just found this article about carl goldberg

706jim wrote:Now that I think about it I wonder why the wing was built in four sections. Maybe to keep the box smaller?

It is called "kit engineering". They did it to squeeze as much out of a piece of balsa that they could, and also to reduce storage and shipping costs. They did it to fill the box to its max to reduce box size. (It helped to reduce warehousing costs. Freight costs to dealers was both by weight and by volume. Reduce volume, reduce costs.)

This is why they also provided instructions versus full size plans, it was to reduce printing costs. (When Joe Wagner was alive, in the early 2000's, he had a small airplane and engine blog (basically 1/4, half-A to A) on one of the Internet bulletin boards. We'd asked questions, comment, share photos. He then went through it all, would produce an on-line newsletter in PDF. Then we were using Windows 98 and XP. In one of his newsletters, he mentioned about printing costs and why plans were smaller instructions, with bare essentials so modeller had enough to go on to build the kit.)

I don't have that communication with me off-hand, but have this one on CAD software. I archived it as an E-mail file and was able to import it into Thunderbird E-mail program:


They were talking about tens of thousands kits manufacturered each month and hundreds of thousands of kits manufactured each year. Modern kit manufacturing is deluxe work compared to yesteryear. Even though the quality of some pieces in the kits were iffy, I still liked how it didn't dent your pocket book as much.

706jim wrote:I was going to buy a Brodak kit at Toledo a few years ago but they closed up their display before I got to it. Always wondered how hard it would be to fly now that I've learned how. Btw the original kit price was $1.95 a far cry from the $40 it ballooned to over the years.

Modern manufacturing is much different than yesteryear. We don't have the volume as with back then. I remember my friends in Biloxi, Mississippi in the mid 1960's, who also built plastic display kits. Some also built balsa kits. I could go to the Cornet Department Store that was about a block from where I lived back in the mid 1960's. They had all the Comet kits, they were shrink wrapped in clear plastic, selling at suggested retail, took up a whole isle. Even had their RTF rubber powered jobs with the duralumin metal finish. I never bought those, because they had the least bang for the buck.

I bought Ed Lidgard's 32" Sparky endurance model for $1.25 plus tax (it was then only a couple cents on the dollar. Times have changed.) It was the largest model airplane I built to date, came with a carved 8 or 9 inch balsa propeller, rough carved. The smaller balsa kits were cheaper. The walnut and peanut scale Comets were $0.60 to $1.00.

Jim, personally, I'd just buy the balsa, and scratch build CG's Stuntman 23. The plans for it are already available. It is a very simple kit to replicate.

I built a Ranger 30 from an original Carl Goldberg kit just a few months ago. The fact that the wing was done in 4 pieces from different pieces of wood did cause some problems. The fact that some pieces were more dense or harder then others caused a wash out wash in condition. I had to wet the panels then use a magnet board to twist them in opposite directions. It took a few times to finally get it to pass the kitchen drawer test. By the way, if you use the printout from Outerzone.UK to build this model the wing is not removeable like it is in the original kit.

cmulder wrote:Might b a fun read for those into model plane history.  
I still have the anniversary edition piper cub,had a falcon 3 and a eletra at one stage.


https://www.madeinchicagomuseum.com/single-post/carl-goldberg-models/

What a great read.

This picture brought back a lot on memories. Thanks for sharing. I booked it.

bsadonkill wrote:I built a Ranger 30 from an original Carl Goldberg kit just a few months ago. The fact that the wing was done in 4 pieces from different pieces of wood did cause some problems. The fact that some pieces were more dense or harder then others caused a wash out wash in condition. I had to wet the panels then use a magnet board to twist them in opposite directions. It took a few times to finally get it to pass the kitchen drawer test.

You got one of their better kits. This is kit quality at its finest!      

bsadonkill wrote:By the way, if you use the printout from Outerzone.UK to build this model the wing is not removeable like it is in the original kit.

The RC Groups originator forgot to put the wing hold down dowel holes in the fuselage former and bulkhead patterns. However, with enough imagination and building experience (sometimes a forgotten art these days! ) one can still do the work from what is supplied.

I was the one who supplied Outerzone with my scanned instructions and I think the patterns found on RC Groups. (Grey matter is a little hazy, but I think the original patterns were hand traced then scanned. After, Outerzone (Steve) located or received a much better done CAD version.) I used my legal sized scanner and stitched together the instructions using photo editing software into a giant graphics file (sent as gray scale to reduce file size for E-mailing). After forwarding, Outerzone then made a PDF of that. I also forwarded them the decals file and the website that I found them on, and photos of my Ranger.

