Log in
Search
Latest topics
» Glow Plug Igniter with CONSTANT CURRENT --Oz--by --Oz-- Today at 7:46 pm
» help with battery and fuel, etc
by dsmithor Today at 7:34 pm
» help with battery and fuel, etc
by dsmithor Today at 7:31 pm
» Cox 049 Crankcases - First production run
by GallopingGhostler Today at 7:25 pm
» Just won a Cox .15 Sportsman
by GallopingGhostler Today at 6:53 pm
» Big Otto Resurrected Kit - Just finished
by Kim Today at 6:19 pm
» Are these Cox red beam mount tanks ok for diesel?
by ncpiperpilot Today at 4:57 pm
» Fox .09 Rocket Acquisition
by rdw777 Today at 4:01 pm
» Big Otto Resurrected Kit - Just finished
by Hye Flyer Today at 1:47 pm
» Goldberg/Brodak Shoestring Wing
by Hye Flyer Today at 1:27 pm
» Guillows Typhoon CL job...not mine
by Jerry Today at 1:19 pm
» texaco red tank and grey backplate
by Cox International Today at 12:47 pm
Old timers really had to learn to fly
Page 1 of 1
Old timers really had to learn to fly
This thread is more related to CL, but Kim's pulse radio exploits make it seem like RC was a tad on the rough side at first.
I have been flying CL continuously for 3 years now and boy was the learning curve steep!
I tend to wander back and forth from OTS to modern PA stunters and can really feel and see the difference. I have seen some very seasoned pilots do a full pattern with some pretty antique planes and it made me think about how hard it must have been to master CL stunt back in the 50's/60's
CL has come a long way, while I can do most of the same stunts with a Ringmaster as I can with a Cardinal, I find it's so much easier with modern airframes. The newer stuff does what you tell it to the instant you ask whereas the older designs you provide subtle input and hope for the best.
Does anyone else fly Old designs and new? If so do you notice a difference in the quality of flight?
I have been flying CL continuously for 3 years now and boy was the learning curve steep!
I tend to wander back and forth from OTS to modern PA stunters and can really feel and see the difference. I have seen some very seasoned pilots do a full pattern with some pretty antique planes and it made me think about how hard it must have been to master CL stunt back in the 50's/60's
CL has come a long way, while I can do most of the same stunts with a Ringmaster as I can with a Cardinal, I find it's so much easier with modern airframes. The newer stuff does what you tell it to the instant you ask whereas the older designs you provide subtle input and hope for the best.
Does anyone else fly Old designs and new? If so do you notice a difference in the quality of flight?
Cribbs74- Moderator
Posts : 11880
Join date : 2011-10-24
Age : 49
Location : Tuttle, OK
Re: Old timers really had to learn to fly
Old designs were plagued with thin wings and narrow spans. They stall in the maneuvers and therefore needed a lot of speed which period engines couldn't deliver. In addition, they used close coupled control surfaces and were generally overweight. The OTS pattern is not one that demands a lot of momentum to keep things looking the same. The planes are already handicapped therefore they can't properly perform a PAMPA pattern. Certain models of that era were different. This is why you see the OTS guys flying the same models, The Humongous, Jamison Special etc. These had larger than normal for the time wingspans with thicker airfoils.
The real test of the plane and your patience is when you introduce the bonus points for period correct engines. This is where you throw your handle across the circle and throw a tantrum. Rusty posted his flying experience with Bob Zambelli at Fort Jax. Bob uses a OK .60 in the Viking. The video presented a nice flying plane and the engine was on song for the video. A few weeks later at Huntersville, nothing. The engine wouldn't start and all the variables were correct in order but no run. I still haven't asked him what the problem was.
Old designs with the exception of few just don't track or fly correctly. Don't believe what you read in the old magazines in regards to the way these old models fly. The editor's were like car salesman. The fact that you can use modern engines on old designs is what changed the playing field.Garden State Circle Burners have been monumental in OTS rules. A modern engine develops enough power (with reserve) to keep things chugging along.
I've flown a lot of old time designs and while I feel they're neat and interesting I do like the modern stuff. We were recently flying a Drone .29 diesel on a late 40's design plane which the name escapes me. Our entire club flew the plane and a few of us even managed flying it inverted which was pretty amazing. The plane however could loop fairly well assuming you nursed it through. Ken
The real test of the plane and your patience is when you introduce the bonus points for period correct engines. This is where you throw your handle across the circle and throw a tantrum. Rusty posted his flying experience with Bob Zambelli at Fort Jax. Bob uses a OK .60 in the Viking. The video presented a nice flying plane and the engine was on song for the video. A few weeks later at Huntersville, nothing. The engine wouldn't start and all the variables were correct in order but no run. I still haven't asked him what the problem was.
Old designs with the exception of few just don't track or fly correctly. Don't believe what you read in the old magazines in regards to the way these old models fly. The editor's were like car salesman. The fact that you can use modern engines on old designs is what changed the playing field.Garden State Circle Burners have been monumental in OTS rules. A modern engine develops enough power (with reserve) to keep things chugging along.
I've flown a lot of old time designs and while I feel they're neat and interesting I do like the modern stuff. We were recently flying a Drone .29 diesel on a late 40's design plane which the name escapes me. Our entire club flew the plane and a few of us even managed flying it inverted which was pretty amazing. The plane however could loop fairly well assuming you nursed it through. Ken
Ken Cook- Top Poster
- Posts : 5103
Join date : 2012-03-27
Location : pennsylvania
Re: Old timers really had to learn to fly
Ken,
I am really fond of the classic era designs as by that time they starting figuring things out and ships flew a lot better. That era gives you the best of both worlds.
Interesting that you mentioned engine choices. I think you are spot on and that modern engines do make a huge difference in older designs.
Mind you sometimes the older ones do work well in certain airframes.
I really wish I had something in 1/2A that could lumber along like the big birds do. It seems that I will have to settle for high speed runs as there is just not enough torque to allow them to slow down.
I am really fond of the classic era designs as by that time they starting figuring things out and ships flew a lot better. That era gives you the best of both worlds.
Interesting that you mentioned engine choices. I think you are spot on and that modern engines do make a huge difference in older designs.
Mind you sometimes the older ones do work well in certain airframes.
I really wish I had something in 1/2A that could lumber along like the big birds do. It seems that I will have to settle for high speed runs as there is just not enough torque to allow them to slow down.
Cribbs74- Moderator
Posts : 11880
Join date : 2011-10-24
Age : 49
Location : Tuttle, OK
Re: Old timers really had to learn to fly
Control line flying didn't really take off in the UK until after the war in 1947.
I have a little book "Control Line Flying" by R.H.Warring that was published in 1948. It is dated but has some gems of wisdom.

