Lovely plane. These old time cabin models are so great.. Most of us grew up on them - I know I did! Peter Chinn did a monthly column in Aeromodeler Magazine - I think it was called 'Engine Test', featuring a different motor each issue. Very informative reviews and loads of really technical stuff, like graphs and what not.. Beautifully built and flown, I really enjoyed this one Josh! It kind of reminds me of a big version of the Kiel Kraft Eaglet, only more complex. Similar lines though. Excellent as ever! Thanks for this. 🌟👍
Yeah I've gotten a lot of data from reading back issues of Chinn's engine reviews. Apparently he was a prolific rubber power designer back in the 1940s and 50s.
Another great kit to add to my have to build list Thanks for putting out great airplanes Josh and Hope Keeping the hobby strong Kinda looks like a sparky all grown up
Josh and Hope, if I may ask a question or two: We know that the long noses on rubber-powered models with the propeller far ahead of the C.G. are designed so to provide a long distance from the motor pin to the propeller shaft end so that we may have a maximum-length rubber motor. We also know that with the propellor that far ahead of the C.G., a powerful moment arm is created at the propeller that accentuates any deviation from dead straight at which the propeller thrust angle might be set, and that accordingly, even tiny changes in the propeller’s thrust angle make an enormous difference. On most high-performance rubber-powered models we have no choice but to put up with this sometimes frustrating trim vagary. However, if one was to convert a Gollywock, or a BOP Challenger to R/C with electric power, would it be advisable to shorten the nose in order to, One - Make it easier to balance the model within the proper C.G. range with that relatively heavy motor (far heavier, in any event than the rubber-powered model’s nose block and propeller) way up front and, Two - Avoid a highly sensitive propellor thrust angle situation? I would love to hear your thoughts on this. Cheers.
Good questions! On electric conversions you have pretty small propellers, by comparison, so the destabilizing effects are reduced, however you still have all that stuff way out on the nose instead of distributed through the fuselage. I think a short-nosed Gollywock would look...odd...but from a performance perspective, it's definitely a better solution. This is also why electric conversions of old-time gas models work so well.
@@joshuawfinn Thank you, Josh. I appreciate that you took the time to answer my questions. I agree that the classic, old rubber models would look a bit "odd" with shorter noses and that gas models with already short noses are easier conversions to electric. Still, those rubber models perform so well and are so graceful in the air. I’m thinking of converting a Gollywock and a Gypsy. Some time ago, I did a gas-to-electric-R/C conversion on a 2 - metre Lanzo Bomber, and it is the best flying and performing sailplane I have ever had. Just after completing the conversion and test-flying it a few times (and marveling at its performance and how incredibly beautiful it looks in the air), I brought it to my old club's limited-time climb/duration contest and won it with little trouble (or, I should say, the Bomber won it). The old girl climbed nearly vertically out of my hand and just hung there at altitude like a kite until it was time to bring her down for a touchdown at the appointed moment. I used the old “simulated D/T” method to descend quickly, i.e., full up-elevator) I had to stretch my time by a 30 seconds or so, and I did this by S-turning just above some trees at the end of the landing area that provided enough lift to keep her from sinking. That really popped a few eyes you can be sure. Most of the others had brought sleek, modern sailplanes with spoilers and flaps and all, and they scoffed at what looked to them to be a crude, '30s relic. However, they stopped laughing when they saw it fly. I made a few converts to the older stuff that day. Thanks again, Josh.
Curious about the tracker you mentioned. How does it work, where can you get one and how much is it? Enjoyed another of your videos. Thanks for sharing
That is a beauty! Just took a quick look on Outerzone--there are 10 plans there, listed under "Peter Chinn." Did not look further, to see if there is more info on the plans and/or accompanying articles...
That would be incredible if Mr. Chinn was responsible for the design. That in itself makes it for someone like me worthwhile to build. But the fact that it is such a great flyer...
The bug I've got on it is a Chinese built unit on thr 216 mhz band for use with Walston receivers. I do sell 460 mhz FRS band beacons from BMK which work with Baofeng receivers, which I also carry, but you will have to source your own yagi antenna.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Lovely plane. These old time cabin models are so great.. Most of us grew up on them - I know I did! Peter Chinn did a monthly column in Aeromodeler Magazine - I think it was called 'Engine Test', featuring a different motor each issue. Very informative reviews and loads of really technical stuff, like graphs and what not.. Beautifully built and flown, I really enjoyed this one Josh! It kind of reminds me of a big version of the Kiel Kraft Eaglet, only more complex. Similar lines though. Excellent as ever! Thanks for this. 🌟👍
Yeah I've gotten a lot of data from reading back issues of Chinn's engine reviews. Apparently he was a prolific rubber power designer back in the 1940s and 50s.
