C/L connectors

Tried to post this query a few minutes ago, but got an 'attempt'.
Had problems with the old Sullivan connectors, saw some new type at the Merced Speedmeet. These were a 'double-J'with a 180degree loop at opposite end,about 1" total length. How can I get some?
Are these what you fellas are using? I haven't seen any posts on connectors, just line terminations and leadouts.
Thanks,
Mike in Atwater

>Tried to post this query a few minutes ago, but got an
>'attempt'.
> Had problems with the old Sullivan connectors, saw some new
>type at the Merced Speedmeet. These were a 'double-J'with a
>180degree loop at opposite end,about 1" total length. How
>can I get some?
> Are these what you fellas are using? I haven't seen any
>posts on connectors, just line terminations and leadouts.
> Thanks,
> Mike in Atwater

Try Brodak Snap Connectors...

They are made by Sullivan, also. Here's the link to Tower Hobbies:

http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFU29&P=0

This is the large, they also come in a smaller size. Oddly, our LHS carries them.
Kelvin

The first time I saw the double "J" connectors was in 1963. They were probably around before then.

The ones Brodak carries are a little different from the Sulivans, but work in the same way. And they are a lot cheaper.

110 pound test at Brodak are $ 1.99 for package of two
80 pound test are $ 1.89 for a package of two.
(Tower's price on the Sullivans is $ 2.89 and $ 2.49 respectively.)

Either one is good, however, and (relatively) easy to use once you get the hang of them.

Leonard wrote:

"The ones Brodak carries are a little different from the
Sulivans, but work in the same way. And they are a lot
cheaper.

110 pound test at Brodak are $ 1.99 for package of two
80 pound test are $ 1.89 for a package of two.
(Tower's price on the Sullivans is $ 2.89 and $ 2.49
respectively.).............."
=======================================
Or you can get them from Boondocks Sporting Goods in Eagle River for $3.00 a dozen for the 110 lb test size. They are part of some sort of tackle for downriggers. I'd try your local sporting goods store, though. Eagle River may be a ways from you.

I tried these connectors and didn't care for the contortions I had to go through trying to get them connected. Maybe I am all thumbs but the slider connectors are easier to use and I have never had a problem.

When you say slider connectors do you mean the old perfect brand type connector? I thought those were illegal to use in a contest? I have seen them fail more than once.

> When you say slider connectors do you mean the old perfect
>brand type connector? I thought those were illegal to use in
>a contest? I have seen them fail more than once.

I don't think they are illegal, just inadvisable.

>> When you say slider connectors do you mean the old perfect
>>brand type connector? I thought those were illegal to use in
>>a contest? I have seen them fail more than once.
>
> I don't think they are illegal, just inadvisable.
>
> Brett

NO joke...
You haven't lived until you have had one of these come open and snag the other leadout while you are flying a VooDoo- REAL exciting 15 or 20 seconds...
I still like the old MacMahon (fishing) snaps- wish they were still made...

I keep remembering that I was told at a contest that I had to change those connectors( the dogbone slider) or couldnt fly. This would have been late 80's early 90's. They said it had something to do with the ama so off I scrambled to borrow some. I only liked them cause they were easy. When I got home I threw them all out and changed to sullivans. Aint looked back since! Especialy thinking back on all the planes ive seen crash because of them. Safety First is a good thing.

>I tried these connectors and didn't care for the contortions
>I had to go through trying to get them connected. Maybe I am
>all thumbs but the slider connectors are easier to use and I
>have never had a problem.

The "slider connectors" fail. It does not happen often, but they can and do fail. And somebody could get hurt. It is not worth the risk for any reason.

>The "slider connectors" fail. It does not happen often, but
>they can and do fail. And somebody could get hurt. It is not
>worth the risk for any reason.

There are good ones and bad ones. Some bad ones were made where the wire was too soft and they pulled loose. You can pull test the good ones with the slide unhooked and they will hold without it. The bad ones will straighten out under a pull test with the slide unhooked.

