
So how do we use this thing, and what
can it do for our airplanes?
One of my big problems with spray
painting is that no matter how good of a
masking job I do, some paint (overspray)
seems to get through. Last year as I was
removing the masking tape and paper from
my new model, there were the inevitable
places where the paint from the trim got
through the masking and ended up in the
wrong place.
My usual method for correcting this
was to sand the spot and repaint it with the
correct color. Remembering how these
magic sponges took marks off the walls
without disturbing the paint, I gave it a try.
The results were incredible!
You can remove black paint overspray
from a white base without marring the base
coat. The eraser is also good for cleaning
up those jaggy tape edges and places
where the paint wicks under the tape. Use
as directed and you will be amazed by the
results.
I also use a soft pencil to trace the lines
for masking, and the Magic Eraser is
perfect for removing the pencil marks.
Oh no, I’m out of space. In the coming
months we will tackle everything from
electric power vs. conventional power to
making decals and control-system design.
If you have a problem or procedure that
you find vexing, please send E-
Edition: Model Aviation - 2006/07
Page Numbers: 135,136,137
Edition: Model Aviation - 2006/07
Page Numbers: 135,136,137
BUILDING AND flying CL Precision Aerobatics (Stunt)
airplanes is very serious. It is not a leisure-time activity. How
good you are will determine your future and the future of your
entire extended family. You will be held forever accountable for
everything you ever say or do. You can have fun as long as you
keep it a secret. Finally, and most important, you must always
worry about everything all the time. Not!
When my new boss (Aeromodeling Editor Bob Hunt) asked
me if I would write this column, my first thought was, “How will
I find the time?” That was not easy. My next thought was,
“Where do I start?” That was not easy either, with everything
going on these days.
Now I’ll introduce
myself. This part
might make you
drowsy or actually
induce sleep. As
you trudge through
the next part, it
might be a good
idea to have
someone you trust stand by with smelling salts and oxygen.
In the past 50 years I have won some contests, designed and
built some airplanes, and am probably personally responsible for
consuming an entire forest of balsa trees.
Once upon a time, in 1971, I had my first construction article
published in Model Airplane News. It was a Combat design.
(Editor’s note: Phil is far too modest. It was a National
Champion Combat design: the Tarantula.)
Three years later I took on the job of the “Round and Round”
column editor for that same magazine. Next I became editor of
the Precision Aerobatics Model Pilots Association publication
Stunt News in 1992, and, along with the tireless efforts of Tom
Morris, we changed the look and feel of it from a typewritten
newsletter to that of a magazine.
Let me confess. I march to a slightly different drummer when
it comes to aircraft design, power application, painting, finishing,
and the future of our event in general. I have always thought of
what we do as a sport rather than a hobby and published my
reasoning 35 years ago.
• Definition of sport: A game or competitive activity. Sport can
be for pure fun and enjoyment.
• Definition of hobby: A favorite leisure-time activity or
occupation. A hobby can be for fun or enjoyment but does not
involve competition.
We commonly refer to what we do as CL Stunt or Precision
Aerobatics model flying. To me, our sport is remotely controlled,
miniature, aerobatic flying aircraft. Those are just words you say,
and you are right. Consider it just my different drummer warming
up.
This sport has been and continues to be exciting and
adventurous. I have been fortunate to meet, befriend, and learn
from some incredibly bright, interesting, and adventurous people.
Among my favorites are such notables as Howard Rush, Bob
Hunt, Bill Netzeband, Larry Scarinzi, Bob Palmer, George
Aldrich, Carl Goldberg, Vic Cunnyngham, Tony Lopez, Sandy
Norton, Ed Southwick, Bob Gialdini, Darrol and Rhonda Cady,
Chuck Rudner, Bob Carver, Mike Tallman, Riley Wooten, Duke
Fox, Les McDonald, Art Adamisin, Mike Keville, and Bart
Klapinski.
MA’s newest columnist introduces himself and relates his Stunt philosophy
[email protected]
Control Line Aerobatics P.T. Granderson
Also included in this column:
• Mr. Clean Magic Eraser
sponge
Bob English proudly holds his Al Rabe-designed Mustang. This is
becoming a popular Classic Stunt design of late.
Larry Fernandez prepares to start the Aldrich Jett .50 in his
Checkmate original. Cliff Denchfield holds.
The new columnist’s latest is this Skinny Diva. It features a thin-tip
airfoil. A Magnum .36 with pipe powers it.
July 2006 135
Also Ted Fancher, Brett Buck, Jim
Aron, Windy Urtnowski, Shareen Fancher,
Tom Morris, Gordan Delaney, Bruce
Perry, Chris Cox, Bill Rutherford, Dan
Rutherford, Gary Stevens, Ron Scoones,
Charlie Johnson, Henry Nelson, Randy
Smith, Rich von Lopez, Phil Cartier, Doug
Barton, Bill Lee, Will Naemura, Don
Anderson, Mark Satterely, Don Shultz,
Walt Schroeder, John Anderson, Dave
Fitzgerald, Paul Walker, Bill Werwage,
Wynn Paul, and Dick McCoy.
I could probably fill this entire column
with the names of people who have
contributed to this big adventure. You may
not recognize some of them because not all
of them fly Stunt, or even CL for that
matter.
For the most part I am not conversant
in theoretical analysis. We often make
things much more difficult than they really
are. You will not find me camped in the
sea of mind-numbing analysis, revolving
contradictions, fear of failure, or hesitation
to act. My preference is to meet the
challenge head-on, solve the problem, and
keep going.
When it comes to performance, there is
only truth. The real proof is in the
application. To be sure, much of what we
do is not easy but it is not impossible. In
the coming months it will be my mission
to present methods, products, and
techniques that work in actual practice.
That having been revealed, please keep
in mind that there are many ways to
achieve good results. So if what you are
doing works, keep doing it. If you are
looking for a better way, maybe you will
find something published here that helps.
Although my preference is for CL
miniature flying aircraft, I have
participated in and remain an admirer of
FF and RC. I have learned much from
those disciplines and continue to learn
through observation and passive
participation.
At the risk of slightly upsetting the
apple cart, I will ask, and even challenge,
you to take a close, honest look at where
we are as a group and where we are
headed. Maybe this is the natural order of
things and we should just relax, enjoy the
rest of the ride, and let our sport move into
peaceful nonexistence.
You might say, “At my age I really
don’t have a problem with that.” Actually,
neither do I. In fact, most of the time it’s
hard to imagine how I could get more
enjoyment from our sport. I truly enjoy the
challenge and satisfaction of
accomplishment while continually setting
my goals ever higher. I am happy and
pleased to be an active participant.
Whether you are a competition builder,
a designer and pilot, or simply enjoy
maneuvering your ARF to the best of your
ability, I hope you will find something
helpful in this column.
Many wonder why we can’t seem to get
more people involved in our sport. Maybe
it’s because we don’t welcome change.
Let’s take a look at another segment of our
sport with high spectator appeal and newpilot
participation.
At the risk of having you rip out this
page and toss it in a paper shredder, I will
use the term RC. Why has it grown so
spectacularly? I believe that the single
most important factor in its growth is that
it encourages change and innovation.
To illustrate this, let’s go back 30 years
and compare CL Stunt to RC Aerobatics.
They were comparable in popularity and
similar in execution. The CL Stunt pattern
was a solid tradition that hadn’t changed in
more than 20 years. Although the RC
pattern was evolving, with new maneuvers
being added, the overall presentation was
similar. The big difference was that at the
same time the idea of creativity and
improvisation was welcomed and
encouraged in RC.
Now let’s fast forward to 2006 and
compare the two disciplines. Our CL
pattern is more than 50 years old and still
hasn’t changed. As a group we don’t
encourage change and certainly don’t
appreciate improvisation when it comes to
maneuvers.