One of them is the precis on sport vs stunt models.

The whole book provides examples of the learning curve that old timers went through developing the hobby.
I have a little book "Control Line Flying" by R.H.Warring that was published in 1948. It is dated but has some gems of wisdom.

One of them is the precis on sport vs stunt models.

The whole book provides examples of the learning curve that old timers went through developing the hobby.
ian1954- Diamond Member
- Posts : 2688
Join date : 2011-11-16
Age : 68
Location : England
Re: Old timers really had to learn to fly
"Learning curve" ah yes I think, as a young lad, I progressed fairly fast, mostly due to crappy plastic stuff that only stayed in the air by shear will of the pilot....think any Cox RTF in the 60s.
Learning about .19 or .35 balsa airplanes and how easy they were to "build" (even with time consuming silk n dope coverings) had a dramatic effect on my "piloting". And had the added benefit of learning how to construct a kit to be both light and durable. (Thank you dad) as well as fly them competently.
Of course by the 60s (when I started); what Cribbs is alluding to had already turned into history.
I, like thousands of kids, got to leap forward exponentially because we had fathers, older school chums, or great magazine stories to guild us past many of the frustrations of those just a few years older.
Interesting as I now learn about some of my C/L heroes, like Wooten or Mathis and similar competitors....they were teenagers at the time not too much older than I was. It would be great if I could say I too was a pioneer. But truth is I was good at reading, listening, observing...and developed the fine skill of imitation
35 years later, much is the same, as each of you here on this forum contributes to my continued imitation and increasing knowledge and competence
Thank you Jacob and ALL forum contributors!
Learning about .19 or .35 balsa airplanes and how easy they were to "build" (even with time consuming silk n dope coverings) had a dramatic effect on my "piloting". And had the added benefit of learning how to construct a kit to be both light and durable. (Thank you dad) as well as fly them competently.
Of course by the 60s (when I started); what Cribbs is alluding to had already turned into history.
I, like thousands of kids, got to leap forward exponentially because we had fathers, older school chums, or great magazine stories to guild us past many of the frustrations of those just a few years older.
Interesting as I now learn about some of my C/L heroes, like Wooten or Mathis and similar competitors....they were teenagers at the time not too much older than I was. It would be great if I could say I too was a pioneer. But truth is I was good at reading, listening, observing...and developed the fine skill of imitation
35 years later, much is the same, as each of you here on this forum contributes to my continued imitation and increasing knowledge and competence
Thank you Jacob and ALL forum contributors!
fredvon4- Top Poster
Posts : 3963
Join date : 2011-08-26
Age : 67
Location : Lampasas Texas

» "Forcing My Brain To Learn Things It Doesn't Want To Learn" Herding More Electrons in the Front Yard.
» Glider Timers
» Dethermal Timers
» Pictures of WWII aircraft
» I've a lot to learn.....about non Cox engines
» Glider Timers
» Dethermal Timers
» Pictures of WWII aircraft
» I've a lot to learn.....about non Cox engines
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum