Peacemaker

For pure enjoyment I'd recommend this plane to anyone

PAW 2.49 diesel for power (about 40 years old - but still goes great!)

how do you find the PAW 2.49 for power ? I have one but it is the weakest 2.49 I have ever owned in either glow or diesel. It's a contest special too. It appears to have marginally more power than my PAW 1.5. Do you get good line tension ?

Mine has PLENTY of power. I have heard though that they can be "variable" in quality as they say (a bit like Foxes) Not quite as much power as my Oliver MkIII (which is an exceptional motor) or my Rossi 15D, but certainly up to all "ordinary" 15's that I've used.

Flies the Peacemaker very well on 52' lines and a 9x4. I used an 8x6 to start with, but that was TOO fast.

Maybe there's something wrong with your PAW?

Dagnabit Charles! Mine hardly had line tension with an 8x6!

I bought that engine new years ago, gave around an hour break-in time and the end result was as I said, poor. You may well be right, the Eifflander's were asleep the day it was made , a bad engine.

Do you mind me asking, what fuel-oil-ether ratio ?

Back when I was a teenager PAW 249s and 19s were what a friend and I used to fly. My 19 would pull like a tractor - put it in the Aeroflyte ME109 semi-scale stunter (box said for .19-.35), and it flew it very well indeed. My mate's 249 was only slightly weaker than my .19.

With the PAWs we found prop selection was critical. With an undersized prop they were gutless, but give them a big hunk of prop to torque up on and they were wonderful.

Eg. my mate's 249 was dead hopeless on a Grish 8x6, but put a 9x4 or 9x6 master airscrew on it and it was great.

For my 19, anything less than a 9x6 was a disaster, and I ended up flying mostly a master airscrew 9x6 or 9.5x6, sometimes even the same 10x6 that I ran on my OS .35. I reckon that 19 will fly a full size flite-streak no problem when I get around to building one.

When I get some diesel fuel happening, feel free to lend me your weak 249 contest to play with. The guys at ALC have put me onto a source of ether at the Sumner Park industrial estate.

That 249 contest sounds like a challenge - it should be better than a regular untuned 249. Is it the Schnuerle ported version? It'll be interesting to see how it compares with my pair of MARZ 2.5Ds on the same props.

EDIT: spelling. One day I'll learn to spell 'Schnuerle' properly on the first attempt

I had one and loved it, all the way into the ground. Enya 35 equipped. The only model I ever had catch fire too.

Colin, from memory I tried it with props both ways, I started with 8x6, went to 8x4 (horrific) and then went up to 9x6. All Taipan props. No dice. This was a long time ago and I packed it away in disgust, so I may be completely wrong and didn't try the props I think I did. My chinese Silver Swallow 2.5 left it for dead.

You can borrow it and play with it if you want. What's the bet the thing rockets when you do ? About that ether Colin, it's expensive and if you want to go halves let me know.

That ME 109 was one sweet flying model. It was the first plane larger than a .049 that I ever flew, and that first flight surprised me with awesome line tension overhead. I can't imagine what one would have been like with an Enya 35 in it - the PAW 19 was plenty of engine for it! I'd love to find the plans, or one of the old Aeroflyte kits, and build another. The .15 semi-scale spitfire was great as well - I have the plans for that one courtesy of Peter White.

My ME 109 eventually died of oil seepage after about 18 months of flying most weekends - I have no idea how many flights I got out of it. After it died, I gave the wing to my mate who turned it into a flying wing with a pair of Cox .049s on it. Only lasted a couple of days in that form, but was an absolute hoot while it did.

Horrific is certainly a good description of the PAWs on 8 inch props. I came darn close to writing off my ME109 trying a tornado 8x6 on it - no idea how I got it back on the ground without breaking it - it was hair raising! I should have had more sense than to try a new & unproven prop on a day with high winds - I was running back every time it went upwind. Luckily the engine cut just as I was coming onto the downwind leg, so I slammed it onto the ground.

I'll be happy to go halves with you in any ether purchase. I sure wish we could find $10/litre ether like they get in Sydney. The good news is I know my PAW 19 will run on far less than 30% ether, but I'm betting I'll need to use 'olde english 1:1:1 mix' to break in my NIB Marzes.

I would love to find the plans of the Aeroflyte Me 109 myself. If I do I will let you know. It never looked like an Me 109 when it was built

Mine was white and pale blue with red trim, and looked more like some kind of mutant cropduster than an ME 109. Sure flew well 'though.

I've tried an eBay 'want it now' listing for old Aeroflyte kits. Zero responses. I just don't think there are that many of them out there.

If anyone out there has plans from an Australian made Aeroflyte ME 109 kit for .19-.35, please contact Luke and I.

I should go through my dad's collecton of slides. Somewhere in there will be a set of photos of my ME 109 in flight. There was one head on one, taken at 1/1000th of a second exposure, which allowed us to roughly calculate the engine RPM from the arc traversed by the prop.

Oh well.

He was the worst needle tweaker I have ever met, he couldn't leave the needle alone. Even when an engine was running perfectly, nope, wind that needle in and out again and again. Half a tank gone before it was launched. I started my own from then on with strict instructions to him to NOT touch the needle.

Sorry Charles, hijacking your thread somewhat here.

My mate and I had a strict policy of starting & tuning our own engines. I liked my PAW to run slightly rich and undercompressed with honey coloured exhaust oils. He liked to run his PAW 249 lean & hard - exhaust oil on the wing was like black soot. really hated the sound his engine made when he tuned it like that. Didn't seem to do it any harm though - I guess PAWs are built tough.

We also disagreed about starting procedure. He would start his inverted engine with the plane balanced upside down on his knee, then scare the willies out of me by waving the running engine around as he flipped it back over. I was too chicken to do that, so instead mastered the art of starting my PAW inverted and learned to leave the settings alone as much as possible.

One day he went in for one last fiddle with the needle valve, misjudged and 'zzzztttt' as the tip of his finger went into the prop. He swore because there was blood all over this plane, then pulled out a handkerchief and wrapped it around his finger and screamed at me to launch anyway. Never did have any medical attention for the finger - we flew for the rest of the day. When we got back to my place he got me to distract my mum while he raided the bathroom for elastoplast.

I'm amazed he didn't. The engine didn't start, it did the blowtorch thing instead. I could actually hear it making a strange "fluffle" sort of sound. I asked him what was the noise and next thing his eyebrows flew back and touched the nape of his neck. I knew we had trouble so I raced to the model as he's screeching out "fire !"

Our heads collided as we both bent down blowing as hard as we could to put it out. The man was a bl**dy idiot!

He had hung around a CL club and picked up all these crazy notions about what should and shouldn't be done. I think they were feeding him BS to be honest.

I broke in a MARZ 2.5 on Davis's fuel. It was the first engine I saw that instructions said to set the contra at TDC of the piston and back off 1.5 turns for the initial compression setting...it worked.

Also, the engine initially had no compression seal. Compression seal increased each heat cycle for the first few cycles. Eventually it ran well. I have not had it in a plane, nor experimented with props. I used a 9x4 for break-in. Note that it is a short stroke engine so may handle smaller props if you so desire. One other note...it came with a muffler so I inverted the muffler for break-in (removal would alter timing). After I could start the engine with a choke or intake prime, I reinstalled the muffler.

Here is a pic. The aluminum colored head is the one I referred to, the black one is still new.

Full-fuselage Peacemaker: The wing is constructed much like the Flite Streak, the fuselage has a little fancy jigging around the nose doubler to save weight. Nice plane also.

Profile Peacemaker: Note that the trailing edge has more taper than the Flite Streak. Construction similar to FS.

George

Edit: After-thought on the Marz...it was hard to turn over at first because the rotor was pressed against the crankpin. I had to install a thicker backplate gasket to fix it. The black head one did not have that problem.

Their claimed performance of 0.34bhp at around 15,500 RPM is very similar to PAW 249, but they are somewhat lighter than the PAW.

