Electronic Second Wind 95-1

Second Wind 95-2

The Newsletter for soaring gods in a "winged arrow" world

________________________________________________________________________________

Wee wins portend a new day in 2-meter!

The Wee "ISS" Number One in 2-Meter Competition!

by Gregory Baggerly - March AFB, CA

3 July 1995 Dear Bob, I would just like to tell you what a great little sailplane your Wee-gilante is. I have been looking for a 2 meter sailplane for the past three years. I have flown a Banchee, Vulcan, and yes a Waco Two. Your Wee has them all beat, hands down! I followed your instructions. I used epoxy instead of transfer tape, painted the fuselage, used Black Baron film to cover the wings. I placed the center of gravity per plans, then adjusted the V-tail incidence. Total weight is 38 oz. I flew the Wee in it's first contest at The Inland Soaring Society (ISS), Riverside CA, I took first place in 2 meter. Everyone couldn't believe how light it was and how it slows to a crawl to land. I'm looking forward to going up against some Super Vee's in the near future. I look forward to flying the V-gilante soon. --Gregory C. Baggerly

The Pre-Wee (Sprite) 2-Meter and Jon Weyl Win Big in Open Class!

Jon Weyl has been doing an amazing thing down in Florida. He has a 2-meter Sprite that he flies in open class competition! Unintimidated by the size of his weapon, Jon is going head to head with all the latest open class gliders on the Florida contest circuit and he is consistently winning with his little Sprite!

 Jon Weyl and his famous Sprite!

As some of you may remember, the Sprite was the predecessor to the Wee-gilante. In fact, the Sprite is a Wee-gilante without the V-tail. Also the Sprite features flapperon control as the preferred control option rather than separate flaps and ailerons as is the preferred option on the Wee-gilante. Jon is flying his Sprite with flapperon control and uses the spoileron feature for landing control. He does not even have sharks' teeth or any other kind of landing skids on his Sprite.

It all started when Jon entered his first contest with the Sprite and won first place in 2-meter Sportsman at the 1995 Florida SS contest #2 held at Orlando. The powers that be, immediately bumped Jon up to expert class for next day's competition. Undaunted, Jon flew the next day, achieved the highest overall score and placed first in open class expert with his 2-meter Sprite! Then at the 1995 Florida SS #3 contest in Orlando, Jon won highest overall score, and first in open class expert flying his Sprite against all the open class winged arrows and all of the many expert and masters class flyers! He also won second in 2-meter expert. Later, Jon placed second in open class expert at the Florida SS contest #4. Continuing his amazing open class and 2-meter class wins, Jon won first place in both expert open class and expert 2-meter class at the big 11th annual (1995 Florida SS #5 contest) Rebel Rally! Can you imagine how amazing it is that Jon and his r35 oz. 2-meter predecessor to the Wee-gilante are taking on the latest bullshitically correct open class winged arrows and winning? Just imagine what this seeming incongruity and antithesis to the accepted soaring truisms is doing to the excepted wisdoms being dispensed around the flying fields in Florida! Reports that are starting to trickle in on the Wee-gilante, indicate that it may be an even better contest ship than the Sprite. However, I wish that I could include a bit of Jon Weyl with each kit I ship out! Now that Jon has his new Windsong Classic built and flying, the challenge to the brief reign of the winged arrows in Florida is bound be even more formidable! ________________________________________________________________________________

Magazine Kit Reviews

Dave Garwood Says:

From the internet Sat, 4 Mar 1995

Kay Fisher (fisher@gaas.enet.dec.com) wrote:

"The problem today in magazines is Marketing. The problem today in the world is Marketing!"

Kay, thank you for taking the time with this detailed post. It contains not only general economic philosophy, but many specific suggestions as to how magazine kit reviews can be improved, plus you admitted prejudices in public. I'll say you're pretty brave to do this. Regarding your observation on the effects of marketing pressure, I believe that: (1) Readers are happier with balanced reviews and "the straight scoop", at least they say they are. (2) Some designers and manufacturers believe that balanced reviews are much more credible, although clearly, many do not. (3) Given the choice, some (not all) editors will avoid any product criticism. (4) The reviewer himself may hesitate to say something negative, lest he start a snot fight. This may be especially true of beginning reviewers; it was for me. Remember my Sig NINJA review in the JUNE 1991 Model Airplane News? I criticized the balsa, criticized the plywood. I said that I had to replace the clevises and control horns to get tight linkages. I made it easy for the editor to ignore some of the criticism by presenting it in a photo and caption that could be easily left out. The review also said the NINJA flies well. (I learned inverted flight and got my two hour LSF slope flight with that NINJA.) M.A.N. Editor Tom Atwood ran the review as submitted, heavy criticism and all, with an editor's note mentioning Sig reported their plywood source had been improved. Sig never said a word to me about the NINJA review, and later even sent a SAMURAI kit which became a MAN review in APR 93. (The SAMURAI is a luxury quality kit, and flies terrific, BTW.) Sig runs full page NINJA ads to this day; and I'm still flying one. Is this the way model airplane journalism should do its job? I think so, and I'm happy with the way it worked in this case. My hat is off to Tom Atwood at M.A.N. and Mike Pratt at Sig. One kit maker has told me privately that negative kit reviews sell his kits just as well as glowing reviews. Maybe he'll share his view that "There is no such thing as a bad kit review." with us online. I also know two kit makers who will not support a review unless the reviewer agrees to the maker's veto power over the manuscript. We all know of instances where makers or distributors pulled their ads from a magazine after a review appeared that they didn't like. So, it seems to me that manufacturer nervousness over criticism in print can have a chilling effect on "tell it like it is" kit reviews. I also suspect that most readers are perceptive enough to understand the strengths and limitations of magazine kit reviews. 1. How do happy vs. critical mag reviews influence your purchases?

