RC Groups

RC Groups
    Control Line
        Discussion Resurrection of the CG Buster

#1 BeerBatter Sep 26, 2010 09:34 PM

Resurrection of the CG Buster
 
1 Attachment(s)
Some of you "older" folks like me may remember this bird. It's a Carl Golderg Buster. My dad bought it for me when I was 12 and I built it myself. It was my first CL model and my entry into the hobby as a kid. That was more years ago than I care to tell :D. Since it was my first model, I've held on to it ever since, and now I have decided to bring it back to life. Man, the memories of those days can never be forgotten, and now I feel just as excited about this project as I did when I was 12.

So here it is. I have disassembled all the major pieces and stripped the wing of the Monokote that covered it. The wing has several broken ribs that will be easily fixed. It's so cool seeing the glue joints in the wing and the mediocre workmanship I employed as a kid.

I sanded the fueselage, and although it is a bit fuel soaked up front, it's not excessive and I think I can still use it. The stab and fin are shot and I'm going to make new ones to replace them. The Fox .35 engine that was on it is shot as well. I'll have to get a new engine and fuel tank for it. If any of you have suggestions on engine, please let me know. From some of the reading I've been doing preparing for this resurrection, it appears that modern engines are more powerful therefore a modern .25 may be a better choice.

Visit the thread again soon. I'll be posting pictures as I progress with this project.

- Noel

#2 NX-687 Sep 27, 2010 02:23 AM

Hi
 
A plain bearing 25 would be good , light , with muffler , comfortable , powerful on 10%

, Im going out with my boys in 2 days , there will be breakages , oh well thats the fun , good luck with your build , keep the pictures up

How good did you get with C/L flying ?

#3 BeerBatter Sep 27, 2010 08:15 PM

Breakage is good. Expecially coming from kids. It means they are flying, and learning.
Also, thanks for confirming the 25 instead of 35. It makes sense that modern engines can produce more power and rpm than those of my childhood. It's amazing to me that the old Fox 35 C/L is still being made. It would be cool to go with that to keep it original, but I like the idea of light weight and powerful better.

It's been too many years since I last flew C/L. Been doing R/C ever since. I could do the basic stunt manuevers. I could fly inverted, do wing overs, horizontal figure 8's, I could almost pull off a descent square, and I could orbit around almost straight up. Never could do a vertical figure 8. I never pursued it as much as I could have since I got introduced into R/C not long after I started C/L and R/C took over my life.

- Noel

#4 Pinecone Sep 28, 2010 07:58 AM

It couldn't have been THAT long ago if Monokote even existed. :)

What did you glue it with? It might be better to hang this one on the wall and enjoy it as a piece of history and build a new one.

http://www.brodak.com/shop_productde...ProductID=2566

BTW you can still get Fox .35 Stunt engines, new from Fox.

http://www.foxmanufacturing.com/inde...roducts_id=272

But a modern .25 will also do the trick

#5 The Kiwi Sep 28, 2010 01:14 PM

Monocote was available by 1966 or so, 44 years ago now. A friend used it for some kit he built, and I recall it would sag and look terrible in the heat of a Texas spring day. What I cannot recall is what he covered with it. I can remember his shocking pink Super Clown, a silskspan and dope covering job, and his U-Name-It (Scarinzi Trident) was covered in doped silk.

Whatevr Chuck's Monocoted plane was, and I suspect an Ambroid (Don Still's) Stuka, it was black. I avoided Monocote as being too heavy when it really was very heavy in the beginning, preferring the much lighter Solar Film when I did start using film coverings about 1973 or so.


Kiwi

#6 BeerBatter Sep 28, 2010 08:57 PM

Pinecone, I here ya on the availability of the Brodak products. I had looked at that, but there is just something about getting my first plane back up in the air that intrigues me. To see if fly again after so many years will be awesome. Especially since my Dad, who bought it for me way back when, is still around to see it fly once more.

I looked at the Fox .35 again, and honestly I'm still torn between going that route again for old times sake, or going for a more modern .25. Still undecided. This old bird deserves to have the .35 put back on it, but the performance seeker in me also leans towards a .25.

Kiwi, I never like Monokote either. So hard to work with. I'll probably recover this in Ultracote, which is much more forgiving to work with.

- Noel

#7 BeerBatter Sep 28, 2010 09:03 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Here are some new parts I cut out. Made a new stab and elevator, as one piece which I will cut after sanding, new fin and rudder, and several rib pieces to bond alongside broken ones in the wing to repair and reinforce them.

Gonna fix the ribs and sand the wing next.

- Noel

#8 The Kiwi Sep 28, 2010 09:13 PM

Something that I forgot (a lot of that lately!)
 