I have a bunch of Aeromodeller plans for 1.5cc and 2.5cc combat wings, so I'll probably end up putting one of my MARZes in something like this:

porky

Regards

Mike

Not at all. It ain't a Flite Streak, although it is from the same family tree. The Profile Peacemaker was a special design George did for the British Aeromodeller magazine in the late '50s at their request for a combo Sport/Stunt/Combat model for the UK market using the then popular diesel motors. The construction is very akin to his original FS design which TF modified for production.
It is intermediate in size between a Jr FS and the full-size FS, and is still quite popular in the UK- in fact I think they hold a Peacemaker only event over there.
By the way, the TF Peacemaker is NOT the same as the MAN version (the full fuselage job)- TF also redesigned this one for production, and George felt it was a sorry airplane at best- way too heavy.

John

PS: If you want a set of the original UK Peacemaker plans, Bare (Barry Baxter) has them on his plans list. I loaned him my set a few years ago to copy so he could add them to it.

http://www.controllineplans.com/frameset2.htm

Hi Charles,

I concur ...... for outright enjoyment on two lines the GMA "Peacemaker" (English Version) is an hard act to beat ..... the model I am illustrating was built in England in 1966 and is powered by an Enya 19 purchased in 1964 and both are still going strong .... I fly it on 60 foot lines with a 9x6 prop and it literally dances on the end of the lines. GMA certainly pushed all the right buttons when he created this little beauty.

It is akin to GMA's ORIGINAL FS, but it really isn't a Flite Streak- look at the plans. It is too small for a glow .35- the Veco .19BB is about top-end power/weight level.

I assume you mean the Fox .15 schnuerle? That or the Cox .15 Medallion is about right. The TD .09 would probably do ok if it is built light.

I have scaled up a version of GMA's "Peacemaker" (English Version) by 15% and it comes out more or less equivelant to the FliteStreak in size and weight and when powered by an OS 20 FP it gives a performance equal if not better than the Enya 19 powered version ...... in any event I am surprised that this most versatile of models has not be been chosen for kitting by the likes of the entrepreneur's in this field of business ... or maybe their are copyright reasons why this cannot be so ..... only in England Eh! ...... What a pity!.

It is indeed an extremely versatile airplane. I think the reason it hasn't been kitted (properly) is that most modelers outside the UK think it is "just a Flite Streak", it really isn't. If I recall correctly, there is a 1/2A "twin" version called the "Talisman"???

I would like to get a set of plans for the MAN Peacemaker. Steve

He had an Ollie Tiger on that one rather than the PAW (I THINK).
I somewhere have a letter from him mentioning this 15 degrees of offset and the 10" prop bit, but I thought he wrote it was an Ollie. I am wondering now if this isn't that special .19 size Ollie that is mentioned in a related thread. It wouldn't surprise me if John Oliver made up some specials like this- especially in the case of someone like GMA. George of course was a master at building his own stuff, and he could just as well have brewed it up himself.
Bare also has the MAN Peacemaker plans, BTW.

I've spent quite some time with the MARZ diesels and in my tests, the muffler robs the engine of way too much power. Run them open-exhaust. While they will run on all sorts of propellers, the nylon prop supplied is typically way out of balance & over-revs in the air with marginal thrust for our purposes. I find the Taipan grey 7x6 ideal as it correctly loads the engine to work in the peak BHP engine speeds and (more importantly) reduces vibration so that I get consistent needle settings. My fuel uses 20% castor oil for a run-in engine and 2% ignition improver (DuPont DII). The ignition improver is most important in this engine to get smooth running and to avoid (delay) breaking the crankshaft. Old-style three part mix will not do!

..SNIP..
>
>I've spent quite some time with the MARZ diesels and in my
>tests, the muffler robs the engine of way too much power.
>Run them open-exhaust. While they will run on all sorts of
>propellers, the nylon prop supplied is typically way out of
>balance & over-revs in the air with marginal thrust for our
>purposes. I find the Taipan grey 7x6 ideal as it correctly
>loads the engine to work in the peak BHP engine speeds and
>(more importantly) reduces vibration so that I get
>consistent needle settings. My fuel uses 20% castor oil for
>a run-in engine and 2% ignition improver (DuPont DII). The
>ignition improver is most important in this engine to get
>smooth running and to avoid (delay) breaking the crankshaft.
>Old-style three part mix will not do!
>
>Cheers
>Maris Dislers

