logo
Thread Tools
Old 02-27-2014, 01:03 PM
Memo Lomeli is offline
Find More Posts by Memo Lomeli
Registered User
Memo Lomeli's Avatar
United States, TX, McAllen
Joined Mar 2006
574 Posts
Here´s the part 2, there´s some magic here:

TOC 1999 (part 2) : freestyles and interviews (1 hr 0 min 5 sec)
Memo Lomeli is offline Find More Posts by Memo Lomeli
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old 02-28-2014, 12:20 PM
Whiplash48 is offline
Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Registered User
Whiplash48's Avatar
Maryland
Joined Apr 2009
117 Posts
Back to the '84 TOC and Hanno' Skybolt

I have exhausted the supply of TOC pictures I have, but I have been wanting to examine Hanno Prettners' Skybolts in more detail. What I have discovered is more interesting than I expected.

As an introduction to the image attached; I have 2 pictures I took, 1 of the '84 Skybolt (others are lost) and 1 of the '88 Skybolt that I purposefully took in side profiles. Using the lower wing L.E. and chord length as reference I scale these to match the TRUE outline of the Skybolt-S. I then drew outlines of both the '84 and '88 airplanes to compare.

In the end it looks to me like the '88 airplane was nearly identical to the '84 airplane with a bit of camouflage in the way of red/white/blue and stars paint and more scale like cockpit position and landing gear.

The most egregious deviation from the 10% rule was the tail moment and vertical stab location.

I can scratch this one off the "Bucket List".
Whiplash48 is offline Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-28-2014, 12:54 PM
Andy Thomas is offline
Find More Posts by Andy Thomas
OK 1 Roll, No I Mean 2 Point
Andy Thomas's Avatar
Farmington, MN
Joined Jan 2006
1,155 Posts
Thank you so for much posting what you had!
Andy Thomas is offline Find More Posts by Andy Thomas
Last edited by Andy Thomas; 02-28-2014 at 02:49 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-28-2014, 01:50 PM
rcakropilot is offline
Find More Posts by rcakropilot
What... Weather sucks again!!!
rcakropilot's Avatar
Hyannis, Massachusetts
Joined Jan 2007
5,648 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Thomas View Post
Thank you so much posting what you had!
Definately. Thank You. This is a great thread.
rcakropilot is offline Find More Posts by rcakropilot
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-28-2014, 01:52 PM
mmcconville is offline
Find More Posts by mmcconville
Registered User
mmcconville's Avatar
Monticello, IL USA
Joined May 2006
946 Posts
Chris, where did you get the data on Hanno's Skybolts? "Skybolts"
mmcconville is offline Find More Posts by mmcconville
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-28-2014, 04:26 PM
Whiplash48 is offline
Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Registered User
Whiplash48's Avatar
Maryland
Joined Apr 2009
117 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmcconville View Post
Chris, where did you get the data on Hanno's Skybolts? "Skybolts"
I think I have the only photo taken of HPs '84 Skybolt. I originally had 4 pictures but have miss placed 3 of them ([email protected]#$%). I had started to right an article for publication back in 1985 about the TOC (Model Airplane News was interested), most of my TOC materials were lost in a basement flood a few years back, so I think the other 3 negatives got thrown away.

I do a lot of image analysis at work and it is a mix of science and art. As long as one does not take too many liberties with the process it can be amazingly precise.

For this project I had a pretty good side profile to work with but of course I personally did not measure Hanno' airplanes. Steve and I and of course the Stearman were behind Hanno for Tech Inspection (wish I had a video camera!). It was obvious from the start that Phil Kraft was a bit concerned (my observation). While they were all quietly discussing the situation I snapped a few pictures.

Anyhow, the process of re-engineering goes like this: I used the '88 Skybolt side view to scale everything first, it has a full length prop in it (I used 22") since that was pretty close to what everyone was using back then. You drop the image into a CAD program and then scale up the image until the prop dimension is -22", Wah-Lah everything else scales too. Yes there can be some error from Horizontal and Vertical distortion, etc.,etc. but experience has taught me that for the most part this error is pretty small and in this case negligible since we are just trying to get say +/- 1 inch or so.

The '84 image was a little trickier, basically I used the diameter of the engine cylinder head from the first image ('88 bird) to scale that image, a ST G61 head is ~ 1.8 in. in diameter. With these methods, the larger the reference dimension is, the more precise the results, prop length of 22" is pretty good to work with.

Now for the Art part of the process. I used the best side view of a Skybolt model S that I could find and scaled that so that the lower wing chord was the same as the previously scaled '84 and '88 images. I don't know what the real chord is for either airplane but based on analysis of the two images when scaled the same, the chords look to be identical for both. The end result was a chord of ~ 12.5" which based on other airplanes at the TOC in '84 and '88 is in the park. The Stearman was ~14" and so was the Falcon.

If your still with me and have "Drunk-The-Koolaid", I then just align all images, now hopefully scaled correctly, up using the lower wing L.E. as the primary reference.

Some more Art is needed to inturp. things like exactly where the center of the top wing is positioned, and the vertical location of the horizontal stab.

With all that said, just outlining the airplane in the two images and then scaling them to be the same length produces a similar result, the '84 and '88 Skybolts were basically the same airplane.

Hanno gets the last laugh! hope that makes sense.
Whiplash48 is offline Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Last edited by Whiplash48; 02-28-2014 at 06:09 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-02-2014, 01:54 PM
Whiplash48 is offline
Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Registered User
Whiplash48's Avatar
Maryland
Joined Apr 2009
117 Posts
Hanno '84 Skybolt 3D model

Based on some of the previous work I've done on Hanno' Skybolt, I built a 3D model of it. I bet it flew great.

