ebay window shopping

Marleysky wrote:She’s a beauty!  She’s expensive!   Keep the picture to look at. A pictures worth $700!

Look at, right. At almost 2 pounds I doubt that it would ever leave the ground. But, I like the C/L leads out through the passenger windows and the removable guide. As a stick built Guillows I'm amazed that he could paint that stuff on then sand it to that level without crushing the superstructure. That's no MG under there.

I don’t see it. It really could use some detailing.

2x.074 is just shy of .15 and a very anemic .15 at that. Maybe with a long enough rollout it might ROG. 2lbs is near the limit for .35 sized ships. There was probably a reason it was never fueled.

Cribbs74 wrote:I don’t see it. It really could use some detailing.

2x.074 is just shy of .15 and a very anemic .15 at that. Maybe with a long enough rollout it might ROG. 2lbs is near the limit for .35 sized ships. There was probably a reason it was never fueled.

Yes, after going to all that trouble I would have painted it like this rather than just over-all bronze.



I flew in one just like this back in the mid-50's. Baltimore to Boston. Tight but comfy. Stewardesses, err flight attendants were really friendly to young Sailors travelling in uniform.

Ahhh the good old days. Stewardess’s are still friendly to those in uniform. After 911 I no longer flew in uniform. I wanted to not be singled out and be able to provide help when needed. I am sure my haircut and clean dress gave me away though. Actually it was mandatory that we fly in uniform until 2001. After that it was ordered we do not unless on deployment.

rsv1cox wrote:The engines have excellent compression and were bench-tested. The model has not been fueled.

So what, they sat the engines on the bench and it didn't break??

Myself, I think it looks rather good and different with that paint scheme. Although a bit of accenting or details as in Bobs picture woule really make it look good. But I was taken back a bit when I read that it was a Guillows kit. Looking at the window and door detail, I wonder if the kit had a sheet of plastic molded parts for these areas? Either way, a neat specimen. Yes, I had to google how to spell specimen....

NEW222 wrote:Myself, I think it looks rather good and different with that paint scheme. Although a bit of accenting or details as in Bobs picture woule really make it look good. But I was taken back a bit when I read that it was a Guillows kit. Looking at the window and door detail, I wonder if the kit had a sheet of plastic molded parts for these areas? Either way, a neat specimen. Yes, I had to google how to spell specimen....

Does look a little like it was cast in bronze. Talk about a heavy weight.

I'm grappling with that Bondo-glass thing. Builder must have been a body-man superman to achieve that level of finish on a balsa sheeted airplane.

Trying to figure this out Rod:

So what, they sat the engines on the bench and it didn't break??

Remember, I'm working an 83 year old brain here.

rsv1cox wrote:I'm grappling with that Bondo-glass thing.  Builder must have been a body-man superman to achieve that level of finish on a balsa sheeted airplane.

Well, I will bow out on that comment..... As that is my trade, I will admit that when I started with control line, I too had a few blunders with my 1/2a sheet models. I will admit however that they looked great with no woodgrain showing. Highbuild primer was a guarantee with no shortage of color and clearcoat...... Back then I did not really grasp the weight thing.

rsv1cox wrote:Trying to figure this out Rod:

So what, they sat the engines on the bench and it didn't break??

Remember, I'm working an 83 year old brain here.  

Well, if I may intervene. I think he is referring to the comment in the ad posted above.

'The engines have excellent compression and were bench-tested. The model has not been fueled.'

If the engines have excellent compression and were bench tested, how has the model NOT been fueled. At least this is the way I see it and believe this is what Rod was referring to.

NEW222 wrote:

rsv1cox wrote:Trying to figure this out Rod:

So what, they sat the engines on the bench and it didn't break??

Remember, I'm working an 83 year old brain here.  

Well, if I may intervene. I think he is referring to the comment in the ad posted above.

'The engines have excellent compression and were bench-tested. The model has not been fueled.'

If the engines have excellent compression and were bench tested, how has the model NOT been fueled. At least this is the way I see it and believe this is what Rod was referring to.

What I got from that was that the seller bench tested them out of the airplane then installed them.  No need to fuel it up.

And, Bondo as you know is quite easy to sand and finish, add fiberglass and it's a whole new ball game. If he just layered it with pure Bondo, I can see it, but you have to be a master to layer a very thin coat on so that details shows, especially around the door.

I guess the BENCH did not break....that is how I read the snarky comment

fredvon4 wrote:I guess the BENCH did not break....that is how I read the snarky comment

You might be on to something Fred, Rod does work on engines and I would think that he has pulled a few and put them on a workbench perhaps collapsing one or two. But he works on those itty-bitty Brit and Aus four cylinder jobs that barely weigh a pound and a half.

Ask me how I know.