Hi Maris, I agree with your assesment of the profile Peacemaker, build
light and use a light engine. Also I agree with your take on the Marz
2.5 diesel engine, I have 5 of them and they are run in and flight tested.
Three of them shelled themselves out after 45 min's runtime and two
are still intact and running very well after 2-3 hours runtime. They
all turned over 16,000 rpm on a Taipan 8x4 test prop. My fuel is a very
similar formula it seems: 43.5% kerosene,20% castor,35% ether and 1.5%
DII. One of my good Marz 2.5's is powering a CLC Super Clown, I like
to fly it with a Taipan 8x6", very nice sport/Old Time Stunter.
I must add to this thread that many modelers are using the plain bearing
PAW 15-19's which have meager performance; guys,try the .15-.19TBR's
which are far and away better performance engines. I have a PAW .19TBR
powering an All American Senior right now. They are almost a direct
replacement for the Fox .35 Stunt, believe it or not.
Tony

Correct my friend, it's the single exhaust Schnuerle job. Man, it's next to useless. I could play with it some more, but the price of ether in QLD might see me selling it before it costs too much fuel.

Thanks for the tip Maris.

>
>He had an Ollie Tiger on that one rather than the PAW (I
>THINK).
>I somewhere have a letter from him mentioning this 15
>degrees of offset and the 10" prop bit, but I thought he
>wrote it was an Ollie. I am wondering now if this isn't that
>special .19 size Ollie that is mentioned in a related
>thread. It wouldn't surprise me if John Oliver made up some
>specials like this- especially in the case of someone like
>GMA. George of course was a master at building his own
>stuff, and he could just as well have brewed it up himself.
>Bare also has the MAN Peacemaker plans, BTW.
>
>JAK

There was the Oliver 3.5cc Major, of course. But what GMA wrote me was about a PAW .19. I don't know if that would have been an early or late variant. I have an early (vertical intake) PAW .19 that is pretty much a POS, IMO. I sold three other NIB PAW's after flying that one on a D-Bat. Steve

The Peacemaker seems relatively unknown in the US. Also I really do not like the full-bodied US "Peacemaker" - to me, it was a plane that just did not "gel".

Second, the Cox medallion 15 is great on a Peacemaker. About 35 years ago I taught my brother in law to fly on a Peacemaker + Cox. The cox is nice and light so you don't need much or any weight at the back for proper CG position.

Tony

I must get around to building a new one. A light one would be totally dynamic!!

Greggles

Regards

If you look carefully at the second photo you will see the line of epoxy where I glued the nose back on.

I was showing off to the RC guys in the club, flying stunts with one hand in my pocket when my feet got tangled up with each other and I fell over. The plane did a vertical dive into the ground. Broke the nose off and broke the prop (8x6 - and mine goes like a bat out of ##### on that prop - much too fast!)

So a few weeks later I had a look at the plane and glued the nose back on. There was a small tear in the covering and the tip weight had come loose, but nothing more.

Good plane

Also, somewhat off topic, have you ever built TWJ Stoker's Cougar from Aeromodeller Nov 57 for 19-33's ? An interesting model and one I might build in the near future. Looks like it would perform nicely.

Hi Luke,

It is coincidental that having subscribed to this thread and having built my first "Peacemaker" in 1966 I built a TWJ Stoker's "Couger" just prior this and powered it with an ED 3.46 "Hunter" diesel ..... it performed reasonably well but when I installed a K&B Torpedo 29s it really came alive and was a joy to fly. A truly competant model and will give you loads of enjoyment. "Build it and you will not regret it"

I covered it with a kind of fabric based shrink covering, not too sure now what it's called here in the UK. VERY tough indeed.

I know the Cougar - but never built one. I also know the ED Hunter from my teens; we considered it a strictly "agricultural" engine, big, heavy, no doubt strong - but no shining performance. Good for a boat?

