Akromaster okay for PAW .09?

Would it be a mistake to match this engine and plane? Is the Akromaster too heavy? I really don't want to fork out for another engine until I get at least one plane to work well with the current one, so I'd like to find a suitable kit.

I promise I'll build it just like the plans and instructions say!

Thanks
Jonathan

>Would it be a mistake to
>match this engine and plane?
> Is the Akromaster too
>heavy? I really don't
>want to fork out for
>another engine until I get
>at least one plane to
>work well with the current
>one, so I'd like to
>find a suitable kit.

Back around 1974, I think Hobby Lobby had some Tyro 09 diesels that they were clearing out. I bought one, mixed up my own fuel, and flew it on a stock Sig Akromaster that perviously had been powered by a Fox 15. As I recall, the plane flew every bit as well, and used about an ounce of fuel (or less) per flight. I think I flew it on .012" x 52' lines.

I am sure that the PAW is better built than my old .09, and might be a bit heavier. The Akromaster was designed around the Fox 15 / OS Max 15 engine, which might mean that it will come out nose heavy with the PAW. So, perhaps a little nose shortening might be in the works for proper balance. My Akromaster was nose heavy with my .09, and if I was to build another I would shorten the nose about a half an inch.

Trying to find diesel fuel in the early-mid 1970s as a kid in Maine was interesting. Kerosene and castor were no problem, but I had to resort to asking an oral surgeon on my paper route if he could come up with the ether. He must have trusted me, as he gave me enough (after some stern warnings on its safe use) to make up what eventually amounted to a couple of gallons of fuel. This was before people made crack cocaine with ether.

Best of luck.

I'd be wary of using a 0.09 diesel in place of a Fox .15 even though the Nobler designed for a .35 Fox can be flown with a PAW .19 TBR. George Aldrich recommended this size ro me a few years ago when I was considering this combination.

Tony Eifflander of the PAW factory did fly such a combination and according to Gig, his dad, he found it rather marginally powered.

I urge you to find a UK plan from the http://www.modelflying.co.uk web site or the http://www.xlistplans.demon.co.uk website.

What exactly do you want to achieve with your next plane:

Level flight with a few swoops without falling over or crashing.

or

Simple manoeuvres including wingovers, loops, lazy eights and inverted flight?

You might as well build a plane designed specifically for a 0.09 diesel and the UK has bucket loads of plans that will fit the bill.

Sadly the Keil Kraft range is out of production as the Phantom would meet the first requirement and the Marquis the second.

I can supply the Mercury Picador plans, a lovely combat wing style sports/stunter. Flies a treat on 35' - 40' lines. Didn't you mention that you had a combat wing plan?...build from that and cover it in nylon or silk. You should have an unbeatable and robust intro to stunting that way.

>Back around 1974, I think Hobby
>Lobby had some Tyro 09
>diesels ......flew it on a
>stock Sig Akromaster that perviously
>had been powered by a
>Fox 15. .......per flight.
>I think I flew it
>on .012" x 52' lines.
>
I have flown a few PAW 0.09 powered planes on 52' lines and suffered from a lack of line tension if there was anything stronger than a zephyr blowing. 40' lines is a better choice.

>
>I am sure that the PAW
>is better built than my
>old .09, and might be
>a bit heavier.

It's very likely, the PAW's are not renowned for their lightness though the earlier models with the vertical venturis are lighter.
>
>Trying to find diesel fuel in
>the early-mid 1970s as a
>kid in Maine was interesting.
> Kerosene and castor were
>no problem, but I had
>to resort to asking an
>oral surgeon on my paper
>route if he could come
>up with the ether.
>He must have trusted me,
>as he gave me enough
>(after some stern warnings on
>its safe use) to make
>up what eventually amounted to
>a couple of gallons of
>fuel. This was before
>people made crack cocaine with
>ether.

US modellers have my sympathy there....
As a kid it was amazing what I could purchase from the local pharmacists ostensibly for my chemistry set....grin. Even now I can get hold of ether from several pharmacists though I can get it cheaper through some other semi official channels and even cheaper at UK modelling shows. To be honest though, it's less hassle to buy ready mixed brews for sports flying though I am likely to resort to custom brews when i indulge in team racing next year.

Having to resort to getting the ether from diesel engine quick start aerosol packs seems to be a pretty desperate and expensive way to get your hands on ether in the US!

Go for it get a plan and build from scratch. It's only marginally longer to build especially if you cut a kit of parts first. I'd recommend that you cut out two kits and assemble them both. It's only marginally slower than building a single plane as you can work on one while the glue is drying on the other. You then have the benefit of having a spare at the ready should you suffer a mishap.

Best Wishes

I never had the opportunity to watch GMA fly . Those that have told me two things: 1- He liked to fly slow 2- In his prime, he could fly just about anything well.

>You might as well build a
>plane designed specifically for a
>0.09 diesel and the UK
>has bucket loads of plans
>that will fit the bill.

I still have two Akromaster Kits in the attic, and may throw one together real fast install that old .09 diesel, and fly it on my one remaining set of 52' .012" lines just to see if I remember correctly. But I do recall the Akromaster flew very, very well with the .09 diesel.

>US modellers have my sympathy there....
>
>As a kid it was amazing
>what I could purchase from
>the local pharmacists ostensibly for
>my chemistry set....grin. Even
>now I can get hold
>of ether from several pharmacists
>though I can get it
>cheaper through some other semi
>official channels and even cheaper
>at UK modelling shows.
>To be honest though, it's
>less hassle to buy ready
>mixed brews for sports flying
>though I am likely to
>resort to custom brews when
>i indulge in team racing
>next year.

Diesel fuel is not all that common here in the States. Because of the warmer temperatures and high humidity of my adopted state of Gawga, I would prefer to add the ether to small batches of fuel as needed rather than mix up a couple gallons of fuel all at once (or buy a gallon of pre mixed fuel). However, ordering a quantity of premix may be my only option.

I do remember one thing though - my surprise on how long a model diesel 09 ran on a couple of ounces of fuel. When I got it no one in my area knew anything about diesels. In fact, I tried to start it with plain old diesel fuel. You could get the compression to the point that it would ignite, but it would not run, and I had some sore fingers for a while. I finally found a book in the local library that mentioned model diesels and what was needed to make fuel. My next mistake was to fill the two ounce tank I used for the old Fox 15 to the top. After about ten minutes I stopped and just did lazy eights until the engine finally sputtered, and I can't remember how long that took, but I remember that I started to wonder if it would quit prior to the sun setting.

>Having to resort to getting the
>ether from diesel engine quick
>start aerosol packs seems to
>be a pretty desperate and
>expensive way to get your
>hands on ether in the
>US!

I don't know of any of the other ways to get ether. Perhaps there are some other methods or sources out there.

I recently bought a gallon of Eric Clutton's Old English Mix, and it is good stuff. I've finally gone to the sealed quart can with tubes and suck fuel out with a Sullivan(?) black for gas squeeze bulb. Previously, I handled diesel fuel like I would glo fuel, maybe a little more dilligent in getting the cap back on tight.

>What exactly do you want to
>achieve with your next plane:

I'm looking to do loops, eights, inverted flight etc. Maybe even squares.

>You might as well build a
>plane designed specifically for a
>0.09 diesel and the UK
>has bucket loads of plans
>that will fit the bill.

Hmm... been burned by that before. My Minilord was supposed to be for a 1.5cc engine and everyone seems to agree that it is far too small, and that the same goes for most British models. That's why I'm really keen to find a model that people agree should work well with this engine. Build it and then tinker from that known good setup. If I can't get that to work then *I'm* doing something wrong, rather than having the wrong bits.

Here's a list of proven designs, I've either flown them or seen them flown well with a PAW 0.09

Mercury Picador - liked it so much I built another two, wore two out and gave one away. Got a fourth one on the boards. My pal learned looping and inverted flight with his. I'd recommend a 1/64" or 1/32" ply core to the tail fin to make it crash resistant. I can supply plans for this.

As an indiactor of what a Picador looks like here's a picture of its big brother (50% bigger), the Toreador's air frame

[photo not recovered: toreador.jpg]

Rascal - a long established small engine stunt/sports model by Ron Moulton will do just about everything apart from squares here's a picture of ine powered by a 0.09 Silver Swallow Replica

[photo not recovered: rascal.jpg]

You can ge the plans from the Nexus/Aeromodeller website

Mercury Marvin - designed to fy well with 0.06 - 0.09 diesels. Not yet built one but I saw an AM diesel powered one win a mini class at the Wharfedale club last summer. I have the plans for this one too.

Cheshire Kitten - Tony Elmore has shown a reduced plan in one of his posts..it's a nice flier too!

>
>>You might as well build a
>>plane designed specifically for a
>>0.09 diesel and the UK
>>has bucket loads of plans
>>that will fit the bill.
>
>Hmm... been burned by that before.
>My Minilord was supposed to
>be for a 1.5cc engine
>and everyone seems to agree
>that it is far too
>small,

I really beg to differ. The Minilord flies well though it is a little twitchy though that is a trait of combat designs. Its big brother the Warlord is dream to fly with a 0.15 diesel but needs to be 'tamed' by adding lead at the front and reducing elevator throw to slow down the manoeuvres if you want to try a stunt schedule. Combat wings are designed to fly fast and turn really tight circles and unless modified attempting the stunt shcedule can be frustrating.

and that the same
>goes for most British models.

I have not heard that from any UK lips

> That's why I'm really
>keen to find a model
>that people agree should work
>well with this engine.
>Build it and then tinker
>from that known good setup.
> If I can't get
>that to work then *I'm*
>doing something wrong, rather than
>having the wrong bits.

Here are some factors than can contibute to a less than satisfactory performance from any plane.

Excessive elevator throw - keep it to 30 degrees or less, more movement does not lead to tighter turns it leads to stalling and 'mushing out'. This can be controlled by using the holes in the elevator horn that are closer to the elevator or using and adjustable handle - see later comments

Line length too long. In the UK's windy climate I'd consider 40' to be the max length for a beginner/improver with a 0.09 diesel powered plane. Look at the competition rules from the BMFA and find a longer line length for the 1/2A (0.09 in the UK) classes if you can. You may find that the 1/2A vintage team race class has 42' lines chosen deliberately to slow the rotation speed down for the other flyers who might otherwise fall over . I've flown on 52' lines and the lack of line tension is not confidence inspiring especially if there is a light breeze which all but eliminates the line tension in the upwind part of the circle. This year it was too windy for 52' lines only twice: once for seven months and once for two

Build light - it's amazing what careful wood selection can do for the weight of a plane. If you ever get a chance to examine the wood content of a Brodak kit do so. I was frightened by the apparent fragility of the low density of the Nobler kit's balsa and amazed by the assembled kit's strength. Lighter planes turn better - I am sure that I have seen a quote here 'build to fly not to survive a crash'

Line spacing at the handle - try to get an adjustable handle that allow the line spacing to be adjusted. Close line spacing reduces the responses of the flying surfaces and the typical fixed spacing of the UK model shop supplied handles are perhaps a little too wide. I persevered with mine until I flew with an adjustable handle with closer line spaceing. It transformed the behaviour of a wayward plane as it reduced the effects of over compensation for its wayward behaviour.

I know that I am coming from a different direction than most of the respondees (I am a UK based diesel flyer with a few glow motors as opposed to a US glow motor flyer with a few diesels ). I can assure you that my comments are both valid and proven - I have carried home plenty of re-kitted planes from 1969 onwards caused by me ignoring my own assertions and seen many succesful flights of the models mentioned in this and my previous posts.

I will concede however, that the saving grace of a kit is its build speed

Vernon
(who still thinks you should get a bigger engine - grins, ducks and exits )

My experience was slightly different. Granted it was a long time ago, and my memory may be wrong, but for me it wasn't twitchy enough. It simply didn't turn well.

Thanks for your other suggestions Vernon. My elevator currently has a massive amount of variability, from almost no deflection to about 45 degrees. I usually use about 30 degs like you say. My last model... now that was a bit silly. I had 90 degs throw, on a huge elevator. Not great.