I continued to use the "dogbone" shaped slider connectors even though lots of folks advised not to. After all, a set comes with every set of lines we buy, so they've got to be OK, right? Not when it's blowing like at the recent Nats and your plane goes slack and then comes to the end of the lines again! Right there where the rubber meets the road on the edge of the fast lane, the sliders straighten out- now we're enjoying freeflight once more. A .15 sized race plane taught me my lesson. For what it's worth,

What you are mentioning here is an interesting observation. Sometimes in the wind the pull on the lines is considerably more than the pull test. The Brodak sliders are rated at 110 lb, but the scissor type might be a wee bit better.

Scissor type? I'm interested, Leonard. A pic, perhaps?
Mike

>Scissor type? I'm interested, Leonard. A pic, perhaps?
> Mike

I don't have a picture. Do I have to take a picture, perhaps? They are like the "double J" except the ends are offset and keep the gadget itself centered and work more like scissors while the other end if smaller and... I am not good at describing things, am I?

>Scissor type? I'm interested, Leonard. A pic, perhaps?
> Mike

LAST EDITED ON Jul-30-03 AT 11:20 PM (CDT)
 
I have a question. Are the ratings of the various line connectors published. I know the Sullivans come in large(110 lb) and small(80 lb). Is there a rating on the old Perfect slider type? What about the new double J type.
Also what are the materials? I think the Sullivans are brass. I just filed through a Perfect slider and its silver metal but non magnetic. Stainless steel? aluminium? Any body know? I think the new double J type are steel.
I use Sullivan or Double J for hot 35, 40 engines and above. The old Perfect sliders I use for 35 and below. I figure that's safe enough.

>I have a question. Are the ratings of the various line
>connectors published. I know the Sullivans come in
>large(110 lb) and small(80 lb). Is there a rating on the
>old Perfect slider type? What about the new double J type.
>Also what are the materials? I think the Sullivans are
>brass. I just filed through a Perfect slider and its silver
>metal but non magnetic. Stainless steel? aluminium? Any
>body know? I think the new double J type are steel.
>I use Sullivan or Double J for hot 35, 40 engines and above.
> The old Perfect sliders I use for 35 and below. I figure
>that's safe enough.

Brodak does not give a pull rating, but does list a "size" rating.

BH-715 Small up to .049
BH-716 Medium .059-.099
BH-717 Large .15 to .29
BH-718 Ex. Lg. .35 & up.

Now, the originals were obviouisly not Brodaks, but I have been using the Extra Large size forever (well, for 50 years), first on the lines, and then when we switched handles, on the handle end of the lines because the large snap connectors did not fit the handle. We have pulled these without the slider being connected and they held fine. However...and this is a BIG however, not all of these slide connectors are created equal. And if you should get some that use soft wire, you are on your own (or, maybe I should say your airplane could become a free flight.)

Remember, this is not a recommendation on any and all slide connectors, and, as the disclaimers are wont to say, "Your experiences may vary."

My slide connectors are : The slide is Plated brass and the wire is steel. Pulls are up to 100# each. There was never a ban nor a proposal to ban the slide type connectors. Perhaps it was discussed at some council meeting, but it was never brought to a vote nor persued. I went back and reviewed all rules and safety code records that I could find. George Aldrich wanted them banned but as far as I could tell, it was never even put to a vote by the council at any time. Perhaps there is someone out there that has more info on this that I don't have.

Bigiron

I have seen Bigiron make his music wire connectors and it's pretty slick. They also operate as easily as the perfect style and, like the perfect style, are less likely to be twisted into a kinked position between flight which, if undetected before lauch, makes enough of a change in handle settings to screw up a takeoff. Usually, the kink comes out during flight with a noticeable bobble.
I've never had a failure with any of the perfect style extra large connectors on 35-46 sized ships or combat airplanes, some of which have had some very severe and sudden strains(broke a handle thong once). All of the perfect style have been the extra large furnished with Brodak or Sig uncrimped lines. Occasionally, I have used the large/medium size to adjust line length slightly on smaller 35-40 sized models using non adjustable handles-again, no problems. Reluctantly, I use the J style with 60 powered stuff hopefully being sure I inspect for kinking clips during the line run out after engine start.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-01-03 AT 04:34 PM (CDT)
 
There have been a variety of connecting devices available from the fishing tackle industry, including some very large stainless steel extra-heavy duty slider types so stiff that you almost need pliers to get the slider off its locked position - and it's worse than that to close them.

