Stan Alexander

some inspiRaTion for this column
came from the last trip to the local grocery
store. My wife said we were going for a
gallon of milk and a loaf of bread. You figure
we’ll spend five bucks at the most, right?
After going through the checkout and
having the piecrusts crushed, we spent a
total of $61.93.
I think some of us are that way when we
go to the hobby shop for that spare propeller
or gallon of fuel; we spend more than we
had planned. The hobby manufacturers
know that flashy box covers and shiny
photos of the finished models sell kits and
Almost Ready to Flys (ARFs).
My job is in the retail grocery business.
We know those candy bars are at the
checkout counter for a reason. At roughly
three feet off the floor, they are in reach of
most kids; if the kids pick the candy up,
mom will buy it.
The same logic holds true for us
modelers. If the hobby shop has shiny new
engines (on sale, of course), glue, and
magazines out at the checkout counter,
chances are we’ll buy them.
Many modelers are what our wives or
husbands commonly call “pack rats”—I’m one.
This point was brought home last weekend
during a conversation with Jim Rediske.

It seems as though we have more trainer-type aircraft
than almost any other. In the 1930s, a variety of biplanes were
used for training military and civil pilots. During the late
1930s, Fairchild Aircraft Division realized there was a need for a
low-wing monoplane trainer.
At that time, biplanes such as the Stearman PT-13-17 and
the British de Havilland D.H. Tiger Moth were the standard.
Trainers have evolved along with other aircraft during the last
65 years.
In the 1930s, the US Army Air Force (USAAF) had the
primary trainer (PT)—the basic beginner’s aircraft. Then the
student was transferred to the basic trainer (BT) series, which
included aircraft such as the Vultee BT-13. The last series a
student saw time in was the advanced trainer (AT) series,
including the AT-6.
The next stop was usually the combat aircraft or further
training for multiengine airplanes.