Walker FIRECAT

Dalke, in the latest SN shows the Jim Walker FIRECAT. I have heard that Walker tried to compete with the popular Ringmaster S-1. It looks to be similar to Ringmaster.

Does FIRECAT compare with Ringmaster? If so, why not see more of FIRECAT at OTS? Maybe it was too late for OTS?

This was discussed on this forum in great detail a couple of years back. My recollection of the discussion is that the Firecat goes back several years before the Ringmaster, including a small run of kits. It was later released as a Jim Walker kit after the OTS end of '52 deadline. If I recall correctly, the Sterling Ringmaster came out late in '52. Can't say why you don't see more firecats. I did see one for sale in an antique shop.

All of that may well be the case, but I can tell you that very early in my Stunt flying I once entered OTS with a Firecat. It was at the NW Regionals, Don McClave was the ED, he is very knowledgable and from Portland, Oregon, the city where Jim Walker did business.

I got booted for not having an OTS-legal model. As I was an FNG, and a refuge from the Combat circle, I was allowed to fly both rounds, my scores were posted. But no glory.

Undeterred I entered something called "Nostalgia Stunt," having no idea what was involved but told the Firecat was legal. Beat 'em all, including whomever ratted me out in OTS.

(NS later became Classic Stunt, it is worth noting Don was also ED for NS, thus the level of competition was low enough for me to prevail.)

>If so, why not see more of FIRECAT at OTS?
>
>Floyd

Can't speak to the OTS legal issue, but I can say you do see an occasional Firecat at VSC.

Cy

My recollection is that Bob Smurthwaite confirmed that he had designed what later became the Firecat in '49, made some kits, went to work for AJ, and eventually the design was kitted there. Isn't there an online list of eligible OTS and Classic designs someplace? I know there's Dave Day's in England, but not sure their regs are the same as ours, regarding the date of design issue. The Aussie Regs are really different than ours. Steve

by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

TCI with Frank Macey's permission had made a truly great reproduction of the Firecat. The wood and cutting was superb and everything but glue and motor was included. All the bolts were hardened cap screws. I bought and still have 2 of them. My first with a Fox 35 ABC has well over 200 flights and is really one of my favorite profiles. Truthfully it has more appeal to me then the Ringmaster, and yes I have one of those too. Second one has an OS25FP dieselized, flies a little faster and longer then the Fox job.
This is one profile kit that i wish was still available

When the TCI kit came out, John Miske commented that it was too late to be OTS eligible.......
I tend to believe him.

See Ya

>When the TCI kit came out, John Miske commented that it was
>too late to be OTS eligible.......
>I tend to believe him.
>
>See Ya
>
>Peabody

I have a letter from Bob Smurthwaite written in 1988. In this letter he states that Jim and Bob flew and KITTED the Firecat before the RINGMASTER. Jim had the kit and plane at a hobby show in Chicago. The next year the Ringmaster came out. NOW here in the NORTHWEST because of this letter from Frank Macy the FIRECAT is OTS legal. When TCI and Frank Macy decided to reproduce the Firecat they both made sure that it was OTS LEGAL. Now at VSC I hear that it’s allowed.

>When the TCI kit came out, John Miske commented that it was
>too late to be OTS eligible.......
>I tend to believe him.

Only in GSCB.

The early VSC was patterned after the GSCB rules; i.e., the OTS plane MUST have been PUBLISHED OR KITTED prior to 12/31/52. It was only recently that VSC folks realized that many models were designed and flown prior to the cut-of date, but, it is only chance or dumb luck that any particular design attracted magazine editors or kit manufacturers.

Since the revision of VSC OTS eligibility, many neat-o OTS models have shown up at VSC. I think this has given a real boost to the OTS movement. It has also spurred my own interest in some obscure (but perfectly legal) OTS models.

I hope the GSCB will someday get with the program.

>>When the TCI kit came out, John Miske commented that it was
>>too late to be OTS eligible.......
>>I tend to believe him.
>
> Only in GSCB.
>
> Brett

What are you trying to say, Brett?

If it wasn't for a Garden State Circle Burner named John Miske starting the event, old time stunt would not exist.

The OTS elgibility date is the same for pampa and gscb old time stunt.