One of those had an extra large loop on one end to use with a type of sinker called a "bank" sinker. At least one would-be expert claimed that the "big ends" of those were likely to jam together (untrue in hundreds & hundreds of flights). Even if it was possible, and the ones with the oversize end were all that could be found, by just reversing one so the two big ends are further apart, that should satisfy the "nitpickingest" of all the anal- retentive types.

.
Kiwi

>I just filed through a Perfect slider and its silver
>metal but non magnetic. Stainless steel? aluminium?

All of mine are plated brass. I have a huge pile of them - they make great fairleads for profile airplanes.

A Navy Carrier plane is limited to a max of 4 lbs by rule and is subjected to a 25 lbs pull test. Since I build light, my Class II has only to pull 93 lbs! So I have a question- physics major I am NOT- with three lines is the load shared evenly? 33 1/3 ;lbs each? So with a 40 lb or so pull on a Stunter we'd be looking at a load on each line of 20 lbs? (I hope a torsion pendulum isn't required to answer this one. I had a choice at the Nats to buy a Ted handle kit or a torsion pendulum and went with the handle.) Best regards,

LAST EDITED ON Jul-31-03 AT 10:26 PM (CDT)
 
100 lbs divided by 3

And that is I believe a 25 g pull test which makes maximum pull 100 pounds. With a 3 line system this gives you roughly a safety factor of 3 for those 100 pound connectors.

I think the carrier plane is only supported by two lines, same as in stunt, speed, combat, etc. The third line is for throttle and would not count in equalizing the load.

But, other than that, when doing the pull test, you want to pull evenly on both lines with the belcrank centered. In actual flight, there would be a slight variation from line to line as you do your "ups" and "downs", but the variations should still be minor. You never want to "hit the stops" and hang the plane on only one line. Still, the lines are going to fail much sooner than the connectors if, indeed, they can withstand 110 pounds each.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-01-03 AT 10:09 PM (CDT)
 
>I think the carrier plane is only supported by two lines,
>same as in stunt, speed, combat, etc. The third line is for
>throttle and would not count in equalizing the load.
>

If the 3-line system is the Roberts bellcrank and handle or some derivative of the Roberts, the load in each of the three lines is about the same. The line diameter requirements of 3-line systems are based the assumption that there is equal or nearly equal pull on each of the three lines.

>
>If the 3-line system is the Roberts bellcrank and handle or
>some derivative of the Roberts, the load in each of the
>three lines is about the same. The pull test requirements
>of 3-line systems is based the assumption that there is
>equal pull on each of the three lines.

I have a couple of the handles here, but never really looked at the belcrank system. Now you have got me curious as to how the third line becomes part of the load.

I used to make up my own J-Roberts compatible bellcranks.

Take two standard identical sized bellcranks. (Actually, I later began hogging out a custom bottom crank out of sheet aluminium, but I don't want to go into that here.)

On one measure the distance between the bellcrank mounting hole and the leadout attach holes.

Drill a hole on one arm of one bellcrank that is half that distance and large enough to act as a mounting hole for the other bellcrank.

Cut and file off the remaining bellcrank arm on that side.

Mount the second belcrank on the short arm of the modified first bellcrank.

Now:

The single line on the long end is the 'throttle' control line that connects to the center of the handle. The pushrod from the modified bellcrank is connected to the throttle.

The single throttle control line moves twice as far as each of two elevator control wires (in and out relative to the airplane) and thus the 'pull' is distributed evenly between one 'throttle' control wire with half an airplane load and a long arm and two elevator control wires with half as much arm each, relative to the bottom (modified) bellcrank. And this relationship stays constant as the throttle is actuated.

The throttle line moves in an inch, and each of the elevator lines moves out a half inch. The throttle bellcrank pushrod arm moves, but the elevator pushrod arm does not.