RC has not abandoned its traditional
pattern, but it has made changes as designs
and equipment have progressed. The
biggest difference is that several new
events and venues have been created in RC
that not only encourage creativity and
innovation but also reward them.
Our strongest argument for keeping our
pattern is that no one has ever flown a
perfect one. Be that as it may, I believe we
have missed several opportunities to
broaden our appeal to prospective
enthusiasts.
Consider the fact that Jim Walker
performed the “Saber Dance” with his
Fireball in the early 1950s, long before we
had the “modern pattern.” I can remember
watching Charlie Mackey flying a diskshaped
airplane 40 years ago at Whittier
Narrows in Southern California, and his
entire flight was a series of improvised
maneuvers. It was cool and spectacular.
Today in RC there is 3-D and
something called 4-D. It has huge
spectator appeal and motivates new
people, including kids, to get involved. My
point is that CL did this kind of stuff first!
Instead of promoting and encouraging
development of new events and venues, we
treated these things as novelty and
unworthy of serious consideration.
Why is the BiSlob the only design of
note that can perform highly stylized and
creative flight? Why don’t we have events
and demonstration teams flying these types
of aircraft in formation and freestyle
maneuvers?
Think about it. We require less space,
so we can set up and perform at other
sporting events and local parks. It has
spectator appeal because it is extreme
when compared to our modern pattern.
As a designer and builder for 50 years,
this next statement might surprise you. I
have a hard time understanding why there
is so much resistance to RTF and ARF CL
airplanes in competition.
I can’t imagine ever abandoning the
satisfaction of designing and building my
own creations, but it doesn’t bother me
that someone else might prefer skipping
those things and going directly to flying.
Not only does it not bother me that others
don’t build the airplanes they fly, but as a
longtime competitor it doesn’t bother me
to compete against them.
The argument heard most frequently is
that some gifted pilots will have an unfairadvantage over those of us who prefer to
build what we fly. When you think about
it, it has always been that way. Some
people learn quicker and are able to
develop high levels of skill more readily.
Requiring competitors to build the
airplanes they fly will slow a rising star
and eliminate many others who, for a
variety of reasons, don’t think building is
important or necessary for that matter. The
idea is not to slow or eliminate
participants. The idea is to motivate and
encourage more people to get involved.
Nothing would please me more than
flying in contests with 100 airplanes
entered. Imagine that 95% of those entries
are RTF or ARFs, and most of them are
expertly built and finished. There are
hundreds of spectators with local and
possibly even national news coverage.
A news reporter with a camera crew
notices a group of spectators that is
particularly enthused about my airplane
and comes over to get the scoop. His
opening goes something like, “Your
airplane looks and flies incredible, your
last flight has put you in contention for
winning, where did you buy it?”
My answer is, “It is an original; I
designed and built it from scratch, and it is
not for sale.”
It just doesn’t get any better than that!
Okay, so it’s only a dream—or is it?
By now you’re probably thinking, When
do we get to the other stuff like building
and flying? That’s a huge elephant to
consume, so let’s eat it one bite at a
time. Designing, building, painting, and
flying are my strong points. Theory,
analysis, politics, and conjecture are my
weak points.
I’ll start with a product you probably
won’t find at your local hobby shop: the
Mr. Clean Magic Eraser sponge. I was
introduced to this product by my wife
Kathleen, who really likes to entertain. It
seems as though every time we have
people over, especially those with kids,
there are scuffs and marks left on the walls
and baseboards. After years of touching up
those marks with paint, she found the
Magic Eraser.
So how do we use this thing, and what
can it do for our airplanes?
One of my big problems with spray
painting is that no matter how good of a
masking job I do, some paint (overspray)
seems to get through. Last year as I was
removing the masking tape and paper from
my new model, there were the inevitable
places where the paint from the trim got
through the masking and ended up in the
wrong place.
My usual method for correcting this
was to sand the spot and repaint it with the
correct color. Remembering how these
magic sponges took marks off the walls
without disturbing the paint, I gave it a try.