LAST EDITED ON Jul-26-04 AT 11:18 AM (CDT)
 
>>>When the TCI kit came out, John Miske commented that it was
>>>too late to be OTS eligible.......
>>>I tend to believe him.
>>
>> Only in GSCB.
>>
>> Brett
>
>What are you trying to say, Brett?

That it's not legal by GSCB standards. but it appears to be using PAMPA standards. "Only" of course refers to the fact that most people no longer use GSCB rules as the PAMPA rules are far less restrictive.

>
>If it wasn't for a Garden State Circle Burner named John
>Miske starting the event, old time stunt would not exist.

A point not in dispute, nor did I mention anything about that.

>
>The OTS elgibility date is the same for pampa and gscb old
>time stunt.

Date is the same, criteria is NOT the same. To be legal in GSCB, it has to on their list, and to be on the list, it has to have been published or kitted before the cutoff date. For PAMPA, there is no list. It has to be published, kitted, or designed (with sufficient documentation) before the cutoff, even though it was not kitted or published prior to then.

"Sufficient" is of course in the eye of the beholder, so you can spend many happy hours debating whether someone it cheating, or not.

Attempts to reconcile the two sets of rules have not met with success, but that's not much of a problem as far as I am concerned. If you want to change the PAMPA rules, there is a process, which I encourage you to follow.

Of course, you knew all that already, so I presume you simply want to start an argument, or for reasons of your own, "tweak" me. I won't get into a "directed urination" contest with you over it. Follow applicable rules for the contests you enter, I don't care which.

Brett, all you have to do is be a bit clearer when you make statements. The statement "only in GSCB" could have been taken a couple of different ways.

And I didn't say anything about changing the pampa rules.

You did.

Although the construction differs, the wings of the two models are very similar. Currell

Floyd is referring to the PAMPA rules for OTS eligability. If you look through magazines of the period you will see many very interesting models which will never be reconstructed because the photo is all there is to show that they existed.

As to the statement that the kit was produced too late for GSCB rules; existance of the earlier kits mentioned above was not generally known until recently.

The most extensive list of OTS airplanes I know of is on Dave Day's webbsite, and it is surely incomplete. It is some 17 pages long. I don't recall if the Firecat is listed.

>Although the construction differs, the wings of the two
>models are very similar. Currell

Never thought I'd say anything like this, but I think the Ringmaster is a superior design, both structurally, and from an overall design standpoint.

Sort of makes you want to go BLECKKK, Bill Werage said that he built
a few, but because of the wing placement, it wouldn't turn equally
insides vs outsides.

Walte

This is why "stupid kit collectors" like myself are good to have around. Preservation of the design.

Bill

>>Although the construction differs, the wings of the two
>>models are very similar. Currell
>
> Never thought I'd say anything like this, but I think
>the Ringmaster is a superior design, both structurally, and
>from an overall design standpoint.
>
> Brett

Yeah, I would rate either the S-1 or S-1A over the Firecat for wing construction. The Firebird doesn't have a spar, similar to various PDQ ships, and both the LE and TE have fussy little notches.

You were right about the OS 15 FP on a Ringmaster. It is so easy to fly, and very quiet with the stock OS muffler. The entire package, partly kit S1-A wing and partly scratch, came out to 22 ounces. The only thing I didn't do is go with 60 foot lines; it is on 52 foot ones.

>>>Although the construction differs, the wings of the two
>>>models are very similar. Currell
>>
>> Never thought I'd say anything like this, but I think
>>the Ringmaster is a superior design, both structurally, and
>>from an overall design standpoint.
>>
>> Brett
>
>Yeah, I would rate either the S-1 or S-1A over the Firecat
>for wing construction. The Firebird doesn't have a spar,
>similar to various PDQ ships, and both the LE and TE have
>fussy little notches.

Well, to be entirely candid, the structural design of both models is dreadful. The spar right down the middle of the ribs probably does as much harm as good. It adds to the load by adding weight, but doesn't provide any significant improvement in wing strength since it's too close to the center.

>
>You were right about the OS 15 FP on a Ringmaster. It is so
>easy to fly, and very quiet with the stock OS muffler. The
>entire package, partly kit S1-A wing and partly scratch,
>came out to 22 ounces. The only thing I didn't do is go with
>60 foot lines; it is on 52 foot ones.

I think it would be worth a try on longer lines. It's not like it's hard to switch back and forth. But glad you enjoy it; probably flies better than most beginner/imtermediate models.

The Firecat is one of the old planes i always intended to build to go along with a couple ringmasters i have. By the time i got around to ordering one from TCI it was too late . I hear they went belly up. Has anyone started to produce the kits again ? Tom

Don't know if anyone makes kits now, but I finished one that a friend of mine started from a TCI kit. My friend built the wing so I guess the hard part was done. I just put it all together and covered it. I have to find some lighter landing gear for it though - I cannibalized the gear that came with the kit for a Combat Streak, and used some R/C gear before realizing that it was entirely too heavy. I'm now considering using plain old wire gear and some light wheels. Here's my Firecat, anyone have pic's of theirs?

Regards,

I know the person that bought all of the TCI stock of the Firecat and that includes all of the sheets, fuselage's, ribs, plans and even the box lables. Boxes of the stuff, even the hardware that went into the kit. The kit will be available a little later on when he gets time to inventory all the stuff and get it together. I got one of the kits and it is really a beautiful kit! That's all I can tell at this time. More info later.

Another detail that was not so wonderful on the original Firecat is the aluminum sheet landing gear. It bends too easily. Not a bad idea, but the material is too pliable.

Was there an improvement on the TCI version?

I thought their plans, with perspective views, were better vs Ringmaster. And Sterling, generally.

When I lived in Atlanta I knew a modeler, Chuck Sikes, an Easter Airline pilot who flew a very good stunt pattern, actually won one of the Marietta contests in the 70's, who had a ringmaster with the venerable Johnson 33 that flew as well as any stunt ship of the day. He liked it better than his nobler. His secret to the setup was an 18 ounce target weight and the light weight, powerful Johnson 33. I flew it myself and it flew much better than I could fly it.

The Firecat landing gear is indeed weak. Add an axle from an aluminum welding rod and it works just fine. The drag goes up slightly but the weight hardly moves.

>The Firecat landing gear is indeed weak. Add an axle from
>an aluminum welding rod and it works just fine. The drag
>goes up slightly but the weight hardly moves.

Good idea. Currell

. His secret to the setup was an 18 ounce target
>weight and the light weight, powerful Johnson 33. I flew it
>myself and it flew much better than I could fly it.

I don't know how he got it down to 18 ounces. Mine was 22, and I really sweated the details. I used the S-1A wing from the box, but subbed contest balsa everywhere else, ultralite wheels, skinny music wire, etc. And I had to use an OS 15 FP to get it to 22, not a heavier 29-35.

Did he go with a custom, hollow fuse?

The landing gear that came with mine can be bent, but not easily. I'm happy with it on my Combat Streak. This plane weighs 31 ounces, and the gear handles it just fine so far. It also survived the destruction of this plane's forerunner, a direct nose hit straight down in a parking lot. You can see the gear pretty good in this pic:

Regards,

Wow Larry, the kit you have must certainly be different than the one I had. Brief descripton, the lazer ribs were pretty, but the trailing edge of the ribs was at least 1/16 inch thinner than the supplied trailing edge stock, the leading edge stock was of a triangular section, the center ribs that are encased by the fuselege were hand cut and so inacurate, that I had to make new ones. The fibreglass bellcrank mount is way to heavy. The slot in the leading edge was machined off center so the ribs didn't line up properly. This was a $20 dollar kit that contained some wheels, CA glue and misc. screws that drove the price up to some $80. IMHO!!!

>Wow Larry, the kit you have must certainly be different than
>the one I had. Brief descripton, the lazer ribs were
>pretty, but the trailing edge of the ribs was at least 1/16
>inch thinner than the supplied trailing edge stock, the
>leading edge stock was of a triangular section, the center
>ribs that are encased by the fuselege were hand cut and so
>inacurate, that I had to make new ones. The fibreglass
>bellcrank mount is way to heavy. The slot in the leading
>edge was machined off center so the ribs didn't line up
>properly. This was a $20 dollar kit that contained some
>wheels, CA glue and misc. screws that drove the price up to
>some $80. IMHO!!!

My Kit is the same way. AND the Motor Mounts are way to short. There was TWO Sets of FIRECATS that came out. Frank Macy got the first 25. These kits had some bad cutting and wood. The next 75 were alot better. Of the Two kits I have #8 and #18 Both have to be re-cut to build them. The Ribs are differant and the fuse would have to be made over.
NOTE...If you have the same Numbers as I do YOU have the Second Batch.

>Dalke, in the latest SN shows the Jim Walker FIRECAT. I
>have heard that Walker tried to compete with the popular
>Ringmaster S-1. It looks to be similar to Ringmaster.
>
>Does FIRECAT compare with Ringmaster? If so, why not see
>more of FIRECAT at OTS? Maybe it was too late for OTS?
>
>Floyd

Hi Dr Spark, Contrary to others Firecat flying experience, I recall
that the Firecat flew much better than the Ringmaster. I had Three
Firecats in the middle 1950's and two Ringmasters then. They were an
absolute delight to build compared to the Rings. everything simply
fell together..My first Firecat was a Sport and Stunt trainer; The
second two were Combat ships. I compared Combat performance between
my Ring and Firecat back then, the F'cat turned better and was faster
I had OS Max I .35's on each model. I later trimmed the F'cat's
fuselage way down to eliminate several oz's which improved their
performance. The last mod(another's idea) was to replace the fuse
with one that brought the wing up to the engine centerline and pared
fuse height to minimum...this was the best flyer of all....OK..it's
not a Firecat anymore...I will certainly buy a repro if they become
available. Tony G

I sure wish I could lay my hands on a few sets of the TCI Firecat landing gear. Have one on a Skyray that is the second best small profile gear I have found. First best is the original Firecat LG that has been thru 2 total wrecks with only minor dings and minimal bending.
Larry Lundy

Sorry to dredge this back up, but a budding CL Stunt flier was by the house a few days ago, noticed my Firecat, wants to build one.

*However,* what he really wants--and needs, come to think of it--is a three-fer model, maybe even a four-fer. As in one model which is quickly built and with which he can enter--this year, not next--OTS, Classic, Intermediate PA, and P-40.

One slight booger here is that I have seen no definitive answer to "Is Firecat legal in OTS?" question on the table. And yes, I have heard of letter from Mr. Smurthwaite. Have even several times asked for a copy of said letter; none have been forthcoming.

So. Is there a definitive answer out there? Suitable documentation? Contest precedents?

>Sorry to dredge this back up, but a budding CL Stunt flier
>was by the house a few days ago, noticed my Firecat, wants
>to build one.
>
>*However,* what he really wants--and needs, come to think of
>it--is a three-fer model, maybe even a four-fer. As in one
>model which is quickly built and with which he can
>enter--this year, not next--OTS, Classic, Intermediate PA,
>and P-40.
>
>One slight booger here is that I have seen no definitive
>answer to "Is Firecat legal in OTS?" question on the table.
>And yes, I have heard of letter from Mr. Smurthwaite. Have
>even several times asked for a copy of said letter; none
>have been forthcoming.
>
>So. Is there a definitive answer out there? Suitable
>documentation? Contest precedents?
>
>Dan

I gave Dave Gardner a Letter four or five years ago and Firecats have flowen at the Regionals
and VSC for years...What more do you need?

Scott

>I sure wish I could lay my hands on a few sets of the TCI
>Firecat landing gear. Have one on a Skyray that is the
>second best small profile gear I have found. First best is
>the original Firecat LG that has been thru 2 total wrecks
>with only minor dings and minimal bending.
>Larry Lundy

If I remember correctly The gears were made by Sig for TCI's firecat. I remember Andy saying that's where he ordered them from.
Dennis

>>I sure wish I could lay my hands on a few sets of the TCI
>>Firecat landing gear. Have one on a Skyray that is the
>>second best small profile gear I have found. First best is
>>the original Firecat LG that has been thru 2 total wrecks
>>with only minor dings and minimal bending.
>>Larry Lundy
>
>If I remember correctly The gears were made by Sig for TCI's
>firecat. I remember Andy saying that's where he ordered them
>from.
>Dennis

In that case, it may be there are off-the-shelf pre-bent gear legs available from SIG, Andy having located a match from the items SIG sells.

When building my Firecat a few years ago, gear legs were cut from hardened aluminum gear blanks sold by SIG.

And the answer to my question is? Got a guy ready to build, but he's not going with the Firecat if it's not legal for OTS.