I have plans though for a Keil Kraft "Super Slicker" and was considering looking on eBay for a Hunter, but that project is in abeyance now as I'm full time getting back into C/L. The Super Slicker is a 60" pylon type vintage free flight plane, and I intended to in radio assist. A Hunter would be ideal for one of those big old floaty free flight jobs, much more appropriate than a screaming glo at 18,000 rpm.

My return to my old love (C/L aerobatics) has been in no small measure due to this very forum. At least here I don't have to keep explaining what I mean - or keep asking what THEY mean!

mine are plain bushed Mk 4's. Real chuggers, but they have an old world appeal to them and I would like to find a CL model that can use one.

I came across someone whose father imported and sold engines to support his tether car habit and he had quite a few ED types amongst them. So I ended up with ED hunters, Bees, Hornets, Mk 3's and an incomplete Ed Racer or two. Add to that the Johnson engines, AM's, Mills, Cannon sparky and various others, line sets, props etc. etc. and I had a real treasure trove on my hands.
AU$800.00 for the lot and that paid for the lone McCoy 60 in my eyes. I wish that would happen more often.

Was it Solartex ? I used Solartex years ago, very tough and easier to use than conventional iron-ons.

I've attached a photo of an ED Hunter as I know them (very long shaft) and also one called an ED MkIV Hunter which I have never seen

my ED Hunters are the longshaft variety you pictured but they have "ED Mk4" cast into the front of the crankcase (I went and checked to make sure). I don't know what the other ED is that you show, I have never seen one myself. It's not the ED Super Hunter, that is more modern looking again. Was there a Mk 5?

Yes to Solartex, oil didn't affect it and it could take a battering. It also took paint very well but that made for a heavy finish.

Edit: and of course Solartex is still around but not cheap.

The engine with the drilled exhaust holes appears to be converted from a later boat engine. Note, all Hunters have the same shafts, it's the prop driver that varies the length. Later Hunters had a short alloy conrod which reduced motor height. Tall motors have steel conrods.

I had one of the Hunters as a teenager, and didn't think much of it as a C/L motor. The ED racer was a different thing altogether, and I still have mine, but not my Frog 2.49 MkII (red head). We were mainly into flying combat and trying aerobatics with Peacemakers

At a demo at one Nats in the '50s, GMA flew the entire pattern on a dead engine when the wind was "just right".

the firebrand is indeed a fine looking model, I think Tony Elmore has a thumbnail of it on his site. I will try and find the plan for that, the idea of building the engine in is somewhat bizarre but I guess not too weird for its day.

I have the plan for the Curtiss Swift, I forgot all about it. Another fine looking model.

Peacemaker:

Cougar:

Tony

Anyone done that?

Regulary fly "Peacemaker" (English Version) powered with an Enya 15 on 60' lines .......... no trouble at all .......... prefer the Enya 19 though.

I'll try it next time I fly (hopefully, fairly soon)

Not strictly on topic, but I was running performance tests on a couple of PAW engines over the weekend. It reminded me that they are a little different to other makes. In particular, they do not like running lean and 30% castor oil in the mix is a good idea. Sort of like workin with a diesel equivalent of the Fox 35.

The two test engines were from around 1980 - a PAW 149DS (the last run with the upright venturi, but with aluminum bearing) and a PAW 80 (the original type with three screws retaining the cylinder assembly).

Both engines are well above average for power output. The 80 delivered 0.13BHP and has an amazingly flat torque curve. The 149 comfortably topped the 0.25BHP mark. The 80 is bog standard and the only thing on the 149 I'm not sure of is remarkably mild exhaust port duration of 126 degrees, compared with around 138 degrees on other engines I measured.

These are well above average figures, but show that even base-model PAW's can really perform. Of course the newer generation of BB models greatly improves your odds of getting a "good one".

I plan to use the 149 in a Stiletto C/L stunt model that was kitted here in Australia in the 1950's and originally called for an OS Max-1 2.5cc engine.

interesting that you should say that about the PAW's , I dug out my 2.49 Contest and decided to give it a run. I haven't run that thing for close to fifteen years and my conclusion is that it hasn't been run in yet. The sheer lack of power should have told me that. I have given it quite a few tanks of fuel now and it appears to be giving a lot more power than before and runs evenly. I think it's fine to be honest, just a few more runs and I'll mount it in a model and go and see. 9x6 prop this time.

