Hip Pocket Builders' Forum

Outdoor Free Flight Forum => Old Time Rubber => Topic started by: gossie on April 17, 2012, 10:53:27 PM



Title: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 17, 2012, 10:53:27 PM
Got the bug to build my first 'Wock.

Jim was good enough to send me a plan that I swapped a couple of things for it.

  Both Jim and Dave Andreski gave me some valuable information on the Lou Vargo version, so I've started to get a kit together and should start the build shortly.

Will keep the pics going as I make progress.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on April 17, 2012, 11:55:26 PM
Should look like this .....


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Ian Easton on April 18, 2012, 12:56:12 AM
I used to go out flying with Lou (he passsed away a couple of years ago).  Looking forward to seeing this one come together. He'd be really pleased to know there was a thread starting up on the Vargo-wock.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 18, 2012, 01:15:13 AM
No Jim, mines having red wings.  I have plenty of red Esaki.   Fuselage to be black Esaki, probably double covered.   And I'm not building two of them, just yet anyway......The pic did not seem to take so I gave it another click and bingo......It happened twice.    Get rid of one of them if you wish Rats.   Very nice pic though of your 'Wock going up Jim.

I did read Lou had passed away, and I'm sure it would have been a pleasure to have known him and flown with him.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: tctele on April 18, 2012, 02:18:02 PM
Seeing as my Golly is not legal in vintage anyone got the prop block dimensions of the Vargo, it's conversion time! A pic would be nice as well please. Tony


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on April 18, 2012, 04:14:31 PM
Why is the G-wock not legal in Vintage?     Cutoff date is December 31/50 amd the Golly is about a decade older  - and they have been flown in SMAE/Sam vintage events in the past.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 18, 2012, 05:35:00 PM
Tony,
Here's the prop block dimensions. Radius= 8".
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 18, 2012, 05:52:27 PM
Good one Dave.  I just took a pic of the prop. on the plan, but yours is so much better.

With folders I would normally have ply sheet on the side of the hub that the prop. slots into with a hole and dowel through it to be hinged.
The plan states it's hinged using Chicago style.......Anybody got a close up of how they have done that please?


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 18, 2012, 05:58:20 PM
Gossie,
I was going to ask what a "Chicago Style Hinge" was. Never seen the term before.
All I see are 'solder lugs' under thread wrappings, fairly standard on some OT Models?

Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 18, 2012, 06:36:57 PM
Soldering 'lugs' are available here-
http://www.tubesandmore.com/
Search for item # S-H112.
You get 10 for $1.20.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 18, 2012, 08:14:59 PM
Mmmmm, soldering lugs eh.  Very tricky stuff.   Will have to think about this when it comes time to do the prop.

Right hand fuselage side is on the board with the PVA drying out at the moment.    A little down thrust and right thrust built into the front.   
 Maybe later on today I'll get the left hand side built on top of it so they are the same......Cling plastic in between of course.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 19, 2012, 08:48:08 AM
Yes,
The 'lugs' look a little tricky. Not posted as a suggestion but only for those who may want to go 'retro'.
Dave


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: tctele on April 20, 2012, 03:29:38 AM
Applehoney, I built the 91' version! Fortunately I built the wing sans vintage with bamboo tips so it's a matter of a bit of butchery at the back of the fuselage, new stab and prop, just a weekends work, thought I'd fly it with my coupe at this years Brit Nats, bound to be as windy as hell, rain by the bucket load, so the Vargo will probably do lol Tony


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 20, 2012, 05:01:11 AM
LH side is on the building board.   Are you all excited? ;D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: flydean1 on April 20, 2012, 07:18:23 AM
"Applehoney, I built the 91' version!"  Is that wingspan or fuselage length.  Either way it will be tough to get down those narrow English country roads!!! ;D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 24, 2012, 10:37:05 PM
Fuselage is pretty much together.    Will make a start on the wing next.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 25, 2012, 12:19:19 PM
I'm paying close attention!
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: SHigSpeed on April 25, 2012, 12:42:00 PM
I'm paying close attention!
Dave Andreski

Me too!