2. What say the online kit sellers - Rollin K, Frank W, Bob D, Jim M ?

3. What do others think of Kay's proposed kit review criteria?

Dave Garwood - garwood@logical.net

Bob Dodgson Responds:

March 6, 1995

Dave, Jim, Frank, Rollin and Kay,

. . . The following response is to your thought provoking e-mail message, Dave. I assume that I am one of the two manufacturers who you (Dave) said like to have "veto power" over what I consider an unfounded or odd-ball finding of a kit reviewer. In reality, I do not demand "veto power", I simply withdraw my financial incentive to the reviewer if I feel that the review is way out of line. My standard incentive is to refund the kit purchase price to the reviewer when a satisfactory review appears in a major magazine. I figure if the reviewer is incompetent or is on, what I deem to be, an irrational moral crusade to save the soaring public from some evil I have inflicted upon then, I will let him put his own dime where his mouth is.

I figure that anyone who is truly interested in doing an objective review would go out and buy a standard kit through standard channels and quietly build and review it. His only financial reward should be his fee from the magazine. I believe it is a bit arrogant that reviewers feel that they should have it both ways, --free kits and goodies and then complain when the manufacturer feels he has been treated unfairly by a myopic, bungling or crusading reviewer. In truth, the heart of the problem that I have seen over the years is the lack of common standards being used to evaluate kits in a review. In the late 1970s RCM started standardizing their reviews eliminating most of the extraneous comments, verbiage and hyperbole. This still left the reviewer enough wiggle room to mention important issues --such as Al Doig's 1983 Windsong review where he mentioned folding a wing on tow. Most magazines appear to have no standard check list and a rave review or a hatchet job is left in the hands of the reviewer whose experience, perspective, knowledge, integrity, affiliations and allegiances vary wildly. Unfortunately, I always seem to get the honest, low-key reviewers working on my kits and I have never refused to refund the kit price yet. But, I have never had one of those hyper, dream, rave reviews on drugs yet either. However, a standard format and standard check list like RCM offers seem to help provide a more uniform basis upon which reviewers can evaluate kits. ________________________________________________________________________________

The strong crescendo of the "Songs"!

Terry Lisansky - Wilmington DE: A "Butt-Kicking" Lovesong Competitor

From: lisansky@strauss.udel.edu (Terry Lisansky)

From the internet February 22, 1995

Hey Bob, I'm glad to see you're finally on line! Whenever I see someone ranting about some new glider, I ALWAYS extol the virtues of your designs. I'm glad to see you are offering a sheeted Windsong. I think that is a big selling point of gliders the last couple of years. My Lovesong is kicking ass out there against the competition here on the east coast.

After you asked for more specific information, I looked back through some newsletters and came up with some statistics. In the last three years flying my Lovesong, I've been in 19 contests. 17 of those I finished in the top three. 11 firsts, 2 seconds, 4 thirds. The other two were in the top ten. I think they were a 6th and 5th place. Most were club contests, a couple had 50 competitors. Not too bad. I must say, the Lovesong is a great plane, and I've gotten good at flying it. So much so that I've put off building a Saber that I've had for two years now. I should probably build it though. Because if something happened to my Lovesong I'd be lost. I do like those long wings though. Maybe a 134" Saber in the future??? Probably not though. I can't read your mind, but I think the shorter wingspan was for the shorter span trend. Here on the east coast we need the most efficiency that I feel I get out of those 134".  Terry Lisansky and his"Butt-Kicking" Lovesong!"

I think the pre-built wings are a great idea. I see a lot of pre-built planes around. It must be a good selling point. I think a lot of people are weary of foam construction, and this would be a way for them to feel better about building the Windsong.

By the way, I have a picture of me and my Lovesong with a zillion pink laced hinges. If you are interested, I could send it to you. I think you'd be amused. --Terry Lisansky March 5, 1995 Hey Bob, I just sent off the picture of my Lovesong. You are going to love all those hinges. I enclosed a piece of the tape I used for them. It's a thin dielectric tape that works great. It sure is a lot easier to use this than iron down hinges made with covering. It's pretty much normal, [the Lovesong] except for a little 3/4 oz. kevlar in a couple of places in the fuse. The wings were vacuum bagged with epoxy. Also it has full length spruce spars with .007 carbon fiber caps. Five servos in the fuse. One for each aileron, one each for the rest. Although I very rarely use crow, electronic differential is nice. And of course aileron-rudder mixing, and elevator compensation. I also put a trip made with 1/8" pin striping at 20% back from the leading edge. Without scientific proof, I think it made an improvement. While I didn't do it here, I've been using a piece of .007 carbon fiber about 1/2" or so wide in the trailing edge. Not for strength, but it's nice to sand the trailing edge down to the C/F for a nice sharp edge. I can't say anything about the thermaling and handling of the Lovesong that hasn't already been said. When reading what others say about a plane, I always take it all with a grain of salt. Especially when I read about all the fantastic things a particular plane will do. However, this plane has lived up to and surpassed all my expectations for a thermal ship. After recommending a Lovesong to a friend, he beat me in the last contest of the season with his. I asked him how he felt about the win. He said, "You were right, it's like cheating!" --Terry March 7, 1995 Hey Bob, it would be fine with me if you used my e-mail. I'm glad it can be useful. A friend gave me the tape and I don't know where he got it. I can always ask him. I know it's a dielectric tape so maybe an electronics store. You'll see it's quite thin and stays stuck down nicely. I'm in the process of trying to finagle a Pivot from a friend. I vacuum bagged the wings for him and he did the rest. I had a Pivot a few years ago until one of the actuator pins popped out of the wing and it spiraled down (not a pretty sight). I flew the dickens out of it before however. It was great on the slope, and thermaled well also. In fact I got all my LSF level 2 landings with it. I even flew it in a few contests and did well. I remember winning one particular contest by sloping it over a couple of tall trees upwind of the launch area. It's maneuverability enabled me to use that small band of lift to get my times, then cruse back to the landing area. It was very breezy that day and no thermals to speak of. I was the only one to make the times. Another time we had an unlimited handlaunch contest. You had to throw something over 59". People were throwing Sagittas, Gentle Ladies, all sorts of things. There was a little slope (about 5 feet tall, 30 yards wide) and we were all standing there throwing into the breeze. I was able to work that hill and made all my times. I even flew through a Gentle Lady, breaking off it's tail. But I just kept on going, hardly slowing down. I won that contest by a wide margin, I believe. The 72" Pivot was awesome. Anyway, I'll see if I can get it out of the hands of my friend who has all but stopped flying. Terry Lisansky - Give me a fast ship........ For I intend to go in harms way.

In the NW the E214 is king too!

Murray Johnson and his Lovesong are off to a flying start for 1995. He won the NWSS Spring contest in Mission, BC, the July contest in Mt Vernon, WA and the July Contest in Mission! Erik Eiche and his Lovesong won the Spring NWSS contest in Mt Vernon, WA. Bill Hanson and his Lovesong won the NWSS 1995 Spring tune-up.

________________________________________________________________________________

Walt Volhard

the shrinkydink of soaring!

It pains me to have to report that things are not going as expected for Walt Volhard since his move to Las Vegas last year. He left the NW all starry-eyed about how he would be able to fly gliders 350 days a year in Nevada --with no rainy day cancellations.

Alas, Walt's indulgent and opulent new life style has cut short his budding soaring career. The last phone call that Walt has made to any of us in the NW was from his new swimming pool via a portable phone. While Walt was hesitant to come right out with it, we have been able to piece together the tragic string of events that has left Walt soaring impaired. When Walt invested in his new swimming pool, he did not take into account "Archimedes law of diminishing mass when exposed too long to H2O." Moderation, not being one of Walt's vices, he has been practically living in his new pool this summer --with the attendant shrinkage of his dangling participles. Too his horror, Walt recently dragged himself momentarily from the pool to find that he no longer had enough balls to be a soaring god! In pitiful testimony to his shrinking manhood, Walt has been sighted lightly pirouetting out to the power field to try to get his propeller going again. Oh, how the mighty have fallen! ________________________________________________________________________________

Historical Perspective:

Multichannel on the Fritz.

Note by Bob Dodgson to Fritz Bien

Fritz, I saw your name on the ISE soaring list. I was talking to Bob Baugher a few weeks ago about a short story I wrote in Second Wind called "voices from my past". I mentioned how that Bob Baugher had been one of the first guys I knew of to modify radios to allow for electronic mixing and putting all the servos in the wings, etc. When he called, he told me that you had been the one that had come up with the circuits and had done most of the pioneering. Bob also said how that I was wrong about Milcott doing anything. He reminded me that Ace had been involved to some extent. He also said that you were the one who turned him on to flying a Maestro. I had always credited Dick Pike with this fete. Now, I have a better understanding of the major roll that you have played in the sport and in the history of Dodgson Designs.

I still think of the time I saw you knocking beer bottles off the slopes of Torrey Pines with your Cirrus around 1970. I had one of my early prototype multichannel gliders. I was just starting a 6 month trip with Sandy and our 6 month-old-daughter, Heather, flying my way around the US in our VW bus. Unfortunately, my radio went on the "fritz" soon after Torrey Pines so I did not get much more flying done on the trip. It must not have been long after that that you moved to Boston. I hope that you have written or are planning to write some of your experiences in your long history of soaring. Naturally, I would be delighted to include anything from you in Second Wind.

Fritz Bien Responds:

From: fritz@spectral.com (Fritz Bien)

March 10, 1995

Hi, Bob,

Its nice to hear from you, especially to update me on my friends Leon (Dick) Pike and Bob Baugher. I hope you're feeling stronger, as we miss your kits in the last few years. To answer you on some of my soaring history in the East Coast, I moved here in 1971, after getting my Ph.D. and doing a short post-doc stint in my home-town of La Jolla. (I was finally kicked out of the nest). When I first came, I was the only one to fly a sailplane using ailerons (my CIRRUS beer-can hitter) and had never flown in a thermal contest. Bob Fish of Fisher R/C dragged me out to a contest in Northern Connecticut where I first met Dwight Holley, as well as Stu Richmond, who eventually moved to Florida. Not knowing any better, I took my slope soaring CIRRUS far downwind into a huge hat-sucker and was the only one to make a 10 minute max. Dwight was so impressed with the performance that he started flying the CIRRUS on rudder and elevator, but liked how mine handled with the decreased dihedral, and the "Slope Soaring wing". Dick Pike flew a beautiful TODI which we liked, but it appeared too squirrely. When you came out with the MAESTRO, both Dwight and I built them. The big problem was that, as you remember, our planes flexed too much so that when we launched, the flapperons would bind, even though they were articulated at the center. The airfoil also lacked any high speed performance, as the leading edge entry was too low. So, at this point, both Dwight and I went onto building the [Maestro] MEGAN I put some Phillips entry into mine, messed with foam wings, electronic mixing etc., but always keeping that nice neat light fuselage with the rolled balsa boom. Dwight built "KILLER" which used a CLARK Y wing of 140" span on the MAESTRO MEGAN fuselage and moments with tail surfaces having a real airfoil. He came up with a very intricate mechanical mixer using square tubing brazed to a flexible drive mechanism to take up the flexing of the wing during launch. The CLARK Y gave him the stiffness he needed to keep the flapperons moving even during launch. We also increased the wing-pin to 3/8" from the original 3/16", as we realized that the stiffer the wing, the higher we could launch. It was with this plane that Dwight began dominating the East Coast soaring scene. Bob Baugher also built a MEGAN and started winning everything in sight. I experimented with the then new EPPLER 387 [the Todi used this airfoil in 1972] with a T-Tailed polyhedral at the time, as well as a greatly modified MAESTRO using a WORTMANN 63-138 airfoil. Since I was not the craftsman that Dwight was, Al Marshall and I went into trying to put servos into the wings and mixing electronically. (Al was never bitten by the quest for speed, and is still flying his AQUILA). At Dwight's behest, we modified his PRO-LINE single stick and our KRAFTs, so that the mixing could be done in the transmitter, and the flaps could be separated from the ailerons. Dwight also wanted to have separate rudder that could be coupled to the ailerons at different user-selected rates. All easy with enough switches. We also tried a bunch of other things that didn't work, such as trying to temper wing rods on a barbecue grill, make hinges from carbon fiber casting samples, cook our own prepreg using a solar oven, etc. The F3B story is an interesting one that I'll tell some other time. Since then, I formed my own company doing Govt contract research in Chemical Physics, got married, and had two kids. It was a month after the birth of the first that I saw you last at the Westfield NATS in 1983. Through this time, I have been experimenting with various T-Tailed aileron designs, electro-static stabilizing systems, composite building techniques as well as electrics. My kids are now old enough, so I'm getting back into competition again and am looking for a good 2 meter aileron ship --any suggestions? ________________________________________________________________________________

Video Tape Mysteries Solved

Dan Juhlin

From: sounder@halcyon.com

March 19, 1995

Hi Bob,

I'm glad Mike [Hansow] decided to get a Saber, probably a lot "gladder" than Debbie is! I figure I can never go over to their house again! He has really caught the soaring fever, that's for sure. I may email him and say that I changed my mind and I'm not going to fly this summer! Just kidding... By the way, I was watching the 86 [DD Promotional Tape #1] video again and noticed in the [1972 footage of the Todi in Germany] shot of Bud's [Bud Grover's] Todi sitting on the ground between two other planes, that's none other than my Graupner Cumulus in the right foreground!! I recognize the pattern on the wing. The wings were yellow with a diagonal slash of light blue and black out toward the tip. On the tip you can make out RP and then my number (which I don't remember). RP was for Rhineland Phalz. I can also just about make out the big CUMULUS logo also on the right wing. And, that contest was the highly touted Kircheim Tech Pokal down in the town where the Graupner factory is. That was the only contest I've ever been to where you had to wear "bibs" with numbers on them. I had forgotten that Bud had the Todi then. It did get a lot of attention as I recall! [Dan Juhlin, as it turns out, is the one who took the original movie footage of the Todi in Germany that won the big Rhineland Phalz contest in 1972. Dan also informed me that he had been the unknown video camera person who captured the footage of Jake Watkins launching his Windsong with the switch off our the video tape!] . . . Later, Dan ________________________________________________________________________________

RC Online Flap:

The Original Article.

The words as they appeared in the April, 1995 issue of RC Online - Soaring Corner... cont...

Windsong Classic is Back!

Bob Dodgson (dodgsonb@eskimo.com) of Dodgson Designs, sent me some new information about his Windsong Classic (photo 5). The pre sheeted Windsong Classic is now in production, and will be available within days of placing your order. This kit comes with pre sheeted wings (Eppler 214), stabs, and rudder. The flap and aileron servo wells are pre cut, and the wing spar is a carbon fiber tube with a 1/2" diameter hollow steel rod with a 6 degree dihedral bend. The fuselage utilizes the same composite taco shell construction as on the Anthem. Dodgson continues as he describes its performance: "There is nothing else like the Windsong available to the public! It brings back the unmatched performance of the Eppler 214 airfoil. Time has shown that none of the new airfoils can do what the E214 can do when used on the large Windsong platform (interestingly, the performance of the E214 falls off relative to the SD7037 in the smaller size planforms. Most of the new open class glider designs are tripping over themselves going to ever faster airfoils, leaving you the choice of fast and faster (as in dumb and dumber). On the other hand, the Windsong gives you the best minimum sinking speed, the fastest thermal climb, and one of the best maximum L/Ds available. And yes, the Windsong has plenty of speed to maximize the long range [thermal search without sacrificing sinking speed and thermal climb. It also has the best long-range visibility allowing it to safely range] thousands of feet further from home than the winged arrow competition. This much overlooked capability provides you with a devastating secret weapon." Complete pre-sheeted Windsong Classic Kit, $430, plus $20 S & H. Telephone: 206-776-8067.

Opinion Time...

Since this is an open column where the goal is to disseminate information and facilitate dialog, I'm writing this column, of course, with a bias. My opinions are mine, and not representative of R/C Online as a whole. I'm not trying to go off on a "Dennis Miller, of course that's my opinion" tirade, but, I will not hesitate to address important issues. Dodgson has been one of the much needed pioneers in our hobby/sport, utilizing new ideas and providing quality kits that are unique signatures unto themselves.

But, come on, the aforementioned statements got my attention with a grimace. I don't know about you, but I do get concerned with advertising statements that contradict themselves with an underlying oxymoronic concept that make no sense. How does "fast and faster" equate to "dumb and dumber"? How about the idea of the best minimum sink with the best maximum L/D? How does one maximize speed of an airfoil without sacrificing lift characteristics? If I inadvertently offend somebody, GOOD. It'll get you thinking, which is the only answer to myopic thinking. I will be happy to include any rebuttals to this. I do believe that in this techno-intensive information organism-type culture, our readers here are intelligent folks. Many of us fly two channel floaters, and many full house unlimited machines. Many common threads of conversations, at various flying sites and garages, involve glider designs and performance, and especially, airfoils. I believe that a majority of flyers out there are quite knowledgeable and that generally the U.S. R/C glider industry is moving towards providing more specifications on their kits and their performance; much akin to what the Europeans have done for quite some time now. So contradictions in statements are more obvious due to the savvy of our glider pilots. The Windsong is an attractive ship, but flagrant contradictory statements usually results in an ambivalence of the reader, which delays the decision making process of purchase. This industry relies heavily on the reputations of kit manufacturers, since the quality of the kits vastly differs from one to the other. I enjoy ads and reviews, since this is one of the major sources of information about the myriad of gliders available. People making statements that can reach many readers, have a responsibility to provide the accurate information, thus not misleading the public. I feel it is my responsibility, here, to present you with accurate information, which involves quite a bit of research time.

I know that my friend and fellow columnist, Don Edberg (Radio Control Modeler) spends an inordinate amount of time researching and composing accurate and informative articles. This is a standard which I'm a strong proponent of, but, of course, that's "just my opinion: ).