The J-Roberts handle is geared in this fashion.

Did that discription make sense, or do I need to post a couple of photos?

Cy.

>
>Did that discription make sense, or do I need to post a
>couple of photos?
>
>Cy.

Did you really need to ask this question...YES PLEASE!

LAST EDITED ON Aug-01-03 AT 06:33 PM (CDT)
 
>>
>>Do I need to post a couple of photos?
>>
>>Cy.
>
>Did you really need to ask this question...YES PLEASE!
>
>regards,
>Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship

(Sigh...)

OK, by request, here are three images of a homebrew J-Roberts Bellcrank, showing Open, Closed and in-between:

---

[photo not recovered: 3f2aee7710fdd3af.jpg]

The Throttle is closed. In this image, we see the modified bellcrank in my previous post colored green and labled Throttle Bellcrank. In fact, I hogged this out of aluminum sheet stock so I could make the swing arm at the top move to clear the pushrod from the Elevator Bellcrank, shown in red. In this position, the Throttle line is full closed and thus the elevator bellcrank is pulled in toward the pilot, pivoting the Throttle Bellcrank to move the Throttle Pushrod, which goes under the Throttle Bellcrank and exits stage left.

[photo not recovered: 3f2aee7d11009250.jpg]

A Composite view. In this view, we see both end states superimposed. The bolt holding the Throttle Bellcrank (Center) is the common reference, as it is bolted to the airframe and is the pivot point for throttle control. We see that the amount of travel of the bolt that holds the elevator bellcrank (Elevator lines Throw) is exactly half the length of the travel of the leadout hold for the Throttle wire (Throttle Line Throw). (Bear in mind that with my homebrew setup I'm discounting the influence the arc of travel of the elevator bellcrank has on elevator input. It's somewhere between negligable and non-existent. And in these images, I've twisted the elevator bellcrank to expose the underlying throttle bellcrank. The whole point is that when you move the throttle on the J-Roberts handle, the throttle setting on the airplane changes but there is no difference in elevator setting.) This is the secret of J-Roberts bellcranks and handles. The entire elevator bellcrank moves half as far as the throttle line and each elevator control line carries 1/4 of the line tension load. The throttle line carries half the line tension load, adding up to the pull of the airplane on the lines. At all times the line tension is balanced, but by differentially moving the throttle line and both elevator lines in unison, the throttle is bellcrank is actuated to drive the throttle pushrod. Or whatever.

[photo not recovered: 3f2aee8411026c29.jpg]

The throttle is open. At the other extreme position, the throttle wire is closest to the pilot and the elevator bellcrank is half that distance farther away from the pilot. This gearing is accomplished by mounting the elevator bellcrank half the distance Elevator Moment Arm from the Throttle Bellcrank mounting bolt as the Throttle leadout hole Throttle Crank Moment Arm.

[photo not recovered: 3e24894a16c0a2dc.jpg]

The Throttle is 87% Open. What you get for the trouble is the ability to fly formation.

>
>>
>>If the 3-line system is the Roberts bellcrank and handle or
>>some derivative of the Roberts, the load in each of the
>>three lines is about the same. The pull test requirements
>>of 3-line systems is based the assumption that there is
>>equal pull on each of the three lines.
>
>I have a couple of the handles here, but never really looked
>at the belcrank system. Now you have got me curious as to
>how the third line becomes part of the load.

The regular part of the bellcrank is not fixed directly to the the airplane, but is connected to an intermediate lever that "floats", to which the throttle is fixed. I would explain exactly how, but this is definitely one of those picture is worth a thousand words deals. I can't remember if it throttles up or down when you lose line tension, but the line tension effects the throttle position.

>I can't remember if
>it throttles up or down when you lose line tension, but the
>line tension effects the throttle position.

Don't have my Roberts crank in front of me but believe when you pull the trigger on the handle (increasing tension on the 3rd line) you throttle up. Relaxing the trigger (increasing tension on the two elevator lines) will idle down. I suppose it would also matter if you mounted the 3 line bellcrank upside down or right side up.