Does anyone happen to have this plan on PDF by any chance?  I'd love a copy for the "to build" list. ;)

_SHig


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on April 25, 2012, 01:47:17 PM
Just on paper


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 25, 2012, 02:09:56 PM
I can help with a PDF but can't guarantee size accuracy. I enlarged a small, magazine page size plan using PhotoShop.
One important dimension that will help- the stab should be 17.5". I've never printed it out.
Some numerals and letters are rather 'smudged' and can be a little hard to read.
Applehoney and Gossie can help clear up any questions.
PM me your e-mail address.

Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: SHigSpeed on April 25, 2012, 02:52:43 PM
Thanks for the help gents!  I think I have what I'm looking for, but I'll hit you up again if for whatever reason it doesn't work out.

_SHig


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 25, 2012, 11:57:09 PM
Wing on the way.  Still a bit to be done to it.

That stab. I just measured is 17.5 inches.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on April 26, 2012, 12:18:39 AM
Nice!

I used to build as fast as you.

Used to ....       :'(


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: tctele on April 27, 2012, 02:57:49 AM
Flydean you're right very tough to get in the car, have to strap it to to the roof and then glide to the airfield, the prop is huge! Tony


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 30, 2012, 04:45:00 AM
Vargo-Wock slowly coming together.   Fuselage, wing, tail including fins ready for some fine detail and finishing.

Thought it was apt to have our Jasper Johns in the background with the 48 stars, the model being from '40/'41.

Next main job is to get the propeller and nose block going.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 30, 2012, 05:55:08 PM
Those that have built Wocks how have you held the wings on?   No dowels marked on the Vargo version on my plan.  Put them in anyway, pegs on top of wing? 

How about DTing it?   We don't/can't use fuse......too dangerous, so where have you put timers?   Fuselage is very narrow so if I put one into that the blast tube may/will hit it on the way in or the rubber may beat it to bits.  Suggestions???


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: PeeTee on April 30, 2012, 07:03:54 PM
Gos

I recall that Andrew Longhurst built one, and he put a Tomy in the bay in front of the wing, with the waggler poking through the top of the fus. I don't recall him having problems with timer damage. Obviously you'll need to put a short spacer or two in the side and top bays to support the tissue.

An alternative location is on the bottom of the fus, under the CofG. Have the winding knob protruding through the bottom of the fus, with the mechanics housed in a small 1/32" balsa box. I've done this with a Senator and a Scram, and both are unscathed (the Tomys that is) after many years of use.

Finally you could always resort to a viscous timer stuck on the outside - but I prefer the certainty of a Tomy, especially where we fly with loadsa trees.

I hope this provides food for thought.

Peter


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on April 30, 2012, 10:01:41 PM
Thanks. Food for thought for sure.

 I still feel with the fuselage being narrow and wanting to use a blast tube, that I have and fits perfectly, I can't afford to have anything hanging inside the fuselage.

I had thought perhaps setting it up in the top of the wing?????   But then the line has to wind itself about from rear to there........Up on top is good on Senator the way the stab. is situated.   Ah, so much to worry about. LOL.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: flydean1 on April 30, 2012, 11:08:59 PM
You have some good suggestions for the timer installation.

Wing retention:  I made some temporary hooks bent in a squared "U"  shape which went under the fuselage and the hooks on either side of the fuselage.  Rubber bands secured the wings in place.  Then installed the motor and allowed it to unwind and be stopped with the flathead screw in the back of the noseblock.  This set the balance point to the in-flight position.  After moving the wing so that the model balanced at the correct point on the wing chord, I marked the spot and installed dowels with local reinforcing.  Then I discarded the wire hooks.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 01, 2012, 07:22:18 AM
Thanks Dean.  Wing retention idea is terrific.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 04, 2012, 10:58:41 PM
Vargo-Wock prop. assembly on the way.

Carved the prop. but with a little more thinning and fine sanding still needed.
 Could not stand to do the folding Chicago style hinge as on the plan, but in my draw of so much old stuff and trash I had a small brass hinge that I glued and bound to the prop. and the hub.  It works perfectly without any slop.   Legal or not that will do.
Prop. will be doped and tissue covered to finish it off.

The nose block is almost done also.  I seem to have run out of bearings so I cut some Teflon washers that have worked well on a couple of big rubber jobs I have here.  Need to make up a spring as yet as well, but it's all coming together.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 12, 2012, 12:38:19 AM
Slowly getting a bit more done on the Vargo-Wock.

Need to tidy up the prop, tissue cover it then balance it.   Bit more sanding and a few more odds and ends on the rest of it, and it should be just about ready to cover.