Besides answering about the venerability of Monocote, I'd meant to point out that Brodak's Buster was based on someone else's kit, not Goldberg's. I think it was Consolidated, but not sure. I don't know how compataible they were with one another; I never built any Buster other than the CG kit, and I didn't have much affection for the Cosmic Wind.

(P. S. I also had a marked preference for the CG Shoestring out of the three CG Goodyear profiles, although my preferred engines for them were the old three-bolt Fox 25s. The LA 25 is closer in power to the Fox 35; my older, smaller Foxes had other endearing qualities beyond just raw power.)


Kiwi

#9 BeerBatter Sep 28, 2010 09:27 PM

1 Attachment(s)
This looks like a good option. O.S. 25LA-S.

- Noel

#10 iluv2fli Sep 28, 2010 11:41 PM

It was one of three of three CG kits in that group. The Shoestring Stunter, Whitman Buster and the Cosmic Wind. I built them all. Still have a Shoestring kit. The Shoestring was my first "big" C/L airplane. First engine was a McCoy 35. I realized quickly it was junk and went to a Johnson 32 and then a 35 large case. This was in '63.

I had been building model airplanes since 56. Started with HLG and rubber power and moved to free flight and C/L in a couple years. Got heavy into Rat race and combat through the 60's. First R/C in 64.

Mine were covered with doped silk.

#11 The Kiwi Sep 29, 2010 04:19 AM

Good choice. The LA 25 will be just fine.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBatter (Post 16167470)
This looks like a good option. O.S. 25LA-S.

- Noel

Right. Easier to start for most people, and easier to needle for just about everyone, than the Fox 35, plus a very short break-in routine instead of a longer one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iluv2fli (Post 16168385)
It was one of three of three CG kits in that group. The Shoestring Stunter, Whitman Buster and the Cosmic Wind. I built them all. Still have a Shoestring kit. The Shoestring was my first "big" C/L airplane.

First engine was a McCoy 35. I realized quickly it was junk and went to a Johnson 32 and then a 35 large case. This was in '63.

I had been building model airplanes since 56. Started with HLG and rubber power and moved to free flight and C/L in a couple years. Got heavy into Rat race and combat through the 60's. First R/C in 64.

Mine were covered with doped silk.

My powered flight start was 1951, but I didn't solo until I gave up on the used sparkies I was trying to fly with, after wasting a large number of afternoons on the spark ignition setups during my first summer in CL.

My first successful setup was a Guillow's Trainer III with a used Torp 29 on it, followed by a Circus King with that same old Torp; I used the silkspan it came with. By the time I built my very first CG Shoestring, I had finished high school and college, and was married (1962).

We used McCoy RHs for various sport racing and super slow combat events, and never took time to break them in at all correctly, nor to protect them from overheating.


Kiwi

#12 Pinecone Sep 29, 2010 05:44 AM

My point is, you may a) have glue joint failure and crash it, b) not remember how to fly CL and crash it, c) get dizzy and crash it, d) just crash it.

And then you have lost your first plane.

Better to build a new one and fly it in memory. That way if you crash it, no big loss. Especially if you are going to power it with a modern engine.

Your choice.

#13 BeerBatter Sep 29, 2010 07:08 AM

The group of friends that all started flying at the same time I did had both the Shoestring and the Cosmic Wind, I chose the Buster. We had all three planes in the group in our group.

I don't go quite as far back in time is some of you guys, but I did do the Ambroid glue, tissue and dope for some time. I also had a McCoy 35.

Pincone :D, point well taken. I totally understand where you are coming from.

Everyone, in general, thanks for sharing your memories on the thread.

- Noel

#14 BeerBatter Sep 29, 2010 07:10 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I took the old Fox 35 apart to have a look. Ain't to bad really, but I'm sure power wise it would be a pig. Crank and piston are frozen up, so it would take a good soaking.

I'll just set this one aside for nostalgic purposes.

- Noel

#15 The Kiwi Sep 29, 2010 08:43 PM

Different Foxes, 35s and 36s
 
The original Fox 35 design is 63 years old now, has a three bolt backplate, and a sweet 4-2-4 "breaking" stunt run. It's still produced, in almost the very same style as when it was new, and is a nice oldie. Eight years after the 35, in 1955, Fox started making engines with four bolt backplates and a different style of operation.

The 1955 engine morphed through a dozen permutations over the following twenty years, and ended up being a 36. Your engine, in the photo, is that "Sport" 36 from the 1970s, and it's not nearly as desireable of an oldie to possess as would be the genuine "Stunt" 35 engine.

The last Fox 36 was produced about 15 years ago, but the one you had was dropped from about 25 years ago or so.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:01 PM.