I'll jump in here and confuse the issue so Bill Bischoff or Bill Calkins or Mike Greb will clear it up. The line distance from handle to bellcrank changes in flight as the throttle is actuated (per the "float" in the bellcrank previously mentioned). Whether you pull the trigger to speed up or move the trigger forward to speed up is just how the throttle arm is mounted on the carb. The mechanical magic is that as the throttle trigger is pulled, the throttle line goes forward! Most Carrier guys pull the trigger to increase speed but some set it up to increase as the trigger is moved forward(like a real airplane). Bill B. amazes me by being able to do either! His own ships are the push type, but to help others ( like me) trim or test a plane, he somehow remembers which way to go. Sorta' like George Aldrich being able to fly CC or CCW. No matter which way I turn, I 'm surrounded by talent! Best regards,

>The line
>distance from handle to bellcrank changes in flight as the
>throttle is actuated (per the "float" in the bellcrank
>previously mentioned). Whether you pull the trigger to speed
>up or move the trigger forward to speed up is just how the
>throttle arm is mounted on the carb. The mechanical magic is
>that as the throttle trigger is pulled, the throttle line
>goes forward! Best regards,

Well, actually, as the throttle line of a Roberts 3-line system or its derivitives moves forward (or back) the up and down lines move back (or forward), the distance between the handle and the bellcrank remains the same or very nearly the same depending on the relative pivot points of the double bellcrank assembly in the model. The bellcrank of the Roberts system has a few more moving parts and an offset pivot that allows the bellcrank to slide back and forth in a slotted portion of its mounting plate. It gives very positive control, nearly equal tension in all three lines and does not change the distance between the handle and the bellcrank as the third line is moved back and forth.

Kieth is correct and I stand corrected. But I had to see for myself. So I built a "simulator/mock-up" using a J Rbts. handle and bellcrank. Three pieces of thin piano wire, 10 inches long serve as lines. (Also, this got rid of 6 of the previously mentioned "slider/dogbone" clips that started this thread.) As the throttle trigger moves, the elevation lines move in the opposite direction in the mounting slot where the bellcrank "floats". Is everyone with me here? It's beautiful to behold- and here I've been utilizing these things for 10 years now and just now stopped to see how it worked! 'Sorta like a Thermos bottle, you don't need to know how it works, just be glad it does. Actually, some folks came down from Ball State some years back at the Nats and I showed them a Carrier plane's mechanical aspects for a videotape they were making, but I never saw the finished product. Anyway, I hope Leonard goes and gets a handle and tries it out. Maybe he would like some "stick" time? Best regards,

"Most Carrier guys pull the trigger to increase
speed"

Do you have any idea how often I tried to get this answer from carrier bulletin boards? Man I love this place. By the way, figured it didn't really matter and set it like that.

Hey Cy, cool bellcrank! Thanks!

There was a MA article a number of years ago describing how to make a 3 wire bellcrank using 2, 2" perfect cranks. Not quite as linear as the normal system, but perfectly compatible, much easier to make. Article also described a homebrewed handle.

Tools

>
>There was a MA article a number of years ago describing how
>to make a 3 wire bellcrank using 2, 2" perfect cranks. Not
>quite as linear as the normal system, but perfectly
>compatible, much easier to make. Article also described a
>homebrewed handle.
>
>Tools

There have been several articles published that show details for "home-made" 3-line systems. Most of these detail the bellcrank assembly as well as a handle.

Model Aviation: Jul 75
Model Aviation: Sep 95

Aeromodeller: Nov 68
Aeromodeller: Jul 72
Aeromodeller: Jul 83

Then, there is a construction article for a really neat .15 powered profile of the Dauntless SBD-3 in Model Aveiaion Nov 84. The plans detail how to make a 3-line system from two 3-inch bellcranks.