Made a "Tomy Timer" yesterday, and have decided to put it in front of the wing on the LH fuselage side, but back enough so the prop. when folded does not hit it.   Don't want the rubber to beat it to death either, and want to get a blast tube into it whilst winding to the max. for a max.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Bargle on May 12, 2012, 08:37:49 AM
Good looking bones, Gossie.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 12, 2012, 02:18:50 PM
Vargo-Wock prop. assembly on the way.

Carved the prop. but with a little more thinning and fine sanding still needed.
 Could not stand to do the folding Chicago style hinge as on the plan, but in my draw of so much old stuff and trash I had a small brass hinge that I glued and bound to the prop. and the hub.  It works perfectly without any slop.   Legal or not that will do.
Prop. will be doped and tissue covered to finish it off.

The nose block is almost done also.  I seem to have run out of bearings so I cut some Teflon washers that have worked well on a couple of big rubber jobs I have here.  Need to make up a spring as yet as well, but it's all coming together.

NO angle on the prop hub?
It wasn't needed?
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 12, 2012, 05:49:07 PM
Vargo-Wock prop. assembly on the way.

Carved the prop. but with a little more thinning and fine sanding still needed.
 Could not stand to do the folding Chicago style hinge as on the plan, but in my draw of so much old stuff and trash I had a small brass hinge that I glued and bound to the prop. and the hub.  It works perfectly without any slop.   Legal or not that will do.
Prop. will be doped and tissue covered to finish it off.

The nose block is almost done also.  I seem to have run out of bearings so I cut some Teflon washers that have worked well on a couple of big rubber jobs I have here.  Need to make up a spring as yet as well, but it's all coming together.

NO angle on the prop hub?
It wasn't needed?
Dave Andreski

There's angle on the prop. hub Dave, being built into the very front, and also a little angle the way the prop. shaft goes in as well.   Down thrust and right thrust built in.   


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 12, 2012, 06:42:04 PM
Thanks Gossie,
It was hard to see in the pics.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on May 13, 2012, 01:02:33 AM
Am wondering if Dave meant if any compound angle in the blade hinge to get a flat fold?


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 13, 2012, 02:04:39 AM
Am wondering if Dave meant if any compound angle in the blade hinge to get a flat fold?

No. 'fraid not.  I'm stoopid, and it does fold a little high in the side of the fuselage.  I need a good whipping. ::)


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 13, 2012, 04:46:43 PM
Am wondering if Dave meant if any compound angle in the blade hinge to get a flat fold?
Yes Jim,
That's what I was getting at but didn't say it quite correctly.
Thanks,
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 13, 2012, 06:05:11 PM
I can in fact adjust it later if need be.  I can unpick the binding and move things a bit, and rebind it.

I'll probably just finish it and give it a fly first to see how it goes.   It's mainly been built just because I wanted to.  My main rubber jobs are the Jeckyll and Hydes that I like flying best in anger.

I do think Vargo-Wock should be not too bad on a really windy day though.  It's a pretty tough little model, that should be easy to handle in the wind and a fast climber to get up there with that low pitch prop.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 13, 2012, 11:02:55 PM
Okay okay you hawk eyes.......I fixed it.   Undid the binding and adjusted things so it folds correctly.  Here a pic I just took to prove it.

Thanks for picking me up on the error of my ways.    ;D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on May 14, 2012, 01:14:55 AM
Better !!!       :D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 15, 2012, 05:29:05 AM
Vargo-W is almost ready to be covered.   Cleaned up the fuselage, wings, tail and propeller today.

Just put it on the scale and it's fraction under 40 grams.  That includes the rear peg but not the Tomy timer.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Modelace on May 15, 2012, 11:01:28 AM
40 grams uncovered is super light! You should have a killer Old-Timer. I highly recommend gussets at the leading edge dihedral breaks, before covering. Do not ask how I came to that conclusion! :-X


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 15, 2012, 11:02:47 AM
Looks like you're Vargowock will come in at a very respectable weight.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 15, 2012, 05:19:28 PM
40 grams uncovered is super light! You should have a killer Old-Timer. I highly recommend gussets at the leading edge dihedral breaks, before covering. Do not ask how I came to that conclusion! :-X

Okay, will do.  Thanks.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 16, 2012, 05:10:34 PM
Last pic before the covering starts.

