"Fancherized" Twister

There were two references to this article in response to my "Re-Starting" post a few days ago. I think I remember this from "Stunt News" a few years (maybe 10) ago.

Can someone tell me which issue, please? It will save me at least a week of paging through back issues, once I unpack them . . .

Thanks

The articles were in Model Aviation, August, September, and October, 1987. If you do not have those magazines, and if you are an AMA member, you can access the article in the on-line archives in the AMA's web site.

Ya know, I always get a kick out of the endless inquiries as to the "Fancherized" SIG Twister, where to get the plans, need copies of the article, blah, blah, blah.

Hey, people, a stock Twister is more than merely competent, not to mention a lot quicker and easier to build.

I think the best advice, should one have a Twister and be considering building and flying it, is to just build the thing, learn as much as you can and then move on to other designs.

Or, looked at a different way, if you want more performance than you believe is available from a stock Twister, buy a more current kit or set of plans.

There are a huge number of really good choices out there, this fascination with the F'd T. strikes me as (mildly) counter-productive. No matter the quality of the work Ted did so many years ago on this basic design, there is just no way the best modded Twister in the world can compete with a profile Cardinal, Mikey's Force or Primary Force, a whole passle of today's current kits.

, there is just no
>way the best modded Twister in the world can compete with a
>profile Cardinal, Mikey's Force or Primary Force, a whole
>passle of today's current kits.
>
>Dan

Dan,

We'll see!

The Twister hasn't been modded with the things i'm going to do to it!

Have to be careful what I say here, it may sound like I'm blowing my own trumpet! I flew in my first stunt contest since 1968 recently. This year I had practiced (and eventually crashed) about 20 flights on a profile Nobler, first attempts at the manoeuvres since then. At this point I had still not completed a horz. sq. 8 or clover, or a complete pattern. When I got to the contest I was loaned what I believe was a standard Twister, Fox 35. With no test flight I went in and flew a complete (bad) pattern, (someone had to call the order of the manoeuvres for me!). This felt real good, but the bottom line is the model was up to it. With a less good model I have no doubt I would have crashed. I can't overemphasise how impressed I was with this Twister, although a club hack I suspect it had been very well set up. To bring me back to earth, yes, I came last!

Dan,

We'll see!

The Twister hasn't been modded with the things i'm going to do to it!

Jim Pollock

Jim,

Thanks for giving me an idea for the ultimate Twister Mod.

Buy a SIG Twister kit.

Buy a Brodak profile Cardinal kit.

Build the latter.

Rob former of "Twister" decal.

Place decal on wing of Cardinal.

Tell everybody at the field there is a very hard to find "Final Edition" of Ted's rework instructions for the Twister and your model is the result, but there was a most unfortunate fire in your shop, and well...

Where did the word "Fancherized" come from?

Does "Fancherized" have some special meaning?

The name came from Ted Fancher......

>Where did the word "Fancherized" come from?
>
>Does "Fancherized" have some special meaning?

The term "Fancherized" comes from the last name of the man who did the mods, Ted Fancher. Ted is a former NATs Open Champion and consistently places in the top three. He is a frequent contributor here. When Ted does speak, one should listen, as his posts are a gold mine of theory and practice from years of experience and success.

In the mid-late 1980s, during the dark years for CL Stunt, Ted was the CL stunt editor for the AMA's flagship magazine, "Model Aviation." Back then there were few competitive CL profile kits. During the course of three months, Ted took the Twister and made a number of easilly accomplished mods that enhanced the design's capabilities. Each month had a different phase of construction, finishing, and trimming. It is a "must read" for any intermediate flyer.

>>Where did the word "Fancherized" come from?
>>
>>Does "Fancherized" have some special meaning?
>
>The term "Fancherized" comes from the last name of the man
>who did the mods, Ted Fancher. Ted is a former NATs Open
>Champion and consistently places in the top three. He is a
>frequent contributor here. When Ted does speak, one should
>listen, as his posts are a gold mine of theory and practice
>from years of experience and success.
>
>In the mid-late 1980s, during the dark years for CL Stunt,
>Ted was the CL stunt editor for the AMA's flagship magazine,
>"Model Aviation." Back then there were few competitive CL
>profile kits. During the course of three months, Ted took
>the Twister and made a number of easilly accomplished mods
>that enhanced the design's capabilities. Each month had a
>different phase of construction, finishing, and trimming.
>It is a "must read" for any intermediate flyer.
>
>Bob Kruger
>

Agreed on all counts, especially the "must read" comments.

However, and as you note, the situation prompting Ted to design a modified/customized/Fancherized Twister no longer exists. It's far past time for us to simply move on to better stuff...

The "Doctor," as an example. Ted didn't have any of the *limitations* (Hey! Ted, I've got the name for your new model, sticking with the "tions" precedent) presented by the kit, instead it was clean-sheet design. Plus the plans are readily available from PAMPA, putting some money in our treasury. Plus the article is readily available, ditto. Plus it is, quite simply, a much better design regardless of the fact it doesn't have flaps. In fact, maybe it is a *better* design for this same reason.