Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
September 22, 2019, 02:26:14 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Half Size Wakefield Models  (Read 16380 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #150 on: December 12, 2015, 02:15:05 AM »

How about resurrecting pre 1954, unlimited rubber Wakefield rules but at 1/2 size?

This would give models of about 20" span for 'traditional' designs but also allow scope for modern design features.  Technology to be consistent with 1953 ie bent wire & balsa.  No carbon

This would be a challenging 'small field' class and give scope to loadsa modern developments.  Some P30's might qualify.

ROG of course  Grin
Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
Hepcat
OOS, January 2019
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 278
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777



Ignore
« Reply #151 on: December 12, 2015, 06:18:28 AM »

Ricardo,
I like your 'bottom line'  I first heard that sentiment in slightly different words:
Any good engineer can make a Rolls Royce, it takes a genius to make a Ford 8.
John.

PS Sounds a good idea.  Do you need to specify the half size is on wing and tail area?
Logged

John Barker UK - Will be missed by all that knew him.
ricardo
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 189



Ignore
« Reply #152 on: December 12, 2015, 08:36:17 PM »

Do you need to specify the half size is on wing and tail area?
We need to check the present FAC 1/2 Wakefield rules but if the idea is 1/2 span oldies, the 'new' rules should be 1/4 area.

As an unlimited rubber class, many 20" mini oldie designs might meet the spec. including 2.5 sq in. x-section or maybe even L^2 / 100 x-section.  Tubbier designs might make up for their poorer aerodynamics by allowing you to stuff more rubber in.  Shocked

This would certainly bring up the Folder vs Freewheel argument again in such small models.  And 1953 bent wire tech. is certainly capable of VP props.

Think of it as an inexpensive, fun but challenging class that requires serious re-thinking of new ideas and resurrection of old ideas.  It would certainly be a change from all the look-alike F1Bs from circa 1963.  Wink
« Last Edit: December 12, 2015, 08:55:14 PM by ricardo » Logged

An engineer is someone who can do for 2 bob what any fool can do for a quid
cd_webb
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 228



Ignore
« Reply #153 on: December 13, 2015, 06:36:00 PM »

...my new model is a 1949 Ellila Wake winner and it flies pretty nice on 4 x 1/8"...

Dave, did you ever get the Ellila sorted out? I'm ready to carve a prop at this point. What diameter and pitch did you finally lite on for yours?

David
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #154 on: December 13, 2015, 10:13:40 PM »

Never got the Elila sorted out and it's long gone in the deep six dirt nap....edgemitchell showed me that Velivole at the non-nats this summer and it knocked me out...good luck is all I can say and I like his idea about just building it BECAUSE !!!!...that's why I built the Hi-Performance Sportster...just BECAUSE...and the folder out front really works well and gets it way up there in thermal-land...highly recommended and a quick build...as far as messing with the 1/2 Size 'wake rules : NAH....8 oz. pre 1951 rules are just fine and there are a ton of models to choose from still. I've drawing maybe 30 of them and still finding some...next up is a Warring VOODOO again  because I love the looks of it and just BECAUSE!!...maybe a full size one for Unlimited flying???...speaking of that model edgemitchell showed us, there are some weird and wonderful ships out there that need building...I really do like the 20" Unlimited idea because I fly one and they are very quick builds...but 1/2 Size 'Wakes fly real purty-like
Logged
cd_webb
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 228



Ignore
« Reply #155 on: December 15, 2015, 08:07:56 PM »

I still have to add a free wheeling latch, but other than that my 1/2 size Ellila is finished. Weight without rubber came out to 27 grams.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #156 on: December 15, 2015, 10:23:30 PM »

And a fine looking model Mr. Webb...isn't it nice to build something to weight?...I like the color scheme too...the wife complains that I finish all my models the same but that is just how I like them and I haven't put the wrong wing on the right body yet...will start the Warring VooDoo soon now that the KK Cadet glider is done and tomorrow we go flying again to test it...this is the deepest we've gone into the flying season yet here in Ohio... 
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #157 on: December 16, 2015, 07:37:14 AM »

How about resurrecting pre 1954, unlimited rubber Wakefield rules but at 1/2 size?

This would give models of about 20" span for 'traditional' designs but also allow scope for modern design features.  Technology to be consistent with 1953 ie bent wire & balsa.  No carbon

This would be a challenging 'small field' class and give scope to loadsa modern developments.  Some P30's might qualify.

ROG of course  Grin

I'd like to point out that something akin to this already exists in the States. It's called Moffett. It's 2/3 the area of the 1951-1953 wakefield rules with a few other tweaks. I've seen them fly...they are absolutely spectacular machines and they look great. They areNOT small field airplanes. I would humbly submit that 1/2 sized 1951-1956 wakefields would possess similar levels of performance.

I'd go so far as to predict 4 minutes in dead air. Would be a piece of cake given that a good Embryo will do 3+ with about 10 sq in less area and a freewheeling prop.

At that point I might as well build a Moffett anyway...
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #158 on: December 16, 2015, 10:08:10 AM »

Ya Maxout !!!...that is what we are talking about here, small models doing what large ones do : maximum amount of fun without building till you throw up...I have built 1/2 size 'wakes from the 51 to 56 era as an experiment and liked what I saw...how about :
1952 Yankee-IV (Chaz Wood)
1951 Red Swan (Henry Tubbs)
1951 Borderline (John O'D)
1956 XL-56 (R. Cizek)
1955 HC-8 (Hank Cole)
....I'm not up on the smaller Moffet rules and if anyone can clue me in on them, I'd appreciate it...I don't want to change the 1/2 'wake rules for the 1937-1950 8 oz. models because it took to long establishing them in FAC and people seem to like them and it gives us Duration flyers something to fly in FAC contests who don't take scale too seriously...I like scale ships but I don't have the chops to finish them as well as some and at 69 I've been flying duration for almost 50 years and won't stop now... 
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #159 on: December 16, 2015, 12:01:17 PM »

Dave, can you send me the plans for the HC-8? I've never seen that one.

There are lots of good designs out there in that time period. Here are a few more:
Duster (Bilgri, light air only)
Perryman 1953 (light air only)
Hi and Bye Dot (Bilgri)
Stark 1951
Marcus (51-52 Zaic)
Champine 1955
Bowers 1954 (55-56 Zaic)
Montplaisir 55 (55-56 Zaic)
Carl Miller "Beginner's Wakefield" (55-56 Zaic)
Ottair 1956

As for Moffett...
202 sq in max for wing and stab combined.
Minimum 50 g/100 sq in
Fuselage must not be longer than wingspan
3 point ROG
2 minute maxes, incremental flyoffs

Ususally carries on past the 6 minute max. They'll do 5+ in dead air. Usually 40-50 g of rubber. Expect wing flutter.
Logged
Crabby
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 132
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,145


I never met a modeler I didn't like



Ignore
« Reply #160 on: December 16, 2015, 12:11:31 PM »

Was there ever a flying wing in Wakefield?
Logged

The Threadkiller!
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #161 on: December 16, 2015, 12:55:10 PM »

Was there ever a flying wing in Wakefield?

Yes, but I cannot remember when/where.
Logged
scrubs
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 501



Ignore
« Reply #162 on: December 16, 2015, 03:03:47 PM »

Du-all maybe?

bill
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #163 on: December 16, 2015, 03:08:42 PM »

Du-all maybe?

bill

An excellent design. Fuselage is a little short for ultimate performance, but it'll fly long enough to make most folks grin.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #164 on: December 16, 2015, 09:34:14 PM »

Have we opened another fine kettle of fish?...Maxout, send me an email with your snailmail address and I'll send you what I have...I assume you can design your own for the Moffet or just known designs?...I did build a 1//2 size Duster and it did very well in light air only...same with the Yankee-IV...and I have built a 1/2 Size 1981
Lothar Doring "Espada" with a folding 2 blader on wire outriggers...neat stuff building models of models...1/2 size versions of 1951 to 1956 'wakes/unlimited's is a cool idea with folders but no events for it...on the other hand, Moffet's would be a gas for me as long as it isn't associated with FAC and there stupid rule about folders which I find is very backward for people who grew up during the creation of folders...That High Performance Sportster I keep talking about at 20" and a single bladed folder is a screamer with 4 x 3/16" braided...I kid you not, it scares me!
Logged
cd_webb
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 11
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 228



Ignore
« Reply #165 on: December 16, 2015, 09:40:21 PM »

I just built a High Perforrmance Sportster, but haven't wrung it out yet. Low turns in the back yard are fun, though. Any video of yours?
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #166 on: December 17, 2015, 08:51:44 AM »

no video but I think I'm going to buy a video camera soon to use for recording flying sessions...I have a regular cell phone (dumb not smart) and I wouldn't trust it for that...
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #167 on: December 17, 2015, 09:42:44 AM »

...on the other hand, Moffet's would be a gas for me as long as it isn't associated with FAC and there stupid rule about folders which I find is very backward for people who grew up during the creation of folders...That High Performance Sportster I keep talking about at 20" and a single bladed folder is a screamer with 4 x 3/16" braided...I kid you not, it scares me!