That would be a good choice, Maris. The original OS Max-1 15 was under 4oz and any engine heavier than this will require lead in the tail of the Stiletto.
I used my own relatively light plain bearing 2.5cc diesel and like most of the Stilettos at Muswellbrook this year, mine had an ounce of lead in the tail.
It is a great little model though and flies very well. It also proved very popular, with well over 100 kits going out this year.

rgds
Dave

The Aeromodeller printed a free plan for a Mini Peacemaker (1.5 cc engine) and a fellow club mate scaled up the origal plan for a 40. They all fly the same - GREAT.

George designed a flapped version for the Aeromodeller too. It was slightly larger than the original, was full bodied and had an upright engine. It used a 2.5 Olly.

HAPPY LANDINGS.

And I agree - until you've flown a Peacemaker, you haven't lived. I learned the clover on a Peacemaker about 45 years ago, powered by a Cox Olympic

George designed a flapped version for the Aeromodeller too. It was slightly larger than the original, was full bodied and had an upright engine. It used a 2.5 Olly.
>HAPPY LANDINGS.

Does that one look anything like the full-bodied Peacemaker published in the Mar 1960 issue of MAN?

Can you post a picture?

HAPPY LANDINGS.

http://www.controllineplans.com/frameset2.htm

Go to the Stunt section under "P"

Here it is again.

http://www.controllineplans.com/frameset2.htm

Check the index.

HAPPY LANDINGS.

Regards

Mike

But how did it FLY?

The Peacemaker topic is really interesting since I'm mid build on the uk version from the aeromodeller plan : built it light looks like it'll be 14 oz for Copeman Oliver Mk 4 but perhaps that may be a bit quick for good stunting? At any rate, reason for posting on this topic is the availability here in the uk of a couple of kits : Hallam models produce a very close clone named Peacekeeper - complete kit with good wood selection and what are mainly bandsawed components
A new company Replikit is offering a part kit featuring laser cut main components with other parts to be builder supplied ; their site is at www.replikit.com

Thanks for great site

Enjoy your Peacemaker! With a Copeman Oliver it will go like a bat out of Hades! My PAW 2.49 is fast enough and I fly on a 9x4 Master prop. I started with an 8x6 but that was too fast for enjoyment.

In the past I've flown them with: Oliver Tiger, Frog 2.49, PAW 2.49, Cox Olympic, MVVS, Rossi 15D - and probably a few others as well that I can't remember now. Probably even with an ED Racer 2.46!

Also check the CG position; it won't handle right unless the CG position is correct (too far back and you have a real handfull!)

As someone suggested above, try 60' lines - I intend to try that as soon as the weather clears

Thanks Charles
It does sound like my initial set up with 8x6 Taipan on 52' lines will perhaps be too quick for relaxed stunting (old combat habits including twitchy CG die hard!) so will also try the larger prop/lines approach.
Actually, I also have an old OS Max 15 kicking about ; perhaps this is a viable alternative?
Was also interested to see the tank mounting options ; I use balsa wood front feed tanks and have found them to be very light/reliable and easy to make to precise custom sizes.
Cheerrs

I flew my PAW 2.49 Contest today (after breaking it in, finally) in a Midislow with a 9x6 prop. Excellent line tension, excellent performance. I'm impressed, amazing difference from when I last ran it fifteen years ago. All I need to do now is build a Peacemaker to suit.

I need a new model to replace the Midislow, what I didn't mention in the last post was the fact that it self-destructed today after three flights.
The PAW pulled the nose off in flight, put prop cuts in the LE of the wing, sliced the fuselage in two, snapped the canopy flat, broke the tailplane in two and left me with a falling maple leaf for a model as it happily tumbled through the air complete with tank and still running. Unbelievable. All of this in a nanosecond too.

My fault, it was an old oil soaked model and I really should have checked the wing/nose joint. I am still flabbergasted by it and fortunately the engine suffered no damage or dirt ingestion. It didn't even break the prop. Bizarre experience and I will check all the wing joints of my remaining models after this.

