Guillows fly or hanger queen

[Bill Gaylord]

This flight shot is a 500 series Stuka. Note: this model WAS built with the kit wood. It wasn't spectacular, flew in the 10 to 20 second range, but I could get it to fly reliably. One skeptical modeler who witnessed a 19 second flight of this model was heard to remark. "Now I've seen everything. A pig can fly!"
Yes, it is in Japanese markings.

Howard

I'm not surprised that you were getting reliable flights from the Stuka. I think the Stuka may be an under appreciated subject as a flyer. I'm not a free flighter, but for micro rc the 500 series Stuka proved to be a stable and easy to fly plane. The gear spats and large plastic canopy would certainly help make it a heavy model at it's size, but I would imagine it may be one of the more stable flyers.

[TJH]

I usually build to fly, make at least a few attempts, and go from there. We have several 900 and 600 series kits that fly nice.

[atesus]

I definitely build to fly. Here's my 400 series P-40 (RIP).

DSC_0315_sml.jpg

DSC_0316_sml.jpg

And a video

http://youtu.be/8ilwRVJ1rKM

--Ates

[oldflyer2]

WOW great looking model and beautiful flight. Congtats

[Bill Gaylord]

That flight video is absolute proof that these planes can fly well as rubber powered models. Just the other day I ran across a so called old time "expert" who insinuated that these models were garbage. I run across them regularly. I'm almost at the point of just telling those folks that they simply don't know what they're doing, which is why they can only make super light models fly. I'd rather build a plane like that beautiful P40 that looks correct and flies well, versus flying some ugly, off-scale looking job with only 2 stringers on the fuse and unpainted transparent covering. Guillows models fly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNzCNA4SPZ8&list=UUtk2LreLH_IhNe3uS3fLSoA&index=6


I got a kick out of this poll, as it actually had a "Both" category also. I don't think it was referring to my type of both, however. I'm a both type. Fly them once, hangar queen them, and then on to the next one.

[scigs30]

I love static display models and that is why I build plastic models. I build balsa models because I also like to fly.

[Steve Blanchard]

Hey Bill,

I get what you are saying but...... If you want to compete in scale rubber powered free flight you have to build lighter than the Guillow's kits allow. The wood is too heavy sometimes and some of the plans have more wing ribs than necessary. The airfoils are not to scale and also too thick for good free-flight. There are many ways to change the designs for these models without losing what scale accuracy they have. But they aren't all great when it comes to scale representation. I agree with not being impressed with off-scale "ghost ships" (as they are sometimes referred to and also penalized) that don't quite make the cut on a judging table. But many of the plans used to compete with are better scale representations than the Guillow's plans and much lighter and better for free flight rubber power. As for the painted vs. see-through covering that too is an opinion based area. I like the painted look if done correctly and if it doesn't look like someone just took some poster paints and a big fat brush to do it but on the other hand 99% of my scale ships are not painted. Sometimes I use chalk on the back of Japanese tissue for various colors or more opacity. But painting adds weight and doesn't always give the desired effect. Truth be told, some people like the translucent affect as a model is floating around with the sun shining through the tissue revealing all of that beautiful structure underneath. I guess what I'm saying is that for some applications, Guillow's models are not the best. I enjoy building and flying them and not all of them fly the best which is the same for models I've made from different kits or plans. It is absolutely true that a lighter model with a better wing loading flies better. How you get to that light, scale accurate model is up to you.

Steve

[Mitch]

Hey Guys... I already answered this question... but thought I would add a few words... from the box...

AUTHENTIC SCALE FLYING MODEL



That is what I want. I want a model that looks good, looks correct, AND can FLY... not all my models flew but I have tried to fly them.

I always figured it was my lack of building skill, but I like the scale look.

The models in the boxes were the first models I built as a kid... Mitch

[Mitch]

Another Excellent job by Dave... Mine was covered in the ORANGE? paper that came in the kit... Tried to fly it, then repair it... etc... It's end was the same as all my previous models... ended in the scrap pile...

I plan to build it again... increase plans to 1/14 scale = 36 inch ws I will try to fly it again

The quest for flight is not over...

PS Dumas makes this in 35" ws designed for RC, I will plan to work off Guillows plans and for about 10 dollars in balsa make it for Rubber Power

[Mitch]

Dave... I LOVE that model... mine did not have the exhaust pipes and of course had a red plastic prop... Just reading though FAC rules and I have to have exhaust pipes and ALL bracing rigging. Control lines are not required. As you know I have a lot of projects going...BUT I hope to learn a lot from the FAC event. I believe this plane would make a GOOD flyer. I'll move it up on my list... for AFTER the FAC event. Mitch

[WIDDOG]

I like to build and fly the 500 series kits. It is definitely a challenge. It is not easy and I have had mixed results. However, I have learned quite a bit on these kits. Also my flying has improved tremendously. I try to build them to look as well as possible but my planes do take a beating.