Amazing luck that plane has, Between all those trees and all that fence wire
My friend you must really like to fly around those airplane magnets😎
Lol! It's what I've got...this plane definitely needs more space. A real powerhouse.
Beautiful airplane and flying. Amazing. Thanks 👍🇺🇸
Another great kit to add to my have to build list
Thanks for putting out great airplanes Josh and Hope
Keeping the hobby strong
Kinda looks like a sparky all grown up
Glad to do it! Been a tough few weeks with the laser failure but we should be back in action soon.
Joshua sos un ídolo👍💪
Beautiful Plane 👍
Beautiful Flyer 👍🇺🇸
Beautiful ship, nice flying!
Nice job!
Josh and Hope, if I may ask a question or two:
We know that the long noses on rubber-powered models with the propeller far ahead of the C.G. are designed so to provide a long distance from the motor pin to the propeller shaft end so that we may have a maximum-length rubber motor. We also know that with the propellor that far ahead of the C.G., a powerful moment arm is created at the propeller that accentuates any deviation from dead straight at which the propeller thrust angle might be set, and that accordingly, even tiny changes in the propeller’s thrust angle make an enormous difference.
On most high-performance rubber-powered models we have no choice but to put up with this sometimes frustrating trim vagary. However, if one was to convert a Gollywock, or a BOP Challenger to R/C with electric power, would it be advisable to shorten the nose in order to,
One - Make it easier to balance the model within the proper C.G. range with that relatively heavy motor (far heavier, in any event than the rubber-powered model’s nose block and propeller) way up front and,
Two - Avoid a highly sensitive propellor thrust angle situation?
I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Cheers.
Good questions! On electric conversions you have pretty small propellers, by comparison, so the destabilizing effects are reduced, however you still have all that stuff way out on the nose instead of distributed through the fuselage. I think a short-nosed Gollywock would look...odd...but from a performance perspective, it's definitely a better solution. This is also why electric conversions of old-time gas models work so well.
@@joshuawfinn Thank you, Josh. I appreciate that you took the time to answer my questions. I agree that the classic, old rubber models would look a bit "odd" with shorter noses and that gas models with already short noses are easier conversions to electric. Still, those rubber models perform so well and are so graceful in the air. I’m thinking of converting a Gollywock and a Gypsy.
Some time ago, I did a gas-to-electric-R/C conversion on a 2 - metre Lanzo Bomber, and it is the best flying and performing sailplane I have ever had. Just after completing the conversion and test-flying it a few times (and marveling at its performance and how incredibly beautiful it looks in the air), I brought it to my old club's limited-time climb/duration contest and won it with little trouble (or, I should say, the Bomber won it).
The old girl climbed nearly vertically out of my hand and just hung there at altitude like a kite until it was time to bring her down for a touchdown at the appointed moment. I used the old “simulated D/T” method to descend quickly, i.e., full up-elevator) I had to stretch my time by a 30 seconds or so, and I did this by S-turning just above some trees at the end of the landing area that provided enough lift to keep her from sinking. That really popped a few eyes you can be sure. Most of the others had brought sleek, modern sailplanes with spoilers and flaps and all, and they scoffed at what looked to them to be a crude, '30s relic. However, they stopped laughing when they saw it fly. I made a few converts to the older stuff that day.
Thanks again, Josh.
Curious about the tracker you mentioned. How does it work, where can you get one and how much is it?
Enjoyed another of your videos. Thanks for sharing
VERY GOOD👍
That is a beauty! Just took a quick look on Outerzone--there are 10 plans there, listed under "Peter Chinn." Did not look further, to see if there is more info on the plans and/or accompanying articles...
Yeah they all do look to have similar design traits, does appear to be the same Peter Chinn as the famed engine review man. Absolute legend of a man.
Beautiful model! How well does it ROG?
They get off the table just fine provide you supply plenty of power.
That would be incredible if Mr. Chinn was responsible for the design. That in itself makes it for someone like me worthwhile to build. But the fact that it is such a great flyer...
I really want to know if it's the same PF Chinn and what other designs he produced. It's an incredibly complex design but it's truly a great airplane.
so "tracking bug" please elaborate - what do I need to buy? is there a link to J&H product? :)
The bug I've got on it is a Chinese built unit on thr 216 mhz band for use with Walston receivers. I do sell 460 mhz FRS band beacons from BMK which work with Baofeng receivers, which I also carry, but you will have to source your own yagi antenna.
A plane worthy of a electric motor
Definitely