 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / April 2010Vintage Sterling Mambo - $181.47 US
Some things seem to be too good to be true. I didn't think this E-Bay listing was worth how much it sold for. I have the plans for it, it's a slab sided constant chord wing and stab plane, easy to scratch build. Sterling Mambo R/C Model Airplane Kit NIB Vintage!! Sold: $181.47 US. http://tinyurl.com/dj3a7 I guess someone was missing this for their collection.  SignatureHPT Some people just have too much money! > Some things seem to be too good to be true. I didn't think this > E-Bay listing was worth how much it sold for. I have the plans [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I guess someone was missing this for their collection. > Some people just have too much money! Or too few brains! >> Some people just have too much money! > > Or too few brains! How do all of these brainless people get so much money? <G> Ed Cregger > Some things seem to be too good to be true. I didn't think this > E-Bay listing was worth how much it sold for. I have the plans [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I guess someone was missing this for their collection. Nostalgia is hard to put a price on. I had one of those kits in 1969. What a massive collection of parts. Ed Cregger >> Some things seem to be too good to be true. I didn't >> think this E-Bay listing was worth how much it sold for. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I had one of those kits in 1969. What a massive collection > of parts. A good Figure-9 would reduce it to a massive collection of parts. :) When I build it, I will modify the original layout by increasing downthrust and change the lifting tail to more prevailing layout for R/O aerobatic capability. Stab is Clark-Y, I'd go symmetrical or slab. Also, I'd go with a standard leading edge instead of the 3/4"x1/4" slant LE. Others have shared with me that the original had a tendency if allowed to pick up speed (as in a spiral dive), it would not pull out of it, doing the "lawn dart" thing. In R/O aerobatics, you want it to zoom up after neutralizing or giving opposite rudder, so it can loop, wingover, S-turn, etc. Lifting tail negates the zoom tendency. Otherwise, it would make a fine R/O aerobatic plane. An option may be to use 1/4" blue foam insulation board for the fuselage and tail feathers. That might be a possibility worth exploring. Or light ply sides instead of balsa, with lightening holes. I've got the vintage OS Max .15 R/C (baffle not Schneurle) to haul it. SignatureHPT >>> Some things seem to be too good to be true. I didn't >>> think this E-Bay listing was worth how much it sold for. [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > lightening holes. I've got the vintage OS Max .15 R/C (baffle > not Schneurle) to haul it. I just realized that we were talking about two different, though related, models. The one that I had was the Mighty Mambo and was intended to be flown with "multi" R/C equipment. After building mostly profile models of Sterling Ringmasters, Top Flite Flite Streaks and Goldberg Shoestring/Busters, you would not have believed my expression when I gazed upon the contents of the Mighty Mambo box. I was incensed/fumed/enraged. Who in their right mind would take the time to build this beast? I wanted to fly NOW. In disgust, I put the lid back on the box and tossed it into the corner of the basement. I then jumped into my then new and trusty steed, a 1969 AMX 390, 4-speed and blazed my way to a hobbyshop, where I promptly bought a Goldberg Senior Falcon kit and a new OS Max .58 R/C engine. The Sr. Falcon was rated for a .45 engine, but I didn't want to take the chance that it would be underpowered. This is a fine example of 23 year old logic. As it turned out, the OS .58 was perfect for the Sr. Falcon. One test flight later, I concluded that the stock Sr. Falcon handled something akin to a B-36 with a full bomb load. I was an ex control line combat jock. This docile , sluggish behavior would never do. I took the Sr. Falcon home and down into the basement workshop. A few minutes later I had lopped off two panels from each wing and had cut off the old ailerons. The new ailerons were twice as large. There! That should perk things up. When I took it back to the field, no one would test fly it for me (I hadn't soloed on multi yet). I went to the field on several occasions with no one volunteering to do the deed, so I finally did it myself. No crash, no problems, it handled beautifully. I used to look at that "old school" (reeds) Mighty Mambo box and smile to myself for not going forward with its construction. I figured I had saved myself a couple of years of frustration and dissatisfaction by jumping right into a model with a semi-symmetrical airfoiled wing and ailerons responsive enough to satisfy a fighter jock. Now, these days, I kind of wish I had that old kit back. It might be fun to build something like that now, as I approach fifty-nine (next Thursday week). Ed Cregger > ... Now, these days, I kind of wish I had that old kit back. It might be fun to >build something like that now, as I approach fifty-nine (next Thursday >week). Happy birthday, Ed! I was given a Mighty Mambo by a friend--along with a McCoy .35, I think, on the nose. I re-covered it with silk or silkspan and did my best to paint it. Unfortunately, I didn't know diddley about primer coats and undercoats when using dope. It was, I admit, not very pretty. The owner came back a few years later and reclaimed his plane and engine. I'd never flown them--just hung them up in my room. As soon as I handed him the plane, he began stripping the covering off the wing because he was planning to monokote it. I've never forgiven him. He could at least have thanked me for storing his model and then ripped up my covering job in private. :o( Marty >> ... Now, these days, I kind of wish I had that old kit back. It might be >> fun to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Marty Thanks for the happy birthday wishes, Marty. Much appreciated. How do you like the nerve of some people! Stripping the covering off right in front of you! Sheesh! I used to kid folks about that kit. I used to claim that you actually had to build the ribs, there were so many pieces. I forget if you did or not, but I'm pretty sure that some of the old kits made you install doublers on some of the ribs. One Sterling model that I always wanted to build and fly was the Royal Coachman. It just looked neat in their advertising, and I'm partial to .15 powered models anyway. The Sr. Falcon kit that replaced the Mighty Mambo used wing construction techniques that I was familiar with, from my control line days. That was a good flying model, before and after I reduced the wing size and increased the size of the ailerons. Now the basement/garage is filling up again with ARFs. I have to make a concious effort to buy some real kits too. Ed Cregger > I used to kid folks about that kit. I used to claim that you actually had to > build the ribs, there were so many pieces. I forget if you did or not, but > I'm pretty sure that some of the old kits made you install doublers on some > of the ribs. I was given an Imperial Ringmaster back around 79 or so. God, what a mess. Crappy plywood and half an acre worth of balsa trees in that little box. I'm surprised no one jumped on the original poster about his plans to do all of those modifications to the mambo kit. Kind of defeats the purpose of building the old kit, IMHO. Start from scratch if you are going to do a lot of changes. >> I used to kid folks about that kit. I used to claim that you actually had >> to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > of building the old kit, IMHO. Start from scratch if you are going to do > a lot of changes. I used to think that Sterling kits were the worst, until I stumbled upon PDQ kits from out of Millville, NJ. They made Sterling look primo, but they did yield good flying control line models - Flying Clown, Baby Clown, etc. Ah, the Imperial Ringmaster. A Ringmaster profile wing with a built up fuselage, IIRC. Ever notice how the airplane tilted away from you when the cylinder head was mounted upright? Ditto the Flite Streak with a fuselage and one combat flying wing that I built with an upright engine. I've liked sidewinders ever since. Ed Cregger > Ah, the Imperial Ringmaster. A Ringmaster profile wing with a built up > fuselage, IIRC. Actually, the wing was very different, especially with wing landing gear blocks and flaps. Very weak structure with horrible quality die crunched mushy balsa. I gave it away halfway through framing the wing when I realized no Fox I had was gonna haul all that lumber around worth a dang. I was about 16 at the time and didn't have the desire to spend a lot more time on it. > Ever notice how the airplane tilted away from you when the > cylinder head was mounted upright? Ditto the Flite Streak with a fuselage > and one combat flying wing that I built with an upright engine. I've liked > sidewinders ever since. I think the only right