Aero Mail
Top Cub
I caught a mistake that I first made when I wrote the Nats News this summer in Muncie. I incorrectly identified the builder and owner for the Piper Super Cub or "Top Cub" as Phil Sibille; that is incorrect. It was repeated in the November 2010 MA as well.
The owner of the "Top Cub" showing the cockpit on page 30, top of the page, is Larry Folk of Pickerington, OH 43147. This is a 1/3-scale model and highly detailed. The model started out as a Balsa USA 1/3-scale kit. Power is provided by a D&B 3.7 gas engine and it's covered with Nelson Paint. Sorry for my mistake.
Stan Alexander [email protected]
The Good Ole Days!
The article on Kaz [in the August 2010 MA] brought back very fine and fond memories of the early days of radio control when I was just entering the venue.
In those days I'd never heard of Kaz, but we in Dallas, Texas were really getting into RC and the Astro Hog and any low-wing plane was really something. I "ran" with a group containing, as best I can remember, Gordon Gabbert (ex-WW2 navy pilot), Ben Bacon from Mississippi or somewhere east, whom I'd known from early 1950s RC contests, and four others whose names time has erased.
I was the only single-channel, rudder-only flier at that time; the other guys were Hams and flew multi-channel bang-bang or escapements on 5 meters. I started out using an Aerotrol from Berkley; my initial model was a Bootstraps also by Berkley, using a Cub .14. Shortly I began designing my own planes and flying single-channel RC until the Good Brothers 3-tube systems appeared.
I remember when the Astro Hog appeared. Quite an innovation, and we learned how to design and fly low-wing models to boot!
In 1955 I was, with family, transferred from Dallas, Texas to Los Angeles, CA, just in time for the Navy-sponsored 1955 Nats. I'd built a special low wing for the event but crashed one week before the meet, so in one week I scratch-built a simple shoulder-wing single-channel model with a Cub .14 and a Good Brothers huge three-tube single-channel rig. It flew out of the box like a dream.
I entered this simple model in the Nats but on first flight it flew away to a Navy ammo dump! Later it flew so well that I gave several demos to other engineers including a few corporate managers; all were amazed by this new venue/hobby.
By the next (1959, I think) Navy Nats at Los Alamitos, CA I had a sport-scale negative-stagger wing big bipe using a Citizenship multi-channel reed "bang-bang" system (R, E, Th, AIL). I really learned to "fan the sticks" on that rig! The model was extremely slow-flying — so slow, in fact, that it could only do one-quarter of the pattern before my time would run out!
By 1963 (I think), the Nats had rotated again to California's Navy base at Los Alamitos. This time I flew a low-wing "rocket," .45 powered, looking rather like an F-80D but with a straight wing. It was extremely fast and unforgiving with a high wing loading but fully aerobatic for those days. Not really a joy to fly. It also used my Citizenship reed rig on 27.255 mc, subject to all types of interference.
On my first flight at the Nats, as I turned to make the required pass up the runway, interference hit it, control was lost, and the model at full bore plowed into the dirt amongst the spectators and cars. Close calls were the norm in those days of random, violent interference failures of any model using the "Citizenship" RC band.
Trying to help things along, I designed, as Bill Winter asked, one of the first — if not the first — do-it-yourself printed-circuit receivers for 27.255 mc with an optional sealed relay by Babcock. Model Aviation published it. Several modelers responded that they couldn't make it work. My response was: with a gas-tube receiver one never knows whether or not the receiver, even when carefully made, will ever work; keep trying.
Somewhere in the late 1958–1960 era Orbit appeared with its first proportional-control multi-channel RC system. It was quite an accomplishment, but for the time of low salaries and tight jobs, it was once in a while. But the die was cast and Muncie became a huge modeling center.
Great for Muncie and someone's AMA plans but hard on the average modeler who had a hard enough time financing time off for a more local trip as the Nats rotated about the country. It was at this point I basically dropped out of any competition other than local contests, and finally even them, opting for sport scale.
By retirement age in 1983 I had enough financial reserves and no bills, so I could afford an up-to-date multi-channel proportional-control rig. And suddenly, as PCM appeared, I had not one rig but three! Amazing! So designing and building really accelerated.
In about 1987 I decided, after an article noting that biplanes could never compete with monoplanes in Pattern, to see if I could with my 40 years in aerospace and other engineering venues design a successful Pattern bipe. I worked on the design for about a year, trying to incorporate all my aerospace experience into the design as appropriate.
I named my "creation" SLIK (naturally!) and indeed it was. Using a Saito .85 four-stroke with a 14-inch-diameter Master Airscrew prop, and my 6-channel Futaba PCM, over the next four years I flew it regularly and found that while a bit underpowered with the .85, it was a superb model and a capable competitor to any other design of one or two wings — except the brutally overpowered "3D" birds (we didn't do 3D in the 1960s through 1980s!).
After 1994 and a couple of minor heart attacks and other back and spine problems, I have pretty much resigned from RC except for limited electric sailplaning, which does not require any significant "chasing" of models, especially with the advent of the gigahertz systems which appear to be the principal radio-control avenue of really safe and solid control from now into the future.
But somehow I miss those early years when we modelers "fought" for every tiny advancement and struggled with far less than perfect (or even really good) RC systems. Wouldn't it have been wonderful if somehow RC could have leaped into the gigahertz field in the 1960s?
John Deden via e-mail
Bobby Watts' MS Society Donation
I read the IRCHA Jamboree story in the December issue of Model Aviation. I must say, I was very touched by Bobby Watts' generosity. As a person who has lived with MS for 16 years, I am very touched and moved by such a gesture.
I don't know Bobby and have never been to IRCHA. Some of the members of my local club, Southern Maine Radio Controlled Helicopter Association (SMRCHA), have been, and they have some great stories.
I hope to make it to next year's IRCHA jamboree. If I get the chance to meet Bobby, I would love to thank him in person.
Meanwhile, if you could pass on my heartfelt expression of gratitude, I would appreciate it. The National MS Society has raised millions for MS research, and every penny counts. I believe the researchers who are working on a cause and cure for MS are closer now than ever. Donations like the one Bobby made are moving that research forward.
Thanks for your time.
Daren Mallory Gorham, Maine
FPV Regulations
As the safety officer at our site, the issue of FPV [first-person view] flying has been a concern, and the article in the latest MA magazine raised the level of that concern. The article [Greg Gimlick's "Electrics" column in the December 2010 issue] stated that the pilot, Alex (inset photo), sits by his equipment. AMA rules require a spotter, and that the aircraft never leaves his or her sight.
The AMA document concerning FPV operations is clear and to the point: this type of flying should be done with a buddy box, with the PIC handling the master box. This has really stirred the members of our club who are borderline on the FPV topic.
James Parks via e-mail
You're right; the AMA does recommend using a buddy box. Greg's column has effectively raised awareness of the proper use of FPV systems.
Thank you so much for your input. The safe practice of aeromodelling is a priority.
—Michael Ramsey MA Editor
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