The results were incredible!
You can remove black paint overspray
from a white base without marring the base
coat. The eraser is also good for cleaning
up those jaggy tape edges and places
where the paint wicks under the tape. Use
as directed and you will be amazed by the
results.
I also use a soft pencil to trace the lines
for masking, and the Magic Eraser is
perfect for removing the pencil marks.
Oh no, I’m out of space. In the coming
months we will tackle everything from
electric power vs. conventional power to
making decals and control-system design.
If you have a problem or procedure that
you find vexing, please send E-
Edition: Model Aviation - 2006/07
Page Numbers: 135,136,137
BUILDING AND flying CL Precision Aerobatics (Stunt)
airplanes is very serious. It is not a leisure-time activity. How
good you are will determine your future and the future of your
entire extended family. You will be held forever accountable for
everything you ever say or do. You can have fun as long as you
keep it a secret. Finally, and most important, you must always
worry about everything all the time. Not!
When my new boss (Aeromodeling Editor Bob Hunt) asked
me if I would write this column, my first thought was, “How will
I find the time?” That was not easy. My next thought was,
“Where do I start?” That was not easy either, with everything
going on these days.
Now I’ll introduce
myself. This part
might make you
drowsy or actually
induce sleep. As
you trudge through
the next part, it
might be a good
idea to have
someone you trust stand by with smelling salts and oxygen.
In the past 50 years I have won some contests, designed and
built some airplanes, and am probably personally responsible for
consuming an entire forest of balsa trees.
Once upon a time, in 1971, I had my first construction article
published in Model Airplane News. It was a Combat design.
(Editor’s note: Phil is far too modest. It was a National
Champion Combat design: the Tarantula.)
Three years later I took on the job of the “Round and Round”
column editor for that same magazine. Next I became editor of
the Precision Aerobatics Model Pilots Association publication
Stunt News in 1992, and, along with the tireless efforts of Tom
Morris, we changed the look and feel of it from a typewritten
newsletter to that of a magazine.
Let me confess. I march to a slightly different drummer when
it comes to aircraft design, power application, painting, finishing,
and the future of our event in general. I have always thought of
what we do as a sport rather than a hobby and published my
reasoning 35 years ago.
• Definition of sport: A game or competitive activity. Sport can
be for pure fun and enjoyment.
• Definition of hobby: A favorite leisure-time activity or
occupation. A hobby can be for fun or enjoyment but does not
involve competition.
We commonly refer to what we do as CL Stunt or Precision
Aerobatics model flying. To me, our sport is remotely controlled,
miniature, aerobatic flying aircraft. Those are just words you say,
and you are right. Consider it just my different drummer warming
up.
This sport has been and continues to be exciting and
adventurous. I have been fortunate to meet, befriend, and learn
from some incredibly bright, interesting, and adventurous people.
Among my favorites are such notables as Howard Rush, Bob
Hunt, Bill Netzeband, Larry Scarinzi, Bob Palmer, George
Aldrich, Carl Goldberg, Vic Cunnyngham, Tony Lopez, Sandy
Norton, Ed Southwick, Bob Gialdini, Darrol and Rhonda Cady,
Chuck Rudner, Bob Carver, Mike Tallman, Riley Wooten, Duke
Fox, Les McDonald, Art Adamisin, Mike Keville, and Bart
Klapinski.
MA’s newest columnist introduces himself and relates his Stunt philosophy
[email protected]
Control Line Aerobatics P.T. Granderson
Also included in this column:
• Mr. Clean Magic Eraser
sponge
Bob English proudly holds his Al Rabe-designed Mustang. This is
becoming a popular Classic Stunt design of late.
Larry Fernandez prepares to start the Aldrich Jett .50 in his
Checkmate original. Cliff Denchfield holds.
The new columnist’s latest is this Skinny Diva. It features a thin-tip
airfoil. A Magnum .36 with pipe powers it.
