Roy Hill 3 Posted January 2, 2023 Share Posted January 2, 2023 I've acquired a 68ish inch Piper Cub which has yet to be maidened! It is clearly made from a kit but I have no idea who the designer or producer is. It has a one-piece wing without ailerons and the wing struts are missing. Does anyone have plans which I can buy or copy in order to construct the struts and convert it to a two-piece wing. Happy landings. Roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatMc Posted January 2, 2023 Share Posted January 2, 2023 You should be able to download & use the info from one or more of the RC examples available FOC from this OZ link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted January 2, 2023 Share Posted January 2, 2023 (edited) 68 is an unusual span so maybe measuring again to get an exact size might help identify the plan. Also the chord to see if it is a Clipped wing Cub. Without ailerons is unusual at this sort of size. Could it be a Flair Cub at 73 inch? Edited January 2, 2023 by kc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Hill 3 Posted January 4, 2023 Author Share Posted January 4, 2023 Thanks for the input, Gents. I've re-measured the aircraft. Wingspan is 70 inch and the constant cord is 11 inch. I'm going away for 5 weeks in a couple of days but I will try to photograph the offending article before I go. Roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Without ailerons suggests it may be quite old or perhaps the semi scale Flair version with only 3 channels. Is the wing built up or foam? Look at the old Berkeley design or the original Hollinger version in English for inspiriation on how a 2 piece wing could be arranged. The struts from that model could be fitted to any similar model. I would suggest measuring the dihedral and seeing if it is reasonable before cutting the wing in half to form a 2 piece wing. In fact flying it first to check the dihedral is satisfactory would be a good idea before cutting the wing apart! If you find the dihedral OK then install wing joiner tubes BEFORE cutting wing in 2 would seem to be worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 I would have to have a very good reason why I would try altering a wing from it’s designed one piece to two piece arrangement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 I agree it's better left as one piece. However if it won't fit in the car it might seem essential - but having detachable wing tips might be easier and safer........ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Hill 3 Posted January 5, 2023 Author Share Posted January 5, 2023 Hi, KC and Don. Thanks for the advise and links. There is a very good chance that the model is from the Berkeley plan. The only reason for suggesting a 2 piece wing is because I have never liked securing the wings with elastics. It would be easy to leave it as 1 piece and modify it to a 'tab and plastic bolts' system! I would, however, like to have ailerons. At 70 inches, it would fit in the car easily. The present dihedral is 4.5 inches at each wing tip - quite excessive, I think. I'll take some photos in a while. Happy landings. Roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Hill 3 Posted January 5, 2023 Author Share Posted January 5, 2023 Me again! Maybe the attached pictures may be of help. Please excuse the chaos in the background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 The amount of dihedral is certainly not scale but will be required to induce bank for rudder only turning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piers Bowlan Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 (edited) Wings secured with rubber bands may not be beautiful or scale but they can reduce the damage in the event of a crash. Sometimes more so than plastic wing bolts too. If you want to fit ailerons you will need to reduce the dihedral somewhat or you may find the ailerons effectiveness is somewhat reduced, due to adverse yaw. All in all it sounds like quite a bit of surgery. Personally I would just maiden it as it is, see how she flies and then consider my options… Looks like it might make a good trainer 😊 Edited January 5, 2023 by Piers Bowlan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Hill 3 Posted January 5, 2023 Author Share Posted January 5, 2023 Thank you, Martin and Piers. Lots of food for thought while I am away on holiday. Roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 It looks quite a nicely built model, but I wonder if the front 'windscreen pillars ' are quite strong enough if a dowel( or tab ) and wing bolts are fitted instead of the rubber bands. Dowel and bolts have no 'give' in them like rubber bands! Maybe a thin piano wire hoop to strengthen the front dowel area? It certainly looks worth keeping the dowel to locate (catch ) the tab and just sawing off the ends. Alternatively the wing could be cut back an inch or so at the LE so the dowels go into a LE block fixed to fuselage which also provides fixing for windscreen glazing. As in many other models. But as Piers says try it with bands first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.