Some of the more interesting aspects of the model were the very simple vertical posts used as Cabane struts, and the single post inter-plane strut that just pocked thru a hole in the wing panels and was fixed in place with a single bolt (one top and bottom). Many of you guys have big bi-planes so I'm sure you understand how important it is to keep the wings fixed in position.

Most of the biplanes that flew in the '84 and '88 TOC that were built up from wood or wood and foam used functional flying wires. Our '84 Stearman would occasionally break a wire from pulling positive Gs. We did not have a vehicle large enough to keep the airplane assembled, so everyday we had to take it apart and then put it back together the following morning. The Reed Falcon was kept assembled the whole time. Hanno's '84 Skybolt had no flying wires.

The intake stack we made for the Sachs engine gave us an extra 300 rpm, almost enough power to actually HOVER!!!
Whiplash48 is offline Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Last edited by Whiplash48; 03-02-2014 at 05:37 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 09:25 AM
mmcconville is offline
Find More Posts by mmcconville
Registered User
mmcconville's Avatar
Monticello, IL USA
Joined May 2006
946 Posts
Nice work Chris!
mmcconville is offline Find More Posts by mmcconville
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 11:04 AM
Whiplash48 is offline
Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Registered User
Whiplash48's Avatar
Maryland
Joined Apr 2009
117 Posts
Thanks Mike, its been bugging me. I'm in the process of drawing and building (3D models for MS FSX) of all my favorite TOC airplanes. I currently have the Dalotel No 1, Kraft Super Fli, and some others in various stages of the process. I spend a lot of time on the train!

Chris
Whiplash48 is offline Find More Posts by Whiplash48
Last edited by Whiplash48; 03-07-2014 at 11:19 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 12:19 PM
MattyMatt is offline
Find More Posts by MattyMatt
F3S Jet Precision Aerobatics
MattyMatt's Avatar
United States, NC, Greensboro
Joined Apr 2006
3,637 Posts
It would be so great to see a TOC style contest today with the really scale planes.

Use the same rules... One plane for free and sequence. The second plane is a true backup... Like the old masters.


Thanks for sharing. Great memories following this stuff as a kid.
MattyMatt is offline Find More Posts by MattyMatt
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 12:25 PM
ULTIMATE1 is offline
Find More Posts by ULTIMATE1
Registered User
ULTIMATE1's Avatar
Canada, BC, Courtenay
Joined Sep 2006
1,980 Posts
Yeh that would be cool especially if you could get someone like REDBULL to sponsor it?
ULTIMATE1 is offline Find More Posts by ULTIMATE1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 12:33 PM
Mithrandir is offline
Find More Posts by Mithrandir
TEAM FUTABA
Mithrandir's Avatar
High Desert California, USA
Joined Jan 2006
7,937 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyMatt View Post
It would be so great to see a TOC style contest today with the really scale planes.

Use the same rules... One plane for free and sequence. The second plane is a true backup... Like the old masters.


Thanks for sharing. Great memories following this stuff as a kid.

I think it would be "Cooler" to see a TOC style contest today with absolutely NO REQUIREMENT of scale....

Being scale is such a limitation...

If there were to be a TOC'ish event again.. I think it oughta be unlimited!!
.
.
Mithrandir is offline Find More Posts by Mithrandir
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 01:18 PM
MattyMatt is offline
Find More Posts by MattyMatt
F3S Jet Precision Aerobatics
MattyMatt's Avatar
United States, NC, Greensboro
Joined Apr 2006
3,637 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithrandir View Post
I think it would be "Cooler" to see a TOC style contest today with absolutely NO REQUIREMENT of scale....

Being scale is such a limitation...

If there were to be a TOC'ish event again.. I think it oughta be unlimited!!
.
.

No more scale. 5% or less hell even <1%. People are better flyers than ever, with advanced radio equipment and servos... And power plants. Let's stop making it easier!
MattyMatt is offline Find More Posts by MattyMatt
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 01:53 PM
why_fly_high is offline
Find More Posts by why_fly_high
100% EDGE Builder
why_fly_high's Avatar
United States, OK, Edmond
Joined Jan 2006
1,453 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithrandir View Post
I think it would be "Cooler" to see a TOC style contest today with absolutely NO REQUIREMENT of scale....

Being scale is such a limitation...

If there were to be a TOC'ish event again.. I think it oughta be unlimited!!
.
.
I REALLY REALLY don't want to derail this thread. I am loving it. this is what my early memories were of RC stuff in the mags. I remember thinking there is no way I will ever be able to afford a 70cc ultimate. Now things are way beyond that.

With that said, I think Mith has a point. To me, scale is played out. There are few new examples to model. I look at what EF has done with the EXP line of planes. These look somewhat scale but have left the 10% rule behind. It is time for some cool big, nonscale planes that are not limited in shape. What do I know? Maybe Mith and I would be the only ones that would like them. The TOC pushed giant Scale design. We need something to push the next step.

Dan
why_fly_high is offline Find More Posts by why_fly_high
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-04-2014, 03:22 PM
Shaker is offline
Find More Posts by Shaker
Doug Cronkhite
Shaker's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
2,556 Posts
Completely agree. I'd like to see nothing more than single-engine, 55 pound max weight as the aircraft rules. And just let it go from there with the stipulation that both precision and 4-minute must be flown with the same airplane.
Shaker is offline Find More Posts by Shaker
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message


Quick Reply
Message:


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools