Stuka Stunt Control Line Forum
Archive, 2000–2021 · recovered from the Internet Archive
Forums › Stuka Stunt Main Forum

Starting construction

Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 16 of 16 known posts recovered

SteveB · Aug 07, 2000 02:04 PM

#0 source
Alright. I finally got a point where I can start doing some more building. I plan on starting my Brodak Nobler this week and just need a little advise. Where is a good place to start? The little manual says start with the fuselage, then tail surfaces, then wing and final construction. Is this a good sequence? This will be my first, real stunter - built-up fuse and all. Up to this point, it's been profiles only.

Also, any pitfalls I should know about?? Confusing bits about certain parts (i.e. - cowl, wing, fuse)?? FYI, I plan on using my Fox .35 in it with ST NVA and probably 10-5 BY&O (if I can find any).

One last question. Any advise on how to build it quickly? I want to fly it in the stunt contest in Baton Rouge, La., Oct. 21-22. Plan on painting it all purple with yellow/gold tips and nose (much like the one on the box, just P&G, instead of blue and white).

Thanks in advance for all hints, tips, advise, etc. And once more, welcome back Len.

Tight lines to all,

Steve Berry
AMA 628018
-------------------------------------
Texas - The "Heart" of Modern Stunt!!

The Kiwi · Aug 07, 2000 02:18 PM

#1 source
> The little manual says start with the fuselage,
> then tail surfaces, then wing and final construction.
> Is this a good sequence?

I don't think that there is any "best" sequence. But I will say that it is far easier to cover a wing that hasn't been attached to a fuselage yet. Thus, if you do build the wing first, you will have things to do on the plane while waiting for the paint coats to dry enough to add the next one.

> This will be my first, real stunter - built-up fuse
>and all. Up to this point, it's been profiles only.
>
>Also, any pitfalls I should know about??

I haven't built a Nobler in donkey's years, but the Green Box kit's nose had a tendency to come off..

>Confusing bits about certain parts (i.e. - cowl, wing,
>fuse)?? FYI, I plan on using my Fox .35 in it with ST
>NVA and probably 10-5 BY&O (if I can find any).
>
The Nobler design, in my book, is right at the limit of plane sizes that you can fly reliably with an average Fox .35 once you put a muffler on it.
>
>One last question. Any advise on how to build it
>quickly? I want to fly it in the stunt contest in
>Baton Rouge, La., Oct. 21-22.

I'm the wrong one to ask about that. I have a 20 year old Chipmunk here that I never did put the canopy on. It spent a dozen years just "in the clear" before getting the base color (although it was test-flown some without color, when it was pretty new).


Kiwi

LNeumann · Aug 07, 2000 02:36 PM

#2 source
LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-00 AT 00:19 AM (EST)

Although I have sold the kit, I have never opened one up, so I don't know how John did this one. The original did not use plywood doublers. I would add 1/32 birch plywood doublers from the front all the way back to at least the middle of the wing. I would add 1/2 inch balsa cross grained between the motor mounts to form a crutch and then eliminate any formers ahead of the gear. This becomes the bottom of the tank compartment. Add an 1/8 inch piece 1 and 1/8 to 1 1/4 below the mount to form the bottom of the tank compartment and then use a tank with all tubes forward that you can then wedge in and remove or shim up or down at will. Beter yet, add 1/8 inch phenolic motor mounts to the maple under the engine and then raise the mount so the thrustline remains the same. Then with a 1 1/4 inch high box you have 1/8 inch up or down with which to adjust the tank.
Make sure to add adjustable leadouts and adjustable tip weight box, and you should be well on your way to building a good airplane. Put a tongue muffler on the Fox. It only weighs 1/2 an ounce and keeps the weight down. Build everything straight--forget off sets. A good prop would be either a 10 x 5 or 10 x 6 BY&O. These are available again now. Keep the finish weight down and it should prove to be a good flying plane.