July 2006 135
Also Ted Fancher, Brett Buck, Jim
Aron, Windy Urtnowski, Shareen Fancher,
Tom Morris, Gordan Delaney, Bruce
Perry, Chris Cox, Bill Rutherford, Dan
Rutherford, Gary Stevens, Ron Scoones,
Charlie Johnson, Henry Nelson, Randy
Smith, Rich von Lopez, Phil Cartier, Doug
Barton, Bill Lee, Will Naemura, Don
Anderson, Mark Satterely, Don Shultz,
Walt Schroeder, John Anderson, Dave
Fitzgerald, Paul Walker, Bill Werwage,
Wynn Paul, and Dick McCoy.
I could probably fill this entire column
with the names of people who have
contributed to this big adventure. You may
not recognize some of them because not all
of them fly Stunt, or even CL for that
matter.
For the most part I am not conversant
in theoretical analysis. We often make
things much more difficult than they really
are. You will not find me camped in the
sea of mind-numbing analysis, revolving
contradictions, fear of failure, or hesitation
to act. My preference is to meet the
challenge head-on, solve the problem, and
keep going.
When it comes to performance, there is
only truth. The real proof is in the
application. To be sure, much of what we
do is not easy but it is not impossible. In
the coming months it will be my mission
to present methods, products, and
techniques that work in actual practice.
That having been revealed, please keep
in mind that there are many ways to
achieve good results. So if what you are
doing works, keep doing it. If you are
looking for a better way, maybe you will
find something published here that helps.
Although my preference is for CL
miniature flying aircraft, I have
participated in and remain an admirer of
FF and RC. I have learned much from
those disciplines and continue to learn
through observation and passive
participation.
At the risk of slightly upsetting the
apple cart, I will ask, and even challenge,
you to take a close, honest look at where
we are as a group and where we are
headed. Maybe this is the natural order of
things and we should just relax, enjoy the
rest of the ride, and let our sport move into
peaceful nonexistence.
You might say, “At my age I really
don’t have a problem with that.” Actually,
neither do I. In fact, most of the time it’s
hard to imagine how I could get more
enjoyment from our sport. I truly enjoy the
challenge and satisfaction of
accomplishment while continually setting
my goals ever higher. I am happy and
pleased to be an active participant.
Whether you are a competition builder,
a designer and pilot, or simply enjoy
maneuvering your ARF to the best of your
ability, I hope you will find something
helpful in this column.
Many wonder why we can’t seem to get
more people involved in our sport. Maybe
it’s because we don’t welcome change.
Let’s take a look at another segment of our
sport with high spectator appeal and newpilot
participation.
At the risk of having you rip out this
page and toss it in a paper shredder, I will
use the term RC. Why has it grown so
spectacularly? I believe that the single
most important factor in its growth is that
it encourages change and innovation.
To illustrate this, let’s go back 30 years
and compare CL Stunt to RC Aerobatics.
They were comparable in popularity and
similar in execution. The CL Stunt pattern
was a solid tradition that hadn’t changed in
more than 20 years. Although the RC
pattern was evolving, with new maneuvers
being added, the overall presentation was
similar. The big difference was that at the
same time the idea of creativity and
improvisation was welcomed and
encouraged in RC.
Now let’s fast forward to 2006 and
compare the two disciplines. Our CL
pattern is more than 50 years old and still
hasn’t changed. As a group we don’t
encourage change and certainly don’t
appreciate improvisation when it comes to
maneuvers.
RC has not abandoned its traditional
pattern, but it has made changes as designs
and equipment have progressed. The
biggest difference is that several new
events and venues have been created in RC
that not only encourage creativity and
innovation but also reward them.
Our strongest argument for keeping our
pattern is that no one has ever flown a
perfect one. Be that as it may, I believe we
have missed several opportunities to
broaden our appeal to prospective
enthusiasts.
Consider the fact that Jim Walker
performed the “Saber Dance” with his
Fireball in the early 1950s, long before we
had the “modern pattern.” I can remember
watching Charlie Mackey flying a diskshaped
airplane 40 years ago at Whittier
Narrows in Southern California, and his
entire flight was a series of improvised
maneuvers. It was cool and spectacular.
