Series 300 Piper Cub build

[supercruiser]

May I suggest we carry this discussion in a New Topic? RG Williams has some valid points and concerns. This thread is scigs30's 300 build and his is doing a very good build progress.

[thymekiller]

RG,
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on some points. Thats cool. Not the end of the world. I still value your helpful input.
The main reason I build them is because I couldnt as a kid. Another reason is that Peck, Herr, ect, do not have an online support group. That is important to me. Would hate to lose that benifit.
As far as the 500 series, they need more dihedral than the plan shows. Thats what this forum is for. Those of us who know these things can share with a positive light.
Perhaps this forum could post a few stickys. Maybe an f.a.q. Basic stuff that we could refer people to.
Most of the wood is insane heavy. Cant argue with that. There seems to be many things that Guillows could do to improve thier product line. Offering at least the plans for some of the better comet kits would be cool. The list goes on.....
In lite of the fact that this topic seems to come up at least once a month, I'm sure Guillows is aware of what the score is. Have been for quite some time. I no longer care why they dont change. Altho, it IS puzzling.
I think part of the reason we see some things differently is because I am more of a builder than a flyier. If I get 30 seconds, I'm happy. If a man wants more air time, well, I can see the frustration. I just build for fun and to relax. Some want higher goals than that. Thats cool, just not for me.
My lhs dosent and wont offer rubber kits. They dont have any tissue. They have all of the Guillows 400 series. They can set you up with elect. for them.
Its sad that we lack new people. I dont see Guillows wood as the main reason, over all. In a world of 3d arf's and rtf's, The thrill of rubber flight is lost on most folks. Thats a big part of why I still do it.

"not buy Guillows kits unless they make changes in the product line"

Sorry about mis-quoteing you the first time. No offense intended.

thymekiller


[quote][/quote]

[RG WILLIAMS]

thymekiller,
Very good point on the ARF and RTF rc ac.
No offense taken
Best Regards
rg

Now back to the original topic.

[scigs30]

I will always support Guillows and build their kits. I have new modelers buy their kits and I show them how to make them fly. There are a lot of changes Guillows could do to make the kits better, but that is not what I am looking for.
I now only build for nostalgia and I am happy to see my Guillow kits fly for 30 to 40 seconds. Heck just do a search of my builds on the forums and you will see I was able to get the 500 series kits to fly. I used the wood in most of the kits and did nothing to lighten the plane. I did switch out the rubber and propellers. I can tell you the only way to get this Cub to fly with the wood supplied is to do some serious scalloping. I know these kits are designed with way too much wood, but that is ok by me, I like that look. When I show someone how to build these kits the only changes I have them make is increase dihedral, make a nose block and swap out the prop and rubber. If the wood is real bad I have them order replacements from Guillows. I am no way criticizing Guillows and appreciate all they do for this hobby. I don't mind cutting out the balsa pieces from quality balsa, I have already finished cutting out all the parts for this kit. I am sorry I got this thread started off on the wrong foot. I will only post pictures of my build and describe any changes I make so this bird will fly.

[scigs30]

Well it took about one afternoon to cut out and sand all the pieces. Today I decided to start building the Cub. The former method of construction works great on round fuselages, but is tougher on square fuselages. Normally square fuselages like this and the WWI birds are built via the box method. With the former method you must make sure everything is square throughout construction or the fuselage will come out crooked. Jigs work real well, but I chose to use a square and eyeball everything. One thing that helps is that I use Elmers white glue. The glue dries slow enough so I can adjust parts as needed.
I first build one side using the square and the side keel as a reference. I will glue the side keel on later.

[scigs30]

One good thing about Guillow plans is that the pieces all line up nicely including the notches for the stringers. Old Comet kits and Dumas kits have notches that do not line up real well. Sterling also had nice instructions, with parts that fit well.


The bottom is nice and square and the bottom keel is straight.

With everything being straight, the stringers should fit in nice and easy.