Leonard Neumann

Nils · Aug 11, 2000 12:01 AM

#10 source
<>
Uhh, Leonard, I realize you know WAY more about this stuff than I do, but isn't that an awful lot of prop for a Fox .35? Did you mean 10-5 maybe?
Nils

LNeumann · Aug 11, 2000 12:21 AM

#11 source
LAST EDITED ON Aug-12-00 AT 03:48 AM (EST)

For a Fox 35 it sure is. I meant 10 x 5. This was probably one of those messages I wrote in the middle of the night. I went back and edited the message so it made more sense. Thanks for correcting my "boo boo".

Leonard Neumann

Nils · Aug 12, 2000 12:18 AM

#12 source
I wouldn't have said anything except I was concerned that a beginner might not realize it was a typo & try putting a 12-5 on a Fox .35
Nils

Jim T. · Aug 12, 2000 04:36 PM

#13 source
Good for you. I used to run Zinger 11 x 5's on my Foxes. The first couple of times I tried them (switch from Rev-Up 10 x 6 wide) I was flying 10 feet behind the airplane on take-off. The lower pitch gives better acceleration out of corners, I think. If I were to run a Fox today, I'd start out with a 10 x 5 or a 10.5 x 4. 5 APC.

Jim Thomerson

Jim T. · Aug 07, 2000 11:04 PM

#3 source
I was fortunate to see George Aldrich build one from scratch. It took him only a week, so I can tell you how to build one quick. You get up at 6AM, have a cup of coffee and sit down at the building board. At 12 you take a potty break and eat a cheeseburger that someone brings in for you. At 6 you take another potty break and go out for supper. At 7:30 you are back at the building board. You build until 12 and then go to bed. Next morning you do it again, and so on until the airplane is finished.

Have fun, Jim Thomerson

LNeumann · Aug 08, 2000 01:17 AM

#4 source
LAST EDITED ON Aug-12-00 AT 03:51 AM (EST)

And then you put a "Plain Jane" finish on it, which is pretty much what they did in those days, anyway. A good finish to today's standards (Nat's judging) can take twice as long as the actual building.

Leonard Neumann

Jim T. · Aug 08, 2000 07:25 AM

#5 source
I didn't get to watch George finish it, as I was gone for a day or two, but it was covered with yellow tissue, areas were masked off, then it was sprayed with metallic purple dope. The letters, numbers, pinstripes, etc. were done freehand.

I'd agree with Len; spend time practiceing rather than sanding on this one, given your time schedule.

Jim

Alan Hahn · Aug 08, 2000 08:22 AM

#6 source
I would say that the instruction booklet which comes with this plane is very complete, so why not follow it?
Windy U. has a whole series of video tapes on building this kit. He has a web site (but I don't recall the address right now). I bet this web site has a link to it somewhere.

Alan

Rocket City Jim · Aug 08, 2000 09:21 AM

#7 source
Windy's URL is:

Http://www/windyurtnowski.com

He has a club feature with his web site, and club members can get special discounts on certain items from his shop.

Rocket City Jim

Garf · Aug 12, 2000 10:39 PM

#14 source

"SAVE ALL THE PIECES"-Phil Brown

Bigiron13 · Aug 08, 2000 10:26 AM

#8 source
My experience with Brodak products has been . If you read the instructionbooklet through and follow the instructions and plans, you can not go wrong. His instructions and plans are the best there are.
Bigiron

peabody · Aug 08, 2000 06:32 PM

#9 source
I strongly suggest that anyone building one of these kits contact Windy and get one of his fibreglass cowls. They save many hours, are more than likely lighter, and look great!

Windy also offers a molded turtleback and nose piece.... the turtleback is a big aid, the nose piece might be better if carved.

This is a good kit. Read and follow the directions and it should fly well!

See Ya

Peabody

Steve · Aug 19, 2000 05:57 PM

#15 source
When I bought the Brodak Nobler I was overwhelmed by the amount of sanding I had to do to shape this plane. It was the hardest kit I ever built but in the end I had a Nobler with a Fox 35 and I personally thought it was underpowered but it flys good and I am still having fun flying it today. I do not think I would build another one but for me it was a learning experience in building and shaping with a belt sander.