I have other articles in my file, including one from a Japanese magazine, but my copies of these do not have dates on the pages.
Aeromodeller: Jan 85

LAST EDITED ON Aug-03-03 AT 11:33 AM (CDT)
 
>>
>>There was a MA article a number of years ago describing how
>>to make a 3 wire bellcrank using 2, 2" perfect cranks. Not
>>quite as linear as the normal system, but perfectly
>>compatible, much easier to make. Article also described a
>>homebrewed handle.
>>
>>Tools
>
>
>There have been several articles published that show details
>for "home-made" 3-line systems. Most of these detail the
>bellcrank assembly as well as a handle.
>
>Model Aviation: Jul 75
>Model Aviation: Sep 95
>
>Aeromodeller: Nov 68
>Aeromodeller: Jul 72
>Aeromodeller: Jul 83
>
>Then, there is a construction article for a really neat .15
>powered profile of the Dauntless SBD-3 in Model Aveiaion Nov
>84. The plans detail how to make a 3-line system from two
>3-inch bellcranks.
>
>I have other articles in my file, including one from a
>Japanese magazine, but my copies of these do not have dates
>on the pages.
>Aeromodeller: Jan 85

The little SBD is a very neat model. I have read the MA articles, I thought that one of the most interesting bits that was brought out was that due to the way the events are flown, the Scale and Carrier guys set up their systems (at least most seem to) opposite of each other. The Scale guys use the (US standard anyway-for full size stuff) of throttle (lever) forward to increase power, and the Carrier guys do it the other way (pull back and hang on for the high-speed portion of the flight).

In a previous discussion about these, I mentioned the PERFECT steel pieces, and that Bob Zambelli had tested several brands / types and that the steel PERFECT models were the strongest.
Ted ships them with his handles...the mateial is round wire, reducing "fouling" problems. They are far and away the easiest to snap on to leadouts / lines, and seem to reduce overall problems.

Try 'em.

See Ya

LAST EDITED ON Aug-04-03 AT 03:34 AM (CDT)
 
Old Sourdough wrote:

>Or you can get them from Boondocks Sporting Goods in Eagle
>River for $3.00 a dozen for the 110 lb test size. They are
>part of some sort of tackle for downriggers. I'd try your
>local sporting goods store, though. Eagle River may be a
>ways from you.

Hmmmm..

Do they do mail order? The old scissor snap type connectors were known in the fishing trade as "McMahon Snaps" (sold by Berkeley). I used to buy them by the hundred and sell them to people at the Nats. But they are no longer being made, so I hoard them rather than sell them. If you find any, snap them up. Bob Bearden's huge stash is now in the hands of Melvin Schuette:

http://home.att.net/~mbschuette/order_form.doc

John Wright wrote:

>I have a question. Are the ratings of the various line
>connectors published. I know the Sullivans come in
>large(110 lb) and small(80 lb). Is there a rating on the
>old Perfect slider type? What about the new double J type.
>Also what are the materials? I think the Sullivans are
>brass. I just filed through a Perfect slider and its silver
>metal but non magnetic. Stainless steel? aluminium? Any
>body know? I think the new double J type are steel.
>I use Sullivan or Double J for hot 35, 40 engines and above.
> The old Perfect sliders I use for 35 and below. I figure
>that's safe enough.

I've seen three sizes of the scissor (McMahon) snaps - 80 pound, 110 pound and 165 pound test (I use these at the handle end). The slider type connector is also a fishing item - it comes in about 5 or 6 different sizes. I've never seen a pound rating for them. I've also heard (from some Chicago fliers) that they were "banned", but it turns out they've never been banned. You know how rumors get around.

I think Fox made their own sliding connectors at one time. These are marked "Fox", the fishing ones "Luxon". The fishing ones are based on brass wire, don't know about the Fox ones. I've never had them fail (as in letting the lines go) but once or twice they've sprung open due to the plane jerking on the lines after coming in. Phil Cartier wrote, in a column back in the 80s, that this might actually prevent the lines from breaking, since the connectors "give" a little when they spring open. The one time I've had the lines break was when the connectors didn't spring open (this was a 1/2-A combat model, on .012 lines, in pretty strong wind). I didn't use them in Fast Combat (used the 80 pound McMahon Snaps instead) but I did (and do) use them for Speed Limit, 1/2-A, sport flying, etc.

