Cardboard Construction
In your April ’04 MA in the excellent
article “State of the Sport: Radio Control
Scale” (on page 29), the caption with the
Junkers Ju 52 got my attention! I have to
totally disagree with the statement that
the open face corrugated cardboard is
difficult to apply and even more difficult
to paint!
I consider myself a better builder than
flier, but only average. My experience
with the cardboard comes from building a
5-AT-B Ford Tri-motor from Radio
Control Modeler plans in 1972.
The outer skin glued on over a box
cardboard and white foam base, with
Elmer’s wood glue thinned 50% with
water. Potentially the hard part was doing
the wing leading edge, which went quite
easily.
You start on the bottom of the wing
about 2 inches behind the leading edge,
let that first 2 inches of glue dry, then
with enough material to complete the top,
with the core upside down.
Then wet the first 25% of the leading
edge, and watch gravity do its job. After
that section dries, continue on 25% at a
time.
Next glue the entire top skin; the
fuselage and tail feathers are a walk in the
park.
To lay a hardened base for paint, apply
one or two coats of Minwax Polycrylic
water-based or similar. Let it dry at least
24 hours.
Next, apply your favorite finish, then
add your markings, decals, etc. Then
apply a coat of Polycrylic or your favorite
fuel-proofer.
I agree that this is not a beginner’s
subject, but don’t be afraid to try it!
The last I heard, the single flute
cardboard is still available from the paper
suppliers. The size flute is identified by
letter. I believe mine was “E” flute, about
1⁄8 inch at 1⁄12 scale.
Fred Maier
Warren, Pennsylvania
Well-Rounded Content
I want to express my thanks and
appreciation for the very fine coverage—
with color photos, no less—of the 2004
Southwest Regionals meet in the June
issue of Model Aviation.
And thanks to the Model Aviation staff
Model Aviation, 5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Letters to the Editor
September 2004 9
for a well-rounded treatment of all aspects
of this great hobby/sport. Keep up the
good work!
Bill Barr
Palm Bay, Florida
Victims or Agents of Change?
I believe that [Bob Hunt’s] capitulation
[in the June 2004 “Modeling Spoken
Here”] from “ … similar feelings to Mr.
Cooke’s and D.B. Mathews’ ... ” to that
viewpoint based upon the factual data
presented by Mr. Jay Mealy may be a bit
hasty.
Actually, all three points of view are
probably firmly based on fact. D.B.
Mathews’ account, I suspect, is a
comprehensive historical one dating from
the 1940s until the present. I believe
views expressed by Mr. Cooke cover
evolution of participation in model
aviation over a similar time period. Both
views will generate little controversy
among those of us who have lived through
this period.
Mr. Mealy presents a view through the
prism of the AMA. A view that probably
extends over only the last one or two
decades. His facts are those facts. I doubt
that any of these three views is
significantly flawed; it is the context that
is different for each.
I believe the AMA became a
significant factor in model aviation in the
early 1960s. It was viewed until then, and
still is viewed by many of us, as being
mainly focused on the competitionoriented.
I say the early 1960s because until that
time, I doubt that 50% of those folks
building and flying model aircraft joined
the AMA. Today, I estimate that 80% or
more of those folks building and flying
join the AMA. (No facts here! Just
opinion based on experience.)
My building of flying models dates
from 1944 when I was 6. At that time,
there were four school yards where UControl
was flown, and two Free Flight
fields, all within a reasonable bike ride
from my home in Philadelphia. None of
these or similar venues are available there
today.
When I was high-school age (1953),
the U-Control club I belonged to had
exactly one AMA member—one of the
two adult supervisors. At that time, I knew
one other AMA member—a formidable
U-Control competitor who was a fellow
employee in the hobby shop where I
worked part-time. Today it is easier to
count the six or so among the fellow
modelers I know who are not members of
the AMA.
Today in Binghamton NY, I know of
no Control Line sites within a half-hour’s
drive. So depending upon one’s sense of
history, the AMA membership and flying
site “situations” may or may not have
changed significantly.
The AMA chartered RC club I
currently belong to has a decent field
owned by one of the members. Another
nearby AMA chartered club that
welcomes guests shares a private grassstrip
airport.
There are two other AMA chartered
club fields in this area. My current
favorite site to fly RC or Free Flight
welcomes AMA members and
nonmembers alike. This is a private grass
airstrip airport owned by a nonmember
full-scale and model aviation enthusiast.
There is still another RC site available in a
public park on a noninterference basis
with field sports. (“Noninterference basis”
means early mornings or all day during
the cold weather months as a practical
matter.)
So what is my point? My point is that
out of these six flying sites, the AMA is
aware of only four. There are significant
modeling activities occurring outside the
purview of the AMA. So while AMA
statistics may present a representative
picture, it is probably not a comprehensive
one. Also, the further one goes back in
history, the less comprehensive are the
AMA statistics for the percent AMA
membership reason offered as opinion
above.
What has surely changed significantly
since the 1940s is the ever-diminishing
opportunity for young and old alike to
encounter model aviation in an informal
or casual setting that is not store,
exposition, or contest, where initial
interest can be nourished through
frequent, friendly personal contact.
Mr. Mealy is surely entirely right on
one account: we can choose to be either
the agents of change to maintain room for
model aviation in this world or we can
choose to be the victims of change. What
it takes is the will. MA
Greg Hofmann
Binghamton, New York
09sig1.QXD 6/24/04 10:10 am Page 9
Edition: Model Aviation - 2004/09
Page Numbers: 9