And I put gussets into the front of the wing, even though they are not on the plan.  Better to be safe than sorry.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 26, 2012, 10:36:52 PM
Got the fuselage covered.  Single Esaki Lite.  Felt double covering was overkill.  Prop. also covered and balanced.  Tomy timer made up and glued to the outside of the fuselage.

Intend to build another stab.  The one I built first off I feel is far too weak and even has a warp in it off the board.   I shall use a full depth 1/8th spar, and harder LE and TE, and hang the extra couple of grams.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: craig h on May 27, 2012, 08:14:50 AM
 Very nice plane..I wish though you would have shown and explained the prop assembley and making in more detail for us
learning more about this old beauties.
 Have a great time flying your new model...enjoyed following your build,



Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 27, 2012, 02:18:07 PM
Howard ( Gossie),
Sure looks good!
Dave


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Bargle on May 27, 2012, 03:49:38 PM
Seconded. I like that the prop matches.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 27, 2012, 08:25:00 PM
For you Craig.

Prop. blade and noseblock are per the plan.   I used a small bound on and cyano'd  brass hinge in the rear so it would fold.   No loop on front for winding........I don't wind with a prop. on.  Use a blast tube.
Made the spring to pull the prop. forward when the turns run out, and made cut the washers from Teflon. 
Moon shaped hook on rear takes the Grey ring that the rubber is on.  This has been my method to hook up the rubber to the prop. for many years.  The rubber stays in place and never moves or tries to go haywire.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: craig h on May 28, 2012, 11:43:43 AM
 Thank you Gossie...do you have a special way to balance the single blade prop ? like do you place it on a special jig
to balance and to add your lead to get the right balance?

   Craigh


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Hepcat on May 28, 2012, 01:22:42 PM
craigh
This is not a 'wock prop but it may back up what Gossie says.  It is for a 24" span 'Hepcat' that I made a while ago.  You will see a crescent shaped hook, a hairpin type spring and home cut washers (although mine might have been from old credit card and not 'Teflon').  Years ago I always melted lead or solder for the balance weight but more recently I have used clay, as here, often with a smear of balsa cement on top.

For balancing I just use a small rubber band and bind it round the spring a couple of times, so that the stop is free, and round the blade to hold it open.  I then hold the noseblock and fiddle with the weight to get a balance.  There is no point in super accuracy on the weight balance because the aerodynamic unbalance will give most of the shaking.

John


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: BG on May 28, 2012, 01:48:39 PM
Hi All,
While we are enjoying pics and descriptions of single bladed folders etc. I thought it might be on topic to ask why? I mean why bother with single bladed props at all. Seems like an odd thing to do so there must be some advantage????

I shall await illumination ;D
B


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: craig h on May 28, 2012, 02:55:14 PM
 Thanks to all for the helpful info...this will most definitely help.

   Craig h


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on May 28, 2012, 03:00:25 PM
Quote
why bother with single bladed props at all.

Why?   Because they work very well for me and so I use them a lot.

Of course, the real reason is that I'm lazy.      I do not have to carve two identical blades ... I do not have to set two blades to similar pitch ..  I can use one simple hinge and a very straight-forward shaft/hub assembly.

The outcome ... with careful attention to both static and dynamic balancing they can run almost as smoothly as a double blade folder.  Note I said 'almost' - a SBF cannot match a DBF in this respect but Ive been pleased, in the past, to have accomplished Wakefield/Mulvihill flyers ask me what my secret is in having one run so smoothly.  No secret, just care.  Performance is good.

Oh, did  I mention the most important reason?

I'm lazy.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: BG on May 28, 2012, 03:54:48 PM
Ahh well I can understand laziness....that makes perfect sense to me, but is there an aerodynamic advantage?? Or is laziness everyone's reason??
B


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Tmat on May 28, 2012, 04:18:21 PM
No Aerodynamic advantage.
But they look cool and are interesting in the way that tailess models are. ;D


Tmat


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 28, 2012, 05:38:43 PM
Thank you Gossie...do you have a special way to balance the single blade prop ? like do you place it on a special jig
to balance and to add your lead to get the right balance?

   Craigh

Just balance using two knives with the prop. shaft sitting on them, until it looks about right.

You may notice the lead in the pic. is rough looking......(a bit like the poor binding in the hub.LOL)  If anything it's a little heavy on that side, so I'll have a small file or grit paper to fine tune it once the winds go on making it look a bit better.