Side Bar

While I would have to agree with Manny on the subject of advertising, we also have to realize that advertising, in general, has become a medium for claims that go from being just a bit far-fetched, to totally unbelievable.

But, this is happening not only in the model industry. This type of sales tactic is used to well everything under the sun. It's gotten to the point that the more hype thrown on to a product ... the less I believe it.

The truly sad part is, that this type of advertising WORKS. It sells billions of dollars of "stuff" every day. So, until the world QUITS buying "stuff" based on hype, I guess this type of advertising is here to stay. While on final approach, let's ponder the question: IF you were in the market for a sailplane of the type mentioned in Manny's column, would buy it on specs alone, or would it take the "hype" to get you to take out your wallet? E-mail us and let us know ... WHAT WOULD YOU DO? Randy Mullins, Editor and Chief

Dodgson Designs First Alert!

From: publish@pop.uky.edu (Robert Kidd)

Subject: Windsong and other designs

April 18, 1995 Hi, Bob, . . . I read about your Windsong re-release in RC Online. Your enthusiasm was such that I just HAD to write and ask you about it. I believe the differing viewpoint presented by Manny was a good stimulator of interest, not a totally negative thing for you at all! In fact, the discussion makes me think that your ship might be a better step-up plane for me than some of the faster foils.

thread continued by Bob Kidd on April 20

Hi, Bob. Manny's column? I'm sure he had some space limitations, as far as his editing. But I'd have to ask him what his primary objection was --maybe he missed the humor in the "fast and faster" vs. "dumb and dumber" reference. Maybe it was your enthusiasm about your ship? I dunno. Now, you have to understand that I am VERY green in this sport, easily confused and whatnot -- but the whole issue of what constitutes a more efficient L/D could be part of the problem in the discussion. Do I have it right: Two ships, released at the same height, headed the same direction with no turning and no wind, in (for discussion purposes) no lift conditions -- last one down has the more efficient L/D, yes? If that is true, would the Eppler 'foils be as efficient as these razor-sharp new thinned out 'foils that present so little resistance? Well, don't let my guessing add to the confusion, for, as I say, I am GREEN in all these matters and looking for knowledge tempered with reason. Gotta go. Teaching PageMaker to secretarial types --whoo-peee. I'll be gone from my desk and the Internet for a few days, too, so I'll check on you all when I get back. (Headed to D.C. for a few days. Wedding.)

Later! Bob Kidd (By the way ... does Windsong stay in your mind like the perfume commercials on TV used to say???)

Bob Dodgson responds

Bob, thanks once again for your letter. L/D by itself does not relate directly to how long a glider stays up. L/D is lift over drag and it is the figure for how many feet a glider flies forward compared to how many feet of altitude it loses. An L/D of 26 to 1 means the glider flies 26 feet forward for every foot of altitude loss. If a glider with an Eppler 214 airfoil has a max L/D of 26 to 1 it may be flying forward at 19 MPH. Another glider with the RG15 airfoil may have also have a maximum L/D of 26 to 1 and it may have that L/D when flying forward at 28 MPH. In still air, if both gliders were at 1000 ft altitude they would both fly forward 28,000 feet but the faster glider would do it faster and be on the ground faster.

I am sending you a complete catalog and a sample "Second Wind" in the mail tomorrow. I have not seen Manny's article in RC Online yet. I'll have to catch it. The Windsong is not only a wonderful "start-up" plane, but it will out-soar the rest in weak and light lift --when performance really counts. Best of all, it has about as good a maximum L/D as anything out there. It just takes a little longer to get from Point A to Point B than the RG15 gliders --but it should be just as high when it gets there and so it will have more total air time! And, that is the name of the game. The minimum sinking speed and thermal climb rate of the Windsong with the E214 puts it in a class by itself! Al Doig has just finished testing one and has a review on it coming out soon in Radio Control Modeler Magazine. He confirmed that the new Windsong Classic with the composite structured wing has overcome the one contest disadvantage that the Windsong/Lovesong had. It could not tow quite as high as the the new small, winged arrows. Now that it can get a state-of-the-art tow, it has a very real advantage over the faster sinking pack of clone gliders. Thanks again for your note, Bob. I will check out the RC Online article. --Bob Dodgson

Bob Dodgson continues the next day

Bob, thanks for the info on accessing RC Online. I FTPed it last night and read the "fairness doctrine" response to the Windsong Classic information I must admit that I was confused by it. Was he saying that you can't have a really good max L/D without having a glider optimized for speed? Also he edited out the part about the Windsong being visible further away than about any other glider which gives you a larger diameter circle in which to explore lift --a more important factor than how fast you can get to the limits of your vision. Thanks again.

Bob Dodgson's very own new Windsong Classic.

Just to clear it up for the historically challenged among us, Those wing-tips are not a case of "tips up"!

They are perfectly respectable modified Hoerner tips. I used flat plates at the 45 degree angle to get another inch or so of span.

Bob Dodgson - Still keeping it up with hot air.

Not one to leave a challenge unanswered, Bob Dodgson responds directly to RC Online

RC Online

Randy Mullins: Editor

Dr. Manny Tau: Soaring Editor

Subject: Re: Soaring Oxymorons

Dear Randy Mullins and Manny Tau, thank you for putting the Windsong Classic information and photo in the soaring section of the latest issue of RC Online. However, I was a bit confused by the content of the "Opinion Time" and by the "Side Bar" following the Windsong Classic information blurb. As soaring editor, Manny [Tau], in a self stated effort to stimulate thought and prevent "myopic thinking" you seam to have missed the point of what was stated in the article. Surely, Manny, someone of your education must know that you can have a glider that is optimized for minimum sinking speed and fast thermal climb and still have a good maximum L/D. These are not contradictory goals. It is only when you bring in blistering hi-speed performance that the goals are at odds. I must say, your comments hit me as being a bit naive for someone of your standing in the soaring community. And then what was up with the "side bar", Randy [Mullins], about truth in advertising? You must not have been able to comprehend the Windsong blurb either. Interestingly, in spite of my e-mail address having changed from the one posted in your magazine, I have received e-mails from people who believe that your very confusing editorializing helped make my case for the Windsong! Thanks! I assume that you would not argue that the Windsong has one of the best minimum sinking speeds of any glider kit in the history of our sport. This has been well documented since 1982. It also has a great maximum L/D --about 26 to 1 according the wind tunnel data and David Fraser's " Sailplane Design" program, using the latest available wind tunnel test data and a tripped E214 airfoil. The impressive maximum L/D is not due solely to the airfoil choice but is also due to the large size of the Windsong platform (132" wingspan) and largely to the wonderfully high aspect ration of 17 to 1. How many glider kits do you know of that can boast a better maximum L/D than 26 to 1? There are not very many. Manny, it was you, not I who introduced speed into the equation. I was saying that an ever greater emphasis on speed "fast and faster (as in dumb and dumber)" is a bad thing. I never said that the Windsong had ground-breaking hi-speed performance. The trend to build ever faster open class thermal gliders, particularly ones that are very slim and smallish in size is self defeating. We now have gliders that you can fly faster and faster around in an ever diminishing circle. The circle is decreasing in size because the smallish glider has such a thin profile that you cannot see it to fly as far away as you can a larger highly visible and more stable ship like the Windsong. Sure, the small fast ships with the RG15s and other fast airfoils might have a maximum L/D of close to the Windsong's 26 to 1 and it might be at its maximum L/D at 28 MPH instead of at 19 MPH like the Windsong. In the end, however, the Windsong will travel just as far in air miles. It will just take longer doing it and it will thus be airborne longer in the process! Time and distance are the name of the game in thermal soaring, not raw speed. As an added bonus, the Windsong can travel farther afield in its thermal search due to its greater visibility. Sure, if you are penetrating a 25 MPH headwind with an unballasted Windsong, you are not going to be operating it at its max L/D. You are going to run it reflexed at speeds around 40 MPH. On these rare occasions the Windsong would give up a bit to the very fast glider --but only if you had to travel a great distance to get to the lift. I know that these concepts run counter to the accepted "thinking" of many of the oracles of the day and perhaps that is why they made you "grimace", Manny. I hope you have recovered from your "oxymoronic" moments and have become a bit more coherent once again. I believe that R/C soaring has been overly influenced by the sport of full sized soaring without considering the basic concepts involved. In full sized soaring, the pilot goes where the glider goes. Maximum L/D is all important for covering distance. However, speed is also of utmost importance because many of the competitions are timed goal and return tasks. Therefore, high-speed performance has been advanced over minimum-sinkingspeed performance. On the other hand, with R/C models a good maximum L/D is important too. Moreover, minimum sinking speed takes on much more importance than it does for the real gliders because the pilot has to maximize conditions inside his limited circle of visibility. It is precisely because the pilot has this limited circle of visibility and cannot travel with the glider that high-speed performance loses its great value in R/C thermal competition. To my knowledge, the Windsong is one of the few gliders that has outstanding performance in the minimum sinking-speed end of the spectrum while boasting one of the best maximum L/Ds in the industry while still maintaining good enough high speed performance for nearly any thermal competition situation. It does all these things and has about the greatest long-range visibility of any thermal competition glider --giving it a range advantage. The exciting news is that with the Windsong Classic's prebuilt wings, the Windsong can now get state-of-the-art tow heights. In thermal competition, tow height was the only thing that the Windsong was giving up to the "winged arrows". I agree, that the soaring public is a pretty educated and sophisticated bunch of guys. I hope that future soaring columns and editorials from RC Online can keep up. Bob Dodgson - Still keeping it up with hot air!

Manny Tau Responds

Hi Bob, thanx for your reply and rebuttal to my 'opinion time' section. I appreciate your attempts to clarify your statements, and would like to place your reply verbatim into my column.

***Randy, email me and let me know if we should insert this into my column or as a sidebar...I'd like to insert this into the column...let's talk.***

You do make some interesting statements (as I have also) that I'd like to share with the readers, in order for them to evaluate and conclude themselves (besides, controversy is free advertising and makes good reading). Though I see where you are coming from, I don't quite agree with some of your perspectives and conclusions. But this is not important, what I'm trying to do is provide readers with info (from "both sides") and let them decide for themselves. My opinion was aimed towards some aspects of your copy in order to stimulate thought and controversy...all to increase thought, promotion of concise conclusions, and to highlight certain aspects of the industry for the continued research and development of better equipment. The proof is in the reality. From your reply, it sounds like you took personal offense (my coherency and RC Online keeping up with the soaring community) to my opinion. My goal was to address the copy, not you as a person (I believe this came thru in the beginning of the 'opinion') as I believe "slamming" a person doesn't accomplish anything. Although I would have no hesitations to address specific issues in your reply, I'd rather not do this and turn it into a Manny vs. Bob type of issue. I'd rather place your rebuttal verbatim (without any further rebuttal comments from me-it wouldn't be fair since it's my column and you're at a disadvantage), and let the readers sort it out for themselves. I believe I've done my job if I raise eyebrows and facilitate some thinking, of course all professionally. It seems as though you've been able to benefit from the article, which I'm glad to hear. It would be great to be able to throw issues on a level table, discourse, debate, and the like, and have a win-win situation for all involved. Eager to hear your reply! --Manny

From taucom@kaiwan.com Thu Apr 20, 1995

Randy Mullins Responds

Hi Bob, I will print this as a side bar in the May 1995 issue we here at R/C Online want everyone to get the full story. And since Everyone has their on opinion I like to get both sides of the story and I think (although I don't know much about the glider side) you have a valid opinion so we will print it. So there is not any hard feelings how about 2 FREE full page ads for your models. Hope to here from you.

--Randy Mullins

PS email me Phone # and best time to call and I will call you and discuss it further. - R/C Online Magazine Email: rconline@gate.net

Manny --once again!

Hi Bob, thanx for the quick reply! I'll use verbatim (last line omitting) your updated reply for my column, and please feel free to ad my "opinion time" to your newsletter, and my response to your response.