[Bill Gaylord]

Hey Bill,

I get what you are saying but...... If you want to compete in scale rubber powered free flight you have to build lighter than the Guillow's kits allow. The wood is too heavy sometimes and some of the plans have more wing ribs than necessary. The airfoils are not to scale and also too thick for good free-flight. There are many ways to change the designs for these models without losing what scale accuracy they have. But they aren't all great when it comes to scale representation. I agree with not being impressed with off-scale "ghost ships" (as they are sometimes referred to and also penalized) that don't quite make the cut on a judging table. But many of the plans used to compete with are better scale representations than the Guillow's plans and much lighter and better for free flight rubber power. As for the painted vs. see-through covering that too is an opinion based area. I like the painted look if done correctly and if it doesn't look like someone just took some poster paints and a big fat brush to do it but on the other hand 99% of my scale ships are not painted. Sometimes I use chalk on the back of Japanese tissue for various colors or more opacity. But painting adds weight and doesn't always give the desired effect. Truth be told, some people like the translucent affect as a model is floating around with the sun shining through the tissue revealing all of that beautiful structure underneath. I guess what I'm saying is that for some applications, Guillow's models are not the best. I enjoy building and flying them and not all of them fly the best which is the same for models I've made from different kits or plans. It is absolutely true that a lighter model with a better wing loading flies better. How you get to that light, scale accurate model is up to you.

Steve

I'm not understanding why you are using my comments as a stage, to make that pitch. I'm very careful at making my statements independently, without unnecessarily challenging the statements of others.

I was trying to point out that they actually can be good flying models, when some folks have entirely dismissed them. I don't fly them as rubber, so I didn't comment on what would be required for rubber free flight. I have seen them fly well as rubber powered models however, and believe many are not highly modified. I was simply saying that I disagree with those who entirely dismiss Guillows models as garbage.

[kittyfritters]

OK, guys, at this point I'm going to put in my 2 cents.

While Guillow is still on the learning curve in their balsa milling operation they have been putting out pretty consistent 8-12 pound wood for their laser cut kits. Anything built straight with this wood is flyable under rubber power. They may not be contest winning models but any of them will be satisfying sport fliers. (And, I've seen them win contests too!) This wood, while ensuring that the models are flyable, is still strong enough that new builders and older builders who are loosing some coordination can build them without breaking them. The design standards for the new laser cut kits have been changed to make sure that the resulting models, built correctly, will fly under rubber power while still being strong enough for "easy" electric or CO2 motor conversion.

I have seen many of the larger, "display model" kits flying with electric motors and small glow engines. The 900 series kits are light enough, even die cut with heavy wood, that few builders have had trouble getting them to fly under rubber power. The real issue is with the most popular line, the inexpensive 500 series kits. If they can work out the production issues to bring these kits into laser cutting, without increasing the price point enough to loose their market niche, no one will have any legitimate complaints about getting Guillow's kits to fly.

Howard

[kittyfritters]

Hey Bill,

... But they aren't all great when it comes to scale representation....

Steve

Steve,

That depends on which one you build. For example the 400 series Bf-109 is a representation of a C or D model that when compared to an accurate drawing looks like it was redrawn from pre-war solid model plans.



The Fw-190 from the same series has been hailed as the finest scale representation of the type available in a rubber powered kit in articles published in military scale model magazines for the last 45 years.

Your mileage may vary.

Howard

[Phugoid]

The real issue is with the most popular line, the inexpensive 500 series kits. If they can work out the production issues to bring these kits into laser cutting, without increasing the price point enough to loose their market niche, no one will have any legitimate complaints about getting Guillow's kits to fly.

Howard

This is an interesting point Howard, these are cheap kits, but there are quite a few contents to them even thought they are still quite small spans. I've always thought that some smaller/simpler civil types are missing from their range, one sheet of ribs, some stringers, flat acetate plus the normal hardware is all that is required.... Low cost and lots of fun. There you go your next series design for Guillows, auster, silvair etc....

Anyway, I think that Guillows designs are pretty heavy for rubber free flight, but snobbishness aside they can fly well, not always competition winners, but who really cares? if it looks like a spitfire in the air, and you find yourself humming the theme music from "633 squadron", or "the Battle of Britain" as you chuck it into the big blue...... then it's job done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFRDyHXCIdg&sns=em

Andrew