[FLYBOYZ]

Sorry I really don,t see what all the fuss is about.I love guillows kits they have nice canopy and nice cowls I just build the cessna 170 300 seriers still in love with it build the cub 600 seriers it flys good enough. bought the cessna 150 today on sale cheap cheap kits lots of building and they give prefroumed parts.No I say buy more of them! guillows goes out of buisness well I not build no more.Thats the buaiety of it they low cost.Iam for one not paying $100.00 for stick models.Buy a real kit for that.Any way Iam looking forward to building the 150 I think Iam in love!

[supercruiser]

.Any way Iam looking forward to building the 150 I think Iam in love!

[scigs30]

Fuss? What Fuss? Look all these old timer kits had their issues. Comet, nice designs but horrible instructions and the parts did not fit. Sterling had the same issues as Guillow except Sterling had real thick plastic parts that are too heavy for free flight. I have always been hooked on Guillows, Sterling and Comet and my goal is to build all my favorites. I also believe in flying what I build and not just putting these planes up for display. None of these kits are designed to win contest, but they sure look awesome finished and flying around for 30 sec. Now to get to that 30 sec is another story. First a FF plane has to have a functioning nose block, second it must have dihedral and third it must be light enough so the rubber band can power it. Unfortunately this Guillow kit is missing all of that. So the best advise I can give to someone is to read these forums to learn how to make these planes fly.

[scigs30]

Here are some pictures of the Guillows Aeronca I built some time back. This kit was given to me by the hobby store to build for display. I used everything in the kit but the wood. This was an older kit and the wood was horrible. The parts did not match the parts on the instruction sheet. I used the Hobby store Midwest balsa to build this kit. I also added dihedral and used after market rubber to power the bird. I used the original tissue and prop. This plane took a lot of weight to balance out but it flew real nice. Unfortunately I gave to the hobby store so now I have to build another.

[thymekiller]

Your woodwork looks fantastic !! Straight and clean. I think, with these planes, I love the "bones" most of all. Almost hate to cover some of them.
Nice wood work.

thymekiller.

[scigs30]

Thymekiller, I agree with you about the Guillows structure. That is why I would rather use aftermarket wood to make it fly vs scalping the formers and omitting other parts. I have always liked the structure of Guilllows and Sterling kits.

[supercruiser]

First a FF plane has to have a functioning nose block, second it must have dihedral and third it must be light enough so the rubber band can power it. Unfortunately this Guillow kit is missing all of that. So the best advise I can give to someone is to read these forums to learn how to make these planes fly.

I have noticed a couple of comments about no dihedral information for flying in the Guillow kits. All of the scale Guillow kits that I have built show the amount of dihedral needed for a flying model, on the plans. Are you talking about adding even more dihedral?

[thymekiller]

Oh Yes. The 500 series need more dihedral than shown to fly straight. [Except 507 maybe] Or you can increase tail size.
Otherwise, you get that "drunken sailor" type of flight. Tips side to side. Unreliable flight pattern.

Its all about center of weight vs center of gravity. All low wing craft suffer this fate, regardless of kit maker.
Thats why a cub is easyer to trim than a warhawk. Thats why fighters are all low wing.
Increase dihedral, and your warbird will , mostly , fly like a cub.
Its not that she wont fly. Its that she wont RECOVER from an upseting draft of wind. We balance our craft fore and aft. They must also balance side to side in flight.
If you have to add more than 25 degrees of dihedral, [ low wing ] then you need to extend your wing span. Somewhere near 30 degrees and you begin trading lift for stability. Not a fair trade.
High wings run from 2 -5 degrees.
Thats what I've heard. Comments?

thymekiller

[FLYBOYZ]

Sorry Iam still sad about comet!Just breaks my little harte.But I guess they gone I just get so excited over these balsa kits I can,t sleep then I dream about them!When Iam going to hobby lobby I think Iam on a secert mission of some sort :