I can remember reading years ago that a single bladed prop. is always in clean air making that method efficient.......I don't really know if that's correct or not, but yes, they are easy and quick to build and do seem to work well.



Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Pit on May 28, 2012, 06:56:37 PM
Actually NO one really wants to admit that they only use one blade so that they have a spare... ::) ::) ;D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 28, 2012, 10:31:12 PM
Talking of SBFs, I have a couple of SBF carbon props here that go onto the front of Rossi 15s.   And do they make the Rossi's sound strong.....Do they what.   Actually they work very well, and it's all but impossible to break them.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 31, 2012, 10:16:14 PM
I'm still "messing" about with the Vargo stab.
 
 Have now decided, and in fact started to build a new one, because the first one warped, by laminating the main spar from 1/32 X 3/16, instead of just using 1/16th X 3/16th......Two lamination's using dabs of PVA to hold it together.
1/8th X 1/8th hard LE and fairly hard TE.  I feel this should have it nice and flat before the covering.

I intend to use Esaki Japanese tissue of course, but shall use the "Duco Guro" method of having the grain run from front to rear rather than tip to tip.   Guess time will tell.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: flydean1 on May 31, 2012, 10:26:28 PM
Don't know what the Vargo stab looks like, but if you only have one main spar, it would not hurt to run a couple spars on the top.  Keeps tissue from compressing the top and warping the tips up.  1/16 X 1/8 suggested.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on May 31, 2012, 11:56:36 PM
Your right Dean, but then that takes away the originality.
  Vargo stab is just a rectangle 18in X 3 and a bit inches wide.   12- 1/4in thick ribs with a 3/16th X 1/16th main spar.    I did laminate the spar with two strips of 1/32nd X 3/16th.
 I've just laid it all out.  At the moment the PVA is drying out so I'll leave like that for a couple of days to settle in and be warp free.......I hope.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 01, 2012, 04:32:41 AM
Vargo stab. on the board for a couple of days.   

Friday night here and the weekend coming up fast, and lots of things on the menu.    Will probably get it off Monday, trim it up and cover it.

The larger gusset is to take a hole to take a line to the Tomy timer.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 01, 2012, 04:53:46 PM
Your right Dean, but then that takes away the originality.
  Vargo stab is just a rectangle 18in X 3 and a bit inches wide.   12- 1/4in thick ribs with a 3/16th X 1/16th main spar.    I did laminate the spar with two strips of 1/32nd X 3/16th.
 I've just laid it all out.  At the moment the PVA is drying out so I'll leave like that for a couple of days to settle in and be warp free.......I hope.

This doesn't mean we must duplicate badly designed structures.

OTf'er


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Hepcat on June 01, 2012, 05:26:02 PM
Quote from reply #66<This doesn't mean we must duplicate badly designed structures.  OTf'er>

If you are flying to Vintage competitions rules in this country it does!  If you are not flying in competition of course why build an old time model at all unless you are going to make it as it was?

John


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 01, 2012, 06:18:04 PM
Quote from reply #66<This doesn't mean we must duplicate badly designed structures.  OTf'er>

If you are flying to Vintage competitions rules in this country it does!  If you are not flying in competition of course why build an old time model at all unless you are going to make it as it was?

John


Here in the USA, we are allowed to add top spars to such structures. Why repeat old ideas which create proven problems? A Wock is a Wock, whether it has top spars or not. Remember the old USA rules were modifided after the fact and aren't original to begin with now.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on June 01, 2012, 06:37:30 PM
Different strokes for different folks, OTF.  In the US rules are more lax than in the UK, where Oldtimers are built as designed, warts and all,  whereas in the US guidelines are becoming increasingly blurred as builders make allowed amendments, exacerbated by some plan and/or kit purveyors who incorporate their own ideas and in the course of time such become accepted as 'original' rather than what purists view as 'look-alike Oldtimers' - especially whereby added spars alter the aerodynamic properties of the flying surfaces.     Same goes for Nostalgia too, of course.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: BG on June 01, 2012, 06:45:17 PM
I am sure folks will disagree but to me building old timers is about the look of those models not their performance. For pure performance I go for modern classes (F1B etc.). So, with my OT models I build with the idea that the model should look right and be constructed mostly of the correct materials but also that it can be modified for improved strength and performance. So with that in mind I make small but important adjustments and improvements (carbon here and there, wing incidence, downthrust, decalage etc.). I also use mylar and other modern covering materials, as well as RDT. I don't see the point of rigidly following the practices of the 1930s and 40s (if we did we would dispense with DTs on most of our models). Adding a single top spar to a stab seems like a very minor and quite intelligent modification, and perhaps also one that one of the 1930-40s era modellers may have used in that day anyway. Furthermore, I believe that it falls within the allowed mods under North American SAM regs. Not sure what the OZ regs say one this issue however.

