- This topic has 18 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
A buddy of mine here in OZ, is building a Casano stick, and l seem to remember that there was a bit here about using 3/16th x 3/16th for the longerons, and also something about the prop.
l have a copy of the 1940 plan in Air Trails, and it shows a single blade free wheel prop of 15″ dia. but there is a pic of Al Casano holding his model, that looks the same as on the plan with a double bladed free wheel prop.
Need to know the size please.Please fill us in all you old rubber gurus, and set us straight so the model is legal.
Correct on all counts. The plan shows a SBF (good thinking! 😀 ) and the photos a DBF; I seem to recall a comment that it flew better with a DBF (guess he didn’t have the SBF set up right! 😛 )
Depends upon OZ rules interpretation… SAM accept the pic as authentic so you take your choice of prop, presumably of similar diameter. Yours might insist on the SBF
The past arguments about fuselage structure arose from models built from the ‘Old Time Model Supply’ plan drawn by Bob Jones for OTMS guru, the late Ken Sykora, who specified 3/32sq for the fuselage instead of the 3/16″ sq of the original. Several got disqualified by CD’s because of it – when queried, Ken is reputed to have said something like ‘Who’d want to use 3/16″ square, anyway?” ….
Built of medium stock for longerons and light soft stock for spacers, weigh is about comparable, anyway.
JM – SBF devotee ….
Jim,
Thanks for your info.Do recall a ‘bunfight’ somewhere about the longerons, and as l feel if the plan shows 3/16 x 3/16 then that should be it.
Prop. at 15in. dia. in single blade or double blade form, l would be more than happy with too, in freewheel form of course, and even using the Garami system that l find the best way to do it. Mentions Garami freewheel system in the instructions too.
Any more info. gladly accepted, thanks again.
3/16th, all over—of course, ’cause that what the plan says, but reckon you could make the spacers from very light wood. 💡
Hi 😀
I hate to spoil your day but OZ rules state “prop and nose block per the plan”, pictures don’t count, which means a single bladed prop. 😈
Ployd
How much rubber should be used in the Casano ? What time of motor run
should be expected. Are there any hints on the trimming . The reason I am’ asking is that I have one that’s 95% complete.
I am using a DFP that I obtained from Superior Prop. The frame is covered in tissue. Hope to have fun with it !Thanks…Craig[/b]
How much rubber should be used in the Casano ? What time of motor run
should be expected. Are there any hints on the trimming . The reason I am’ asking is that I have one that’s 95% complete.
I am using a DFP that I obtained from Superior Prop. The frame is covered in tissue. Hope to have fun with it !Thanks…Craig[/b]
Sorry Craig, must have missed your post from way back requesting rubber size.
The original plan states 22 strands of 1/8th flat. No length or weight mentioned.
I guess I would make it about plus 25% or so longer between the hooks.Further to the prop. debate. As far as I’m concerned EITHER MUST BE LEGAL for competition use as they are BOTH shown from a 1940 picture and plan.
Use anything for ‘fun’ of course.I shall not be ‘testing’ the rules though as I have no interest in building a Casano—-not that there is anything wrong with it, but I have a truck load of rubber models boxed up here ready to go if the urge ever returns to ‘get serious’.
Put up a pic of your Casano please Craig
I have never seen one, and have no idea if the local one was ever built or even started.There is a picture of one on the starlink website: http://www.starlink-flitetech.com/nostalgia.htm
Very nice Derek.
And a nice colour scheme too. BUT, it has a folder on it.No sign or mention of a folder in my 1940 plan.
Did Casano ever do one with a folder? That would to my mind need to be confirmed to be legal for competition—-but as said, for fun or in an open rubber comp. it would go really well.>No sign or mention of a folder in my 1940 plan.
Right! My apologies for mentioning folders in my earlier posting. As an aficionado of single blade folders I guess I automatically thought ‘SBF’ and ‘DBF’ – thr correct prop is of course a single blade f/w, as the two blade illustrated in the article is also f/w …
Duh …..
@Jim Moseley wrote:
>No sign or mention of a folder in my 1940 plan.
Right! My apologies for mentioning folders in my earlier posting. As an aficionado of single blade folders I guess I automatically thought ‘SBF’ and ‘DBF’ – thr correct prop is of course a single blade f/w, as the two blade illustrated in the article is also f/w …
Duh …..
I knew what you meant. I like SBF as well. 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.