Fine with me! I like the idea how divergent ideas such as ours can benefit our industry as a whole, especially if the 'debates' are collegial. Who has the last word or who is right, is not all that important to me when compared to the benevolent intentions of providing knowledge and info for all...and besides, it makes good memorable reading...gets away from the usual 'vanilla' texts of our hobby/sport.

I'd be more than happy to toss my hat into the ring with you in a debate about airfoils, L/D, speed, and the like, and especially us being able to chuckle about it over a beer afterwards. My wife is from Puyallup, WA, and on occasions we swing thru there for various reasons. I'll give you a call if I'm ever up your way! --Manny

Mike Hansow had to get in on the email fun

Manny, I like the Soaring column in R/C Online. Keep up the good work!!!

In reference to Bob Dodgson's outrageous claims; we here in the Pacific-Northwest have long humored Bob and encouraged him to keep making outrageous statements about his products. We generally do not give them much attention though. You have to understand our position. Bob lives near the soaring field and while he is home slaving away in his basement creating all the hot air statements you guys in California get upset over, we are usually flying our Windsongs and Sabers just down wind of Bob's place. He creates some pretty good thermals on a flat day. So please don't get him too excited in your editorials because sometimes the lift gets pretty rough and we can sure tell when he's coming up with some new "Gas bag statements". --Take care, Mike ....

________________________________________________________________________________

The 100 inch V-gilante --A Real Sailplane

June 1, 1995

From: Derek Lieber 

Bob, I just wanted to thank you for a great plane. I bought your [V-gilante] kit last November and just got it flying (ok, I'm a slow builder). It came in at 39-40 ounces and balanced at the forward end of the recommended c.g. without the need for any nose ballast(!) I sheeted the wings with epoxy (applied with a small paint roller and pressed with 100 pounds of bricks) and anointed them with Varathane instead of Towerkote. Everything else was per plans. Your U-shaped flap actuator gizmo works well. I had a few problems on some of my first hi-start launches: I tended to mush and pop-off to one side or the other if I wasn't exactly lined up with the wind. Keeping the nose down during the early part of the launch seems to help (maybe my hi-start is too wimpy). Anyway, this is my first "real" sailplane and I'm looking forward to a summer of good flying with it.

Regards,

Derek Lieber

________________________________________________________________________________

George Voss falls off the wagon at Utah X-Country

I just learned from Jim Benson of 1970s TODI flying fame that George Voss has further enhanced his notoriety among the soaring brethren! You may recall that George is the guy who wrote the review of the V-gilante with the Quadra engine in Second Wind 94-2. George also wrote the real review of the ship that appeared in the July Model Builder. Normally, George flies a Lovesong in thermal competition. At this event, however, he was flying a borrowed Comet.

Evidently George left the safety and familiarity of Oklahoma to experience the major slope event that was recently held at the Point of the Mountain, Utah. One event was x-country. Being a cowboy at heart, George had his pick-up standing by as the steed to carry him home to victory! Having nearly completed the course --with only 100 yards to go and the feel of a hot finish surging through his veins, George was leaning into the task of flying his glider just as the pick-up lurched in the opposite direction and hit a bump at the same time. Being a serious flyer, George would not release his grip on the transmitter to grab hold of something solid. Instead, he went soaring over the side of the pick-up bed with his transmitter in hand --putting on the spoilers while he was in mid air! After plowing a furrow and skidding to stop, George eventually came to and staggered up onto his feet to find that while he was Comet-tose the glider had finished the course and had landed safely. George "the plowman" had won! However, the contest director would not give him any landing points because he said that the pilot had shed too many parts! Not surprisingly, George has put his pickup on the auction block. He says that he never keeps a mount that can throw him --especially if it turns out to be just a plow horse! We wish you a speedy recovery, George! ________________________________________________________________________________

News Flash!

Steve Cameron, flying his modified Orbiter, has just won the handlaunch event at the 1995 LSF-AMA Nationals! We are now kitting this new ship as the Orbiter-2!

The Orbiter is back!

OK, I can't fight it any longer! The recent RCSD article on the Orbiter by Dennis Tyson has created too much of a stir to be ignored. We are kitting it again!

Although it has been out of production for over 4 years, the Orbiter still has been dominating handlaunch competition in the Seattle area right up through the 1994 season. For some reason, the foam-core-winged would-bees, even with the same airfoil, do not perform like the all built-up Orbiter. It is a design that won't go away and that won't be denied!

Well, we won't deny it any longer. I am pleased to announce that due to popular demand, we have put the Orbiter kit back into limited production. Yes, the Obiter kit is once again available for shipment --now that the soaring world is finally catching up with it!

The Handlaunch ORBITER

The designer, Eric Jackson, and his original contest winning Orbiter!   Our new Orbiter-2!

Designed by Eric (Dr. J. Bamboo) Jackson and as seen in RCSD in 1988-89 and 1995.

The Orbiter is a no compromise multichannel handlaunch competition glider that won 9 out of the 10 contests entered by its designer Eric Jackson in 1988. Built-up construction is featured throughout and the Selig 4061 airfoil is used. Two channels are required and a third servo is optional if flaps are desired. A modified mini A.F.A.R.T. for Automatic Flap/Aileron Reflex Trim (the (Min.F.A.R.T.) is used to allow both the flaps and ailerons to reflex during high speed flight for maximum L/D and for doing aerobatics. Naturally, computer radios can be used to advantage with the Orbiter --but they are not needed to obtain sophisticated mutichannel control. In spite of its conventional built-up construction, due to the control sophistication, construction time and skill demands and the extraordinary level of performance available, we do not recommend the Orbiter kit for the beginner or for the novice builder or flyer. This little plane demands top construction and multichannel flying skill to take advantage of its performance potential.

Specifications:

Fuselage Length (less rudder): 32-1/4" [Orbiter-2 = 34"]

Fuselage Width: 1-5/16" max.

Fuselage Construction: Lite-Ply Plywood sides, balsa top and bottom [Orb-2 = bals pod and CF tailboom]

Wing Span: one piece 59" wing.

Wing Area: 432 sq in.

Aspect Ratio: 8 to 1.

Wing Loading: 5.9 oz. per sq ft. [Orb-2 = 4.3oz/ft2].

Airfoil: Selig 4061.

Wing Construction: Joined, bolt-on one piece built-up wing with: 1/16" balsa ribs, 3/32" x 1/4" spruce spars top and bottom with shear webs between, 1/32" balsa sheeting on flaps/ailerons and on the LE "D" tube.

Stab/Elevator & Rudder/Fin Construction: Built-up from 1/8" balsa members and glued permanently to the fuselage [Orb-2 = 3/32" pre-cut balsa sheeting]

Hardware: Complete with all linkages, links, push-rods and even the Min.F.A.R.T. wing TE reflex mixer. [Orb-2 = coupled aileron-rudder and elevator pushrods and links]

Total Flying Weight: 17-18 oz. [Orb-2 = 13 oz.]

Radio Requirements: Mini 2-4 channel receiver, 2-3 micro servos such as Futaba S33 or S133, 275 MAH battery pack. [Orb-2 = two servos: aileron/rudder and elevator]

Controls: Elevator, ailerons 12-1/2" long, rudder coupled to ailerons and optional flaps 15-3/4" long. The flaps and ailerons can even be reflexed up 6 degrees for high speed flight, when performing aerobatics, when coming home from down wind thermals and best of all during the hand launch toss for the contest advantage of increased throw height. Since hand-launch competition does not involve spot landing in its scoring and since the fuselage space is so limited, the Orbiter does not have mechanical flap-elevator compensation during flap deployment as do our larger ships. You may wish to add this feature electronically with your transmitter if you have the option. [Orb-2 = coupled aileron-rudder and elevator only]

Performance:

This is a serious handlaunch competition glider that appears to offer a real performance edge over the polyhedral rudder-elevator gliders and over the foam winged aileron HL competition gliders. Many have tried to speculate why the Orbiter is so good. Perhaps it is the airfoil that sags "just right" between the close-set ribs and cannot be duplicated with solid core construction. Whatever it is --it is back with a vengeance!

The Orbiter is also a most versatile slope performer and it is a real 2-meter contender when flown from a winch or hi-start. It can thermal out in any lift and bore right up through the competition as they flail around trying to max on dying RG15 dreams. The turning ability of the Orbiter is so amazing that Barry Kurath coined the term "bat turn" to describe a special near-stall turn that the Orbiter can perform allowing it to instantly and with nearly no altitude loss change directions 180 degrees. This maneuver must be seen to be believed!

In spite of its one piece wing and non detachable tail feathers, due to its tiny size, the Orbiter can easily be carried around ready to fly in the back end of most cars [The Orbiter-2 simply out-climbs everything else!] ________________________________________________________________________________

The route to a Pivotal idea

Ron Purvis - Everret, WA, is an accomplished and long-time slope flyer. One of his favorite gliders through the years has been the Pivot. He is now on his 7th!

To simplify cutting the slot in the fuselage for the wing actuator pins to operate in, Ron uses a Dermal tool rather than filing the slots out. He attaches the router base to the Dermal tool and drills a 7/32" hole in the base the exact distance that the actuator pin is supposed to be from the center of the wingrod. When Ron is ready to route out the slots, he slides the router base over the wingrod to serve as the pivot point and then he routes out the slot with a 1/8" bit in his Dermal. This is quick, neat and accurate! ________________________________________________________________________________

The weight is over for an old Camano

June 28,1995

Bob, thought you might like to see an old Camano --the little girl is my daughter. This sailplane is a real "piglet"! I bought it already built from a guy here in Ft. Worth --it weights about 70 oz! But, despite all that mass, it flies great.

Tresha Adams and her father's 70 oz Camano!

This Camano is about a pound over weight but still flies great!

I am building an Anthem and enjoying the construction --keep up the work, Bob.

A good customer, Forrest Adams ________________________________________________________________________________

Saber News from CA

June 26, 1995

Dear Bob,

. . . Pat [Stoker] and I had a good contest Sunday at the SC2 contest. We had 60 of the best in So CA inter-club flyers. Pat placed 9th overall and I received the 3rd place expert trophy. We seem to be the only contest Saber flyers down here. As you know, after a certain level of model glider performance, the big factors are luck and pilot skill. We have been able to get the weight of the Saber down to 75 oz. However, I don't see much improvement over the 81 oz. Saber except in zero lift conditions. We usually fly in 6 to 10 mph wind.

I am enclosing one of my titanium wing rods for the Saber as a gift to you. The wing rod saves over 2 oz. in weight and is 50% stronger than the original Saber wing rod. I tested the steel rod and it registered 120,000 psi tensile strength. The titanium rod is 180,000 psi. It has a special anodize to reduce corrosion. It will flex more than the same strength steel rod due to the lower modulus of elasticity. We have never been able to interchange the steel rod with the titanium without re balancing the plane. Maybe you can understand why this is the case? [Bill --I am as amazed as you are!] It doesn't seem that 2 oz that close to the C.G. should make that much difference but it does. We are now using the Hitec HS-80 servos for aileron control with great success. We only use metal geared servos in the wings now. Our major crashes have been caused by stripped out plastic geared servos. We has had some problem with the fuse cracking at the seam along the top behind the canopy opening. We have corrected the problem by gluing in a piece of balsa approximately 1 inch aft of the canopy opening and to the inside top of the fuse between a line in line with the LE of the wings. We discovered hard landings were causing the wings to pinch the fuse and cracking the joint. It also caused the wing tube to break loose in the fuselage. The balsa resists the compression of the breaking force caused by the wings deflecting forward. Let us know about any new Saber tips you learn from your many satisfied customers. Sincerely, Bill Duncan - Garden Grove, CA. ________________________________________________________________________________

Email comments, questions or orders to dodgsonb@eskimo.com

Back to Dodgson Designs Home Page.

This page was created by Bob Dodgson of:

Dodgson Designs

21230 Damson Road Bothell, WA 98021

________________________________________________________________________________