He had 3 Peacemakers and a FliteStreak (Brodak 25).

The first Peacemaker had an Irvine 20 diesel on it - it was going great the engine stopped suddenly and as I watched it glide in I noticed what looked like a fuel filter hanging down from a length of fuel tube - however closer inspection revealed it to be the venturi - however by the time it landed the venturi had dissappeared so that was Peacemaker 1 unserviceable (if anyone finds an Irvine 20 venturi at Croydon it's Irvin's)!

The second Peacemaker had a PAW 19 GTS on crankcase pressure - this was running like a bat out of ##### but on launch the engine stopped - the (epoxied in) pressure nipple had fallen out of the backplate - Peacemaker 2 unserviceable!

The third had an ABC CS Tiger - Irvin got a decent flight in on this but on the second he tripped over the lines (in the very long grass) and pulled the model out of my hands turning the model into a lawn dart - apart from the prop, a 'mudded up' engine and possibly a split tank all seemed ok - but - Peacmaker 3 unserviceable!

This just left the FliteStreak - although Irvin had forgotten his glow starter we managed to borrow one - he got in three good flights on it and it goes very well with the Brodak 25.

Tony

As we all know, happiness with a relatively small model like the Peacemaker comes from a good engine run. Ye olde 4-2-4 break doesn't work anywhere near as well as with larger engine & model combos. Hence my rather eleborate fuel tanks. Your front-feed balsa tanks have me intrigued. Any chance of some pictures & explanation of your method?

In another topic this link was given
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/combatflyers/TANKSFORWEB.doc

It's not specifically front feed but could easily be adapted.

I guess being fg it would only be useful for diesels, but an Olly in a PEacemaker is a good mix.

Regards

This thread has really got TOO long!

If there are any more comments, how about a new thread "Peacemaker - 2" ?

In my experiments with this type of tank, the outer angle to the pickup needs to be quite high. 45 degrees was fine, but 15 degrees was a disaster. What do you recommend as a practical minimum angle for such tanks?

Maris

There are several schools of thought on this one! I have had most success with angles around the 45 degrees you suggest when NO BAFFLE was employed at the pickup corner.
I did build a series of tanks that used a far shallower angle that failed until I used a corner baffle. These were made from tin and rather more complex.
All the balsa tanks I have made have no baffle and between 45 and 60 degrees. All are between 55 and 60cc capacity for PAW 19 / Oliver Tigers in combat models where of course they're just set for max speed!
I have yet to actually fly the Oliver equipped Peacemaker ; where my original thought was just to replicate the combat setup!
There is a good description/plan of a similar tank on the Wallers' site http://members.aol.com/controllineuk/controllineuk/pages/tank.htm

Cheers

Have fun flying it, and let me know how it goes. That motor should be fine. I flew mine again last week - a lot of fun

They were very popular for combat in N.Z. ,with some very nicely built - finised aircraft.
N.Z.ers still have a habit of yelling loudly at times,
If you look at them ,to see what their on about as you'r
coming up behind one (A nicely built, nicely finished,
nice light Peacemaker.)at over 90 m..p.h. in a hard 16.5 oz
combat wing,there's a bit of a bang,pieces flying everywhere
and the 'wing' is still ripping around still attached to the handle,
All my model's were tissue covered,I dont think this one had a scratch. Somewhat surprised my model was still there.

I probably built six or ten Peacemakers,
The ones with a card- board covered solid foam wing with the
controls on top were a waste of time .
I think they were 20 -22 oz.
first timber ones were 16 1/2 to 18,
I just recalled the Nea,nea,nea
my ones 16.5 , yours is 18.5,
later ones (or one)14 1/2 oz.,
a little light for 'every day' use,
or a little delicate anyway,

A 'proper' one on a good calm day was good on 60 ' lines,
I put 1/2 '' sheet nose doubler ,back to the spar, Most of the old engines needed it to damp out the vibration.,
and a half (left) ply nose ring.

The profile job at 150 percent is an excllent 'Classic' aeroplane.
it is 225 percnt the wing area 'so needs a .45 for combat.

Just Kidding,I'll look after it if I build another.