Moffett is an AMA event. A highly prestigious one. Not unheard of to have the models literally out of sight before the prop folds. They outclimb most gas models. Guaranteed even faster than your Sportster, or even the most absurdly fast of all OT models, the Hi-Ho (not for the faint of hear for sure!).

Stop by Muncie for the Nats next year...it's usually held on Monday. Look for the things that go up like F1C's but with no noise.

Oh, forgot the most important of all the Moffett rules: L^2/150.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #168 on: December 17, 2015, 12:58:05 PM »

L squared over 150 from the nose block to the tail end point?...boy, that's got my fingers twitching to draw something up...3 point ROG no problem either...maybe we should start a new topic for Moffet and get back to 1/2 size Wakefields?...will start the VooDoo when I get back from KOI but for now, I'm having a ball with a
30" KK Cadet on a bungee...
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #169 on: December 17, 2015, 01:42:46 PM »

L squared over 150 from the nose block to the tail end point?...boy, that's got my fingers twitching to draw something up...3 point ROG no problem either...maybe we should start a new topic for Moffet and get back to 1/2 size Wakefields?...will start the VooDoo when I get back from KOI but for now, I'm having a ball with a
30" KK Cadet on a bungee...

Dude...wish I could meet up with you at the KOI. Stop through Georgia on your return trip? I'll make sure we get a shot at flying some half wakes. Wink

Do start a thread on Moffett...I'll contribute what little I know. It'll be a fun exchange and you'll be buying a chase bike soon. Grin
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #170 on: January 13, 2016, 08:40:59 AM »

I built a second Warring VooDoo...I used the drawing I produced for the Crosswinds newsletter and took a little more care in building it because on the prototype I didn't add a D/T or a satisfactory landing gear...it came out at 28.3 grams using hobby shop wood...which raises the question what else is there?...do people really buy there wood online?...I consider craft store wood also as hobby shop wood...pics after I download the camera...BTW...I bombed at the KOI meet 2 weeks ago flying the "Aristocrat" and I couldn't tell you why because the model has potential...
Logged
rcousineau
Nickel Member
*

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2



Ignore
« Reply #171 on: July 15, 2016, 02:32:30 AM »

I have the two fusalage halves built for a Korda Wakefield Embryo (22" wingspan). It didn't come with any rubber so I need to know what size of rubber motor I need and how many strands. Brand new to Hip Pocket Aeronautics and any help would really be appreciated.
Roger in Tucson, AZ
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #172 on: July 15, 2016, 10:17:34 AM »

If it weighs right on 28 grams, use 4 strands x 3/32" braided with a carved prop...if 28-30 grams, try 4 strands x 1/8"...with these 2 you'll know soon enough which is better...I fly carved props so you might go down in size with plastic because they turn faster and the pitch is a little harder to figure out...the preference of plastic versus carved is personal and relies on your flying style and matching power to prop...
Logged
rcousineau
Nickel Member
*

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2



Ignore
« Reply #173 on: July 15, 2016, 03:21:42 PM »

Thanks. That gives me a place to start. I've never carved a prop but I think that I'll do it for this project.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #174 on: September 03, 2016, 10:19:27 AM »

I can't say enough about the HI-Performance Sportster as a killer small field flyer at 20" span. In going back to previous comments about small models, perhaps leave the current 1/2 size 'wakes alone and create a new event for these 20" to 24" models. As fields grow smaller and the older duration flyers get older, we need to keep duration flying or we will be forced to rely FAC as an outlet for it in a more diluted form. I enjoy 1/2 size 'wake's a lot and have built at least 15 of them with varying success but the performance is hit and miss because of the wing area/prop/rubber combinations we are faced with. P-30 models have a 4:1 power to weight ratio and they give great duration but hard to keep on a smaller field. Maybe we should start thinking about models like H-P Sportster's instead of 1/2 size 'wakes? Rules?
1. 20" to 24" span
2. No power restriction
3. Traditional building methods and materials only
4. Addition of D/T and Trackers only
5. 90 sec or 120 sec maxes?
6. Folders allowed if shown on plans
      The only other questions I can think of is should it be limited by year and does it have to be known designs?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!