My lines are about 40 feet, my handle is not adjustable but it's about 3" line seperation and I've set the controls so that a small handle movement won't result in huge surface throws.

>Vernon
>(who still thinks you should get
>a bigger engine - grins,
>ducks and exits )

Heh heh, I'm veering that way but I don't think my fiancee will approve of splashing out until I can at least show some results on what I have. I'm the same too, I'm happy to spend time and balsa building something new but I would really like to get my engine doing something good. Since I've worked out its starting foibles I've become rather attached to it!

I've ferretted out the Minilord plans and I'm going to build one. It's just a case of deciding whether to stick with tht 25" span or to scale it to say 30.

I wonder if the C of G was in the right place or even if the plane used oak or lignum vitae? If it was a plane built during your impetuous youth, you may have ignore the C of G thinking that it didn't matter...been there and done that

>My
>last model... now that was
>a bit silly. I had
>90 degs throw, on a
>huge elevator. Not great.

You want to see the Bi-Slob with its barn door sized elevator and 80 degree movement not to mention flaps on both wings.
>
>
>My lines are about 40 feet,
>my handle is not adjustable
>but it's about 3" line
>seperation and I've set the
>controls so that a small
>handle movement won't result in
>huge surface throws.

Stick with 40' you wont be far wrong.
>
>
>>Vernon
>>(who still thinks you should get
>>a bigger engine - grins,
>>ducks and exits )
>

>Since I've worked out its
>starting foibles I've become rather
>attached to it!

Never suggested that you parted with it only that it might be lonely

At the extremes of size, I am building a PAW .60 powered combat/sports stunt wing. I'll need hawsers and crampons to keep it and me under control.

I also have a couple of 0.2cc diesels destined primarily for free flight but I just might build a small control line plane for the living room (or back garden if my wife's at home)

I have put a spare one on Ebay see item number 1646808330

>I've ferretted out the Minilord plans
>and I'm going to build
>one. It's just a
>case of deciding whether to
>stick with tht 25" span
>or to scale it to
>say 30.

I have another small combat wing design that you might be interested in: Mini Early Bird. I'll do a swap with you if you are interested.

Not sure about the C of G. Possibly it was way out. My dad built the airframe, I just covered it. Unfortunately I don't have full plans, just instructions (which don't include the CofG) and I know the wingspan so I'm interpolating from there. The instructions have lots of measurements on them so they're quite useful.

Where should the CofG be on a minilord, or even a warlord in terms of %MAC?

>I also have a couple of
>0.2cc diesels destined primarily for
>free flight but I just
>might build a small control
>line plane for the living
>room (or back garden if
>my wife's at home)

Blimey, I managed to coat a whole garage with castor when I did my engine test runs in it as a lad. A living room?! That'll take some cleaning up!

>I have another small combat wing
>design that you might be
>interested in: Mini Early Bird.
> I'll do a swap
>with you if you are
>interested.

Like I say, I don't have real plans, so you wouldn't be impressed with your end of the bargain! I'll try the minilord build first and, if it works, I can always send you a copy of my redrawn plans.

I have a part kit (more acurately a clone as I cut a spare set of parts eons ago and lost some of them during house moves) and as I'm not into forensic archeology so I'll leave it alone 'til more pressing building needs are met.
>
>Where should the CofG be on
>a minilord, or even a
>warlord in terms of %MAC?

I'll dig out the Warlord plans and have a look at the weekend. Can't help you with the MiniLord

>Blimey, I managed to coat a
>whole garage with castor when
>I did my engine test
>runs in it as a
>lad. A living room?!
> That'll take some cleaning
>up!

The garden is definitely a starter the living room is a non starter unless I use 10' lines though I have successfully flown rubber powered living room sticks there. When ir's due for red

I have had one or two motors running in the kitchen with very little mess before I got my shed.

>I'll
>try the minilord build first
>and, if it works, I
>can always send you a
>copy of my redrawn plans.

I wish I could help with the Minilord C of G.