I scanned a few pictures of some of my old airplanes. Here are a couple of my old control line planes. The red and white is a magician. Had a rc 40 for power, throttle wired open. Scratch built from plans. Stock stap placement. It was a nice flyer. I am getting the urge to build another. Would move the stab back 2 to 4 inches.
The yellow one was VERY LOOSLY based on the magician but enlarged some. An OS 60 for power (insane power). Wore me out to fly it, only comfortable 2 fisting it.

more
The front of the flight box was my stooge

Just Just Bananas was finnished with Sig Koverall and dope. 70 foot lines, I don't know what the lap times were, but they were fast. Lost it when I got a bit low dureing inverted flight. I saved a piece of covering. My nieghbor across the street did the art work.
1 after flight pic. Just wore out.

Thanks Grey, cool pics.

Instead of an OS, you needed one of the Super Tigres, which had a lovely classic 4-2-4 break with hardly any need to rework anything much, other than getting an aftermarket head for it (although I understand that they also were happy running on a pipe setup back when they were popular).

I still have at least one, probably two, and picked up a 51 more recently that I haven't run yet, for a Tutor ARF that I haven't assembled just yet . .

Kiwi

What happens if you put a larger prop with less pitch on a monster engine? I'd imagine it would give lower speed and more thrust but is there some serious disadvantages?

The OS was a second hand engine that I had stumbled upon and could not resist.
It needed a home, So I came up with that plane. I ran a 12/6 prop, way to much prop for a high rever of an engine (never got on pipe no chance), but that brought the revs to a more useful and normal range. In reality the engine would of been much better suited to some kinda of speed plane. The pipe ended up being basically a muffler (and not to good at noise reduction), no boost. But it was still a hot ride.

Originally Posted by perttime

What happens if you put a larger prop with less pitch on a monster engine? I'd imagine it would give lower speed and more thrust but is there some serious disadvantages?

That is exactly what we do with the latest of RC-style engines to match their speeds to the line lengths we fly on. As a matter of fact, instead of the fairly common 10/6, 11/6, and 12/6 props we used in the pre-Schneurle period, we've gone to wider bladed 10/5s, 11/5s, and 12/5s now, even for slower-turning engines like the small block Super Tigre 60s that I used quite a few years ago, and still have a low-time pair of on hand here.

Less pitch would have tamed the silly thing down a bit. It was not a well thought out combo. I bought the engine on a whim and designed and built the plane on one also. But it was a real kick to fly just tiring.
Man I need to build me another u-control. I think a ST 51.

Many fine kits and most lazer cut with good wood. Bordak/ RSM and a few cottage kits. Some good ARF but suffer from poor quality hardware. Like RC ARF's hardware is not good. Plans short kit available also. Even RC conversions work with some work. A ST V .60 can give you a good ride. That rear exhaust OS on sort of pipe must have moved.
Dan

Moved is an understatement. Thankfully it never got on the pipe,. the 12/6 just would not let the engine rev to were it was meant to.
Right now I am tied up with a RC rebuild. I can only do 1 build at a time living in a small apartment. The kitchen table has become my workshop. If I took on any more the wife would grab the rolling pin.

What wing area would be a nice target for fully built up reasonably capable stunter running a ST 51
I have not built a kit in over 20 years and that was a Sig Kadet SR. Mega sticks. I do alot of building from plans or just roll my own design.
The more I think about it the more I think it is time to build another control line.

People seem to have pretty different ideas on power...

I was just looking at some old contest results from Australia, and people were using anything from a Veco .35 to a Stalker .61 on Noblers That time, the winner was the guy whose "Stalker 61 was almost idling to fly his original 1951 Nobler", so the big engine worked for him OK.


edit:
.... and that was a few years ago. I seem to have a photo of the modified monster engine Nobler that he recently built for his dad for the latest US Nats.

Stunt is follow the leader. Big very expensive engines twice the size needed but who cares. Now they are converting to electric and buying expensive electric stuff. Thats fine for them. In spite of all new engines [motors] last Worlds champ used a ST V .60 . A engine that came out in the 1960's. I know some will make excuses for new stuff but old engine beat them all. Yes pilot had alot to do with it but you need a good power train to make it happen.
Dan

Originally Posted by dankar04

Stunt is follow the leader. Big very expensive engines twice the size needed but who cares. Now they are converting to electric and buying expensive electric stuff. Thats fine for them.
In spite of all new engines [motors] last Worlds champ used a ST V .60 . A engine that came out in the 1960's.
I know some will make excuses for new stuff but old engine beat them all. Yes pilot had a lot to do with it but you need a good power train to make it happen.
Dan

Some are making excuses all the time to be able to badmouth electrics.... At least that's what I'm seeing in many fora.
Let me help you to update your historic overview:
The 2010 World Champ lost his European title in 2011 to a guy flying electric.
So the 'IC is better' myth can be binned with the other trash one sometimes encounters....

My ST 60 days are history since 2006 when I upgraded to electrics, never to go back, simply because it flies better.
Coming as a bonus: no more grease/vibrations worn out airframes...