Today in RC there is 3-D and
something called 4-D. It has huge
spectator appeal and motivates new
people, including kids, to get involved. My
point is that CL did this kind of stuff first!
Instead of promoting and encouraging
development of new events and venues, we
treated these things as novelty and
unworthy of serious consideration.
Why is the BiSlob the only design of
note that can perform highly stylized and
creative flight? Why don’t we have events
and demonstration teams flying these types
of aircraft in formation and freestyle
maneuvers?
Think about it. We require less space,
so we can set up and perform at other
sporting events and local parks. It has
spectator appeal because it is extreme
when compared to our modern pattern.
As a designer and builder for 50 years,
this next statement might surprise you. I
have a hard time understanding why there
is so much resistance to RTF and ARF CL
airplanes in competition.
I can’t imagine ever abandoning the
satisfaction of designing and building my
own creations, but it doesn’t bother me
that someone else might prefer skipping
those things and going directly to flying.
Not only does it not bother me that others
don’t build the airplanes they fly, but as a
longtime competitor it doesn’t bother me
to compete against them.
The argument heard most frequently is
that some gifted pilots will have an unfairadvantage over those of us who prefer to
build what we fly. When you think about
it, it has always been that way. Some
people learn quicker and are able to
develop high levels of skill more readily.
Requiring competitors to build the
airplanes they fly will slow a rising star
and eliminate many others who, for a
variety of reasons, don’t think building is
important or necessary for that matter. The
idea is not to slow or eliminate
participants. The idea is to motivate and
encourage more people to get involved.
Nothing would please me more than
flying in contests with 100 airplanes
entered. Imagine that 95% of those entries
are RTF or ARFs, and most of them are
expertly built and finished. There are
hundreds of spectators with local and
possibly even national news coverage.
A news reporter with a camera crew
notices a group of spectators that is
particularly enthused about my airplane
and comes over to get the scoop. His
opening goes something like, “Your
airplane looks and flies incredible, your
last flight has put you in contention for
winning, where did you buy it?”
My answer is, “It is an original; I
designed and built it from scratch, and it is
not for sale.”
It just doesn’t get any better than that!
Okay, so it’s only a dream—or is it?
By now you’re probably thinking, When
do we get to the other stuff like building
and flying? That’s a huge elephant to
consume, so let’s eat it one bite at a
time. Designing, building, painting, and
flying are my strong points. Theory,
analysis, politics, and conjecture are my
weak points.
I’ll start with a product you probably
won’t find at your local hobby shop: the
Mr. Clean Magic Eraser sponge. I was
introduced to this product by my wife
Kathleen, who really likes to entertain. It
seems as though every time we have
people over, especially those with kids,
there are scuffs and marks left on the walls
and baseboards. After years of touching up
those marks with paint, she found the
Magic Eraser.
So how do we use this thing, and what
can it do for our airplanes?
One of my big problems with spray
painting is that no matter how good of a
masking job I do, some paint (overspray)
seems to get through. Last year as I was
removing the masking tape and paper from
my new model, there were the inevitable
places where the paint from the trim got
through the masking and ended up in the
wrong place.
My usual method for correcting this
was to sand the spot and repaint it with the
correct color. Remembering how these
magic sponges took marks off the walls
without disturbing the paint, I gave it a try.
The results were incredible!
You can remove black paint overspray
from a white base without marring the base
coat. The eraser is also good for cleaning
up those jaggy tape edges and places
where the paint wicks under the tape. Use
as directed and you will be amazed by the
results.
I also use a soft pencil to trace the lines
for masking, and the Magic Eraser is
perfect for removing the pencil marks.
Oh no, I’m out of space. In the coming
months we will tackle everything from
electric power vs. conventional power to
making decals and control-system design.
If you have a problem or procedure that
you find vexing, please send E-