I am not sure how you came to the conclusion the patterns lack the information and you can only do a direct glue down of the wing to fuselage.  

Yes, the CAD patterns mistakenly have the wing hold down dowel holes absent in the fuselage formers. However, there is sufficient information in the instructions that one complete the details. (Interestingly, recently I bought bamboo wood barbecue skewers from the grocery store for a small fee. They are 1/8th inch in diameter and could be used for such, as well as the struts on a Sterling Beginner Fokker DVII or Goldberg Little Toot. )


Since you built it from the otherwise excellent kit, (the following is old hat to you),  these photos are from my original kit build:

if ya really really wanted to build a stuntman

Willie Nillies makes a kit

https://willynillies.com/buy-here/ols/products/stuntman-23-classic-control-line

cstatman wrote:if ya really really wanted to build a stuntman - Willie Nillies makes a kit

https://willynillies.com/buy-here/ols/products/stuntman-23-classic-control-line

Nice, and at a good price to boot, thanks for pointing it out.

On the outer zone print out of the Ranger 30 they redid some of the Formers differently. They added formers 5-6 that have slots for mounting the center of the wing. Formers 12 and 13 also have wing mounting slots. The original kit has a center former that the wing ends glue into. I think the outer zone modifications were done to make it a better for building the control line version. No, I don't think it would be that hard to modify, but you would have to get the airfoil shape right. I would have included pictures, but I am not sure how to do it from desktop.

I take that back it looks like I did post a picture.

I see your point.

Now I see what he did, it was for micro R/C, as he shows a cable tray former. Fuselage front shows to put a 2 oz. tank in nose. He eliminated the center wing hold down, as it would interfere with radio equipment installation and access. Also, it appears he is doubling up formers, as he is probably printing his on an HP flatbed inkjet printer, that can only handle 1/32" thick balsa.

So, he did modify slightly the cabin interior. However, I gather that one could take his layout and install the wing hold down dowel. Regarding wing ribs, you are correct, they are on the plans but he modified them. Wing construction differs from original.

Come to think of it, there is not much room for a fuel tank. Somehow, it appears that his layout, although prettier, is more academic than practical. In reality there is only room enough for less than a 1 oz. tank, probably a half (15 cc).

I don't think Steve at Outerzone was aware when he used that, it does not duplicate the original exactly. Memory fails me, but I think there was a previous one made of tracings from the original parts.

A 110 mm film 1973 photo of my Goldberg Golden Bee powered Jr. Falcon in orange Monokote before installing the canopy, from my barracks room with the 264th Army Band, Fort Shafter, Honolulu, Hawaii. (Unit was deactivated Sept. 1974 as part of the Vietnam War end draw downs. Was transferred to the 25th "Electric Strawberry" ID Band shortly after.)

@bsadonkill, I wrote Outerzone of the Goldberg Ranger 30 ID=3830 Plan Deviations:

GallopingGhostler on 6 Feb 2023 wrote:
Hello Steve,

I just wanted to make you aware that https://outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=3830 plans are not the originals. It appeared so 10 years ago, when I submitted my scanned instructions to you and the CAD plans found in another forum, I was unaware that these were modified by someone for 2 channel micro RC and a 1/4-A engine using a separate tank.

Recently, someone on Cox Engine Forums in thread at https://www.coxengineforum.com/t16935-just-found-this-article-about-carl-goldberg#218696 pointed out the differences that even I was unaware of.

It is not the original. The single 1/8 inch dia. wing hold down dowel was eliminated along with the braces for the free flight version. Some of the fuselage bulkheads in the cabin area were also modified / omitted to allow it to contain the RC gear and servos. Also he has a labeling error on the fuselage nose. There is no way one will be able to get a 2 ounce fuel tank because of its compactness, may be a half ounce custom one may fit. It appears that the CAD version may have not been fully updated after his build was completed and tested.

I have attached a few actual photos from my kit build Ranger 30 cabin area, to show how the wing hold down dowel is installed.

Plans may be useful for someone wanting to make an RC version, but one who wants the free flight or control line original will have to make their own deviations to mimic the original kit design.

I received the following reply back from Steve:

Outerzone Admin on 7 Feb 2023 wrote:Thanks for this. Good point, you are right, of course.

I have changed that listing now so hopefully it is clear that the templates do not directly match the original instructions. Have also added a comment to that effect and am hoping we can add more files and split this listing into two, which seems to me the best long term solution.

Hope that makes sense to you,
Thanks again
Steve

Until someone gives Outerzone their kit original patterns, at least Steve's comments on the plans will flag the discrepancies you found on the plans.

The Outerzone Ranger 30 listing has been updated by Steve, now includes patterns for the original FF / CL version.