The scissors type connectors certainly are safer, but I have a heck of a time squeezing them in just the correct manner, in order to slip the lines into them. The fingers just aren't nimble.

So I continue with the old Perfect style.

For very small models, such as 1/2As, I don't think you even have a choice, although I may be mistaken here. So I go with the "Small" Perfects.

Don't nobody be poking me with a sharp stick, but I buy the bulk packs of SIG connectors (100/pack), cut off the wire and retain only the little slider. The clips themselves are bent up in a crude (but effective) jig and the material is .047 piano wire. Open or closed, latter being preferred, these clips are known to having been safely flown on an Impact, first with ST51 for power, now a Saito 56. No problem.

I have a whole bunch of these clips, each a little different length, achieved by trying to make them all the same length. As my hard-point handles are not adjustable, and I am not smart enough to make lines to the (claimed) standards of Brett and Ted, various clips are used to get neutral setting.

Of course it's a hassle! But so are cabled handles, to the point where I will deal with the complications without whining.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-04-03 AT 05:52 PM (CDT)
 
>The scissors type connectors certainly are safer, but I have
>a heck of a time squeezing them in just the correct manner,
>in order to slip the lines into them. The fingers just
>aren't nimble.
>
>So I continue with the old Perfect style.
>
>For very small models, such as 1/2As, I don't think you even
>have a choice, although I may be mistaken here. So I go with
>the "Small" Perfects.
>
>Currell

They used to make the McMahon snaps in a small size that was great for the 1/2A stuff. Instead of squeezing them together- try spreading the jaws apart and slip the line eyelet into the gap and then let close. I find this easier than trying to squeeze and twist...

The reason I've never had problems using McMahon Snaps was that I don't use eyelets.

Incidentally, they come in both "bright" and "dark" finishes (my supplier only had the "dark", Bearden had several hundred of the "bright"). So you'd buy some of his and some of mine, and you could end up with color coded lines..

I like Dan's idea (except I'd get the to-be-reduced-to-parts clips from a fishing supply place instead - probably cheaper). I'll bet there'd be a market for these if someone wants to mass-produce them. $2-3 a clip won't be too much if (1) you don't lose them, and (2) you use them on a CLPA airplane which took you hundreds of hours to build.

Incidentally, the sliding clips make good fuel clip-offs if you're usung a bladder. People often solder the slider to the wire, and often cut off one of the loops (or use it to screw the entire clip to the motor mounts).

**********************
Shock news from the Bladder Grabber: Phil Granderson gets beat --- by a 16 year old girl!!!!! More news to follow...

The large Luxon slider clips fail pretty consistently at the advertised 49 lb. when the slider is closed. This is more than most .018" lines are good for. With the slider open, they fail at 25 lb. I have used them in combat for more than 40 years and endeavor to close the sliders. The double-J clips are stronger, but eyelets on lines and leadouts tend to hang up on the sides of the clips, which can change the neutral bias, bind the lines, or even pull the clips open. Two ways around this are to put tubing over the clips or to inspect the clips before every takeoff. For stunt, I use the double-Js. I put tubing over the clips on the handle end. Tubing would be too draggy at the airplane end, so I try to remember to check them each flight. Combat pit stops are too hectic and pit crews too varied for inspections, which is why I use the slider type for combat.

Luxon makes larger slider clips. I got some in 1971 and still have a few of them in service. An alternative is replacing the brass wire with music wire, as Dan suggests.

Iskandar wrote:

"'Old Sourdough wrote:
Or you can get them from Boondocks Sporting Goods in Eagle River for $3.00 a dozen for the 110 lb test size. They are part of some sort of tackle for downriggers. I'd try your local sporting goods store, though. Eagle River may be a ways from you.'

Hmmmm..

Do they do mail order? The old scissor snap type connectors were known in the fishing trade as "McMahon Snaps" (sold by Berkeley)..."
===============
Iskandar,

I don't know about the mail order, but I wouldn't doubt that Boondocks would do same if the order were large enough. I last purchased a dozen 110 lb test McMahon snaps there last summer from a clear plastic box that appeared to contain three to four hundred of the snaps. According to the owner, the snaps were still readily available and not, to the best of his knowledge, discontinued.

Iskandar,

I may not have made myself clear on this. At any given time there are approximately two dozen piano wire leadouts (they look like a very long line clip, but with end which attaches to hard-point handle permanently closed) for the handles in my tool box. Complimented by the much more commonly used line clips, probably 50 or 60 of them. Plus all the models and line sets which have home-brew clips attached. Again, the longer/shorter leadouts for the handle and a bewildering array of line clips are used to adjust for neutral.

(I don't expect anybody to copy me, this is just my way of having a decent, light, and adjustable hard-point handle without having to reprogram my muscle memory for each model.)

Sounds like an interesting approach. No more lost connectors.

In my case, I make up all my lines to be the same length (within about 1/16" or so), and adjust all my airplanes so that, when you hold the ends of the leadouts together, the controls are neutral. For this reason, my handles never need to be adjusted.

From now on, whenever I make a handle, it'll have hard attachment points. I'll have to find a source for hard aluminum alloy sheet.

You might consider brass.

>You might consider brass.

OK, that should be easier to obtain. Next problem is how to cut metal. Scroll saw, I suppose.. or hacksaw. I wonder if phenolic would work on a 1/2-A handle.

On Ted's handle, is there one c-shaped metal part that forms a continuous layer under the wood grip, or are there just the two pieces of metal that bolt into the wood at both ends of the handle? How thick is the metal?

I copied him. At least I copied the guy he copied.

I always lose when it gets too cute. Yes, I copied PW's setup. At least in concept. Hard-point handles are--for me at least--the only way to go. Also quite popular here in the NW, although there is the much sought after bit of diversity involved.

While I should keep my mouth shut, last fall we were flying in Salem, Oregon, and I was taking pictures of handles, the idea being to write an article. Because we really do have a whole bunch of interesting pieces being pressed into service around here, the majority being light, simple and non-cabled handles. (The pictures were quite poor, no article within the foreseeable future.)

Over to Walker's pits I asked to see his handle and he pulled out one of those five-for-$20.00 pieces from Tom Morris. Pretty much stock. And yes, his first P-51 was hanging off the other end of the lines. I was shocked. But he has now gone back to what we call an "Impact Handle." It's a lot like Ted's unit except no moving parts: Solid sheet of brass, grips to each side of sheet, carved to fit hand. Forward upper/lower arms drilled in a similar fashion to Ted's handle, although I think the hole spacing is wider.

My own handle is not particularly worth describing, plus it requires some hard-to-find aluminum channel stock. However, I noticed this morning the overhang is within 1/16" of Fancher-designed handle with the arms fully seated in grip. So going to Ted's piece will not be a complete shock. Less the vertical grip...

Iskandar should know 1) that while his practice is okay for Combat, in Stunt we are a lot more anal about neutral settings, some of us wishing for quite precise adjustment, witness gobs and gobs of line clips, some of which vary in length by quite small amounts; 2) we will sometimes intentionally change the "neutral" setting while trimming and a little can sometimes go a long way.

>Iskandar should know 1) that while his practice is okay for
>Combat, in Stunt we are a lot more anal about neutral
>settings, some of us wishing for quite precise adjustment,
>witness gobs and gobs of line clips, some of which vary in
>length by quite small amounts; 2) we will sometimes
>intentionally change the "neutral" setting while trimming
>and a little can sometimes go a long way.

Hmm, true, but you could also 1) make lines exactly the same length (to the nearest 1/4 millimeter) fairly easily if you use more care than I do, and 2) do all your trimming on the airplane end. Start at home by hanging the airplane from the ceiling using one common connector on both leadouts and adjust neutral that way, and go from there at the field. This, of course, assumes adjustable control linkages. That way, one handle (and one set of connectors) works for all your airplanes.

Then again, handles are cheap, and stunt fliers only own 4-5 airplanes at a time (unlike Combat fliers who have a garage with 40 or 50 of them, or parts thereof) and one handle and one set of lines per plane isn't a big deal..