BG


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 02, 2012, 06:05:12 PM
It's just a personal thing for me to build a vintage type model close to as it was.   I do always add a DT as I don't like losing them.  But of course that does happen at times.

Our OZ rules mean it should be built as it was as and as far as I know no one has gone over board in changing things.   


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 02, 2012, 06:34:21 PM
I believe that when carbon fiber starts showing up, whether as part of the models structure or on prop blades as reinforcement..... the games over!!

OTF'er


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on June 02, 2012, 09:11:13 PM
I'm with Gossie in this    Way back,  I was involved with the birth of Vintage in the UK when it originated from small pockets of interest in Croydon, South Bristol; and the Northern Area and when it was adopted by the then-SMAE rules were defined that models should be built to the plan without modifications of any type other than for facilitating d/t operation.

I still find it natural to follow that credo despite involvement in OT and Nostalgia for almost 30 years in North America where rules are so much more lax.   If others wish to 'improve' models by amending structures, etc.  then so be it.   Some push it too far; I've seen an OT model by a prominent successful flyer OT that differed dimensionally from the original  ..  but again I've seen the same back in England. In that instance two modellers were walking back together carrying similar models and it was obvious that one had a longer moment arm than the other - after that, it was never seen again.....


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: BG on June 02, 2012, 11:57:43 PM
Hmm... well not to belabour this too much but I do draw the line at changing moments, foils, and shapes. Once you mess with these it becomes a new design. As to carbon...simply wood in a different form. Think of it as lightweight plywood....both are merely carbon based laminates manufactured by man. I guess the you would not be offended by a bit of ply used for reinforcement? especially if used in a way that was invisible and only to reinforce balsa not to replace it.

Parting shot.... rigid dogma never encourages new people to join the fun....flexibility and open mindedness does though. If you give people the freedom to find their own ethic you will probably find things working out very nicely.

B


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 04, 2012, 01:25:25 AM
The second stab. built is off the board and is as flat as a tack.....as the saying goes.   Will cover it with care shortly and get the fins glued on.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 12, 2012, 11:54:55 PM
Vargo-Wock is ready to go, but not today.  It's blowing at 30 to 35 knots here.

Have stuck pins into the wing mounts to hold the wing on using the usual rubber bands.   Will move the pins to where the glide is right and replace with thin bamboo skewers later.

It weighs 66g, plus 30g of rubber (Senator motors) so it's not that lightweight.   But it looks like it should fly.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on June 13, 2012, 01:03:31 AM
Nice!  Smarter than mine .....    :(


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 13, 2012, 02:14:36 AM
Nice!  Smarter than mine .....    :(

Thanks, but that's only because it's new.    Wait until it gets lost a few times, lands in a creek, hits a tree or a fence etc. etc.   


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 13, 2012, 10:35:52 AM
Gossie,
Very nice indeed!
Should be a great all-weather flyer at that weight.

Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Modelace on June 13, 2012, 10:46:40 AM
Good job Gossie..You are not going to let a little 30 knot breeze interfere with the maiden are you??  ::)


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 13, 2012, 06:04:09 PM
Good job Gossie..You are not going to let a little 30 knot breeze interfere with the maiden are you??  ::)

Absolutely not.   We are away flying in a week for a week.   Will take plenty of pics to prove it.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on June 17, 2012, 10:38:00 PM
The V-Wock has had air beneath it's wings.

Beautiful sunny and calm day here today, so decided to walk to the close by park with our 4 year old Grand Daughter Sienna.
We are minding her for two days as she has had a bad cold and Mum ask if we would like her rather than sending her to kindergarten while Mum goes off to make some money.
  We love having her as she truly is a lovely child......(Just like her Grandfather was I guess. LOL.)

Took V-Wock and it needed a 1/16th under the tail, and 1/16th under the main spar on the wing to glide properly.   100 hand turns and it looks reasonable.  Got to 200 or so hand turns and it was climbing away nicely with a right bias and going into a right glide when the propeller folded.   I really had planed for it to go R-L, but if it wants to go R-R and looks safe it can.
As mentioned earlier we are off for a week in a couple of days, so at least it's part trimmed now rather than having to mess about on the field.

Couple of poor pics, with a very pale faced Sienna.   Kids do get over cold quickly so she should be okay in a couple of days I'm sure.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on June 18, 2012, 01:28:01 AM
Quote
Just like her Grandfather was I guess.

Lovely ?      ::)

Do like those floodlight poles with climbing aids to retrieve errant models.

Good flying this week, Howard!


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on February 10, 2015, 11:45:10 PM
Here's a decent shot from Malcolm Campbell of my Vargowock climbing away taken recently.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on July 03, 2016, 01:47:03 PM
Reviving Gossie's thread just to hijack it a little in keeping with the Vargowock theme.   I donated my VW, in September, to a large cornfield, in which I was reluctant to venture after 36 hours of continual rain; I short fused it for about 90 seconds to keep it on the field  ... just to do something rather than stand around damp and miserable  ... but it failed to d/t on the third flight (damp fuse?) and went off to cornflake heaven.  I'd removed the tracker before flying as otherwise I would have had to go into the sodden crops just to get that back.

I finally got around to completing a replacement in time for (hopefully) trimming at Geneseo alongside the FAC activities.   Weighs same as Goss's, 66 grams with tracker (sans batteries) but thinking of using 23 gms rubber as per the previous model, which seemed very happy with that.  Time will tell.  Photos  .... apologies to Hepcat for the crossed wing bands; chordwise without a supporting spar did not appeal...


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: calgoddard on July 03, 2016, 03:42:24 PM
Very nice work on your new Vargo-Wock Applehoney.  Sorry you lost your old one. I guess cornfields are a real hazard to our hobby.

I found that my New Gollywock flies much better with a 25 g motor than a 30 gram motor.  I forgot the weight of my New Gollywock but it is somewhere between 60 and 80 grams.  I added unnecessary diagonal bracing to the fuselage and was not careful with wood selection. 

The glide of my New Gollywock is much better with the smaller motor (5 grams = less weight to carry).  Plus, even though the motor run is shorter with a 25 gram rubber motor versus a 30 gram rubber motor of the same cross-section, the climb seems to be about the same.

I am guessing your Vargo-Wock will fly just fine with a 23 gram rubber motor.


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on July 04, 2016, 12:41:56 PM
Quote from reply #66<This doesn't mean we must duplicate badly designed structures.  OTf'er>

If you are flying to Vintage competitions rules in this country it does!  If you are not flying in competition of course why build an old time model at all unless you are going to make it as it was?

John


Because they are classic designs, that look great and fly very well. Glad that here in the US there is some sanity in the rules. You see just because there were kits and plans available in 1939-to whenever, does not mean that every kid built any model from that time period was per plan. That was totally acceptable then and should acceptable now!! Or hang them in your museum.

Otf'er


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on July 04, 2016, 08:03:05 PM
If building a replica of an Oldtimer it matters not that flyers of the 30's made modifications to the design to suit their own ideas, for better or worse.  That presumed practice does not give todays' builder a green light to do the same - unless he is building the design purely for his own sport flying amusement.     The concept is to build a replica, not a simulation; unfortunately the 'sanity' in US rules has led. on occasion, to variations which have become accepted as authentic by those unaware of such changes.    


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on July 04, 2016, 11:32:22 PM
Nice work jim how does it fly?


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: applehoney on July 05, 2016, 12:34:50 AM
Gimme a chance Howard ... only completed final details two  days ago    ;D


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: gossie on July 05, 2016, 01:01:23 AM
Ah ok
Bit lost here away down south on iphone


Title: Re: Vargo-Wock.
Post by: BG on June 08, 2018, 06:26:32 PM
Hi All,
thought maybe y'all would enjoy seeing my Vargowock go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GakhgpG-P2o
first flight not quite in trim ... too much left rudder countering the turn in the climb and too tight in the glide.

next flight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcnEoRWiQak

knocked off a rudder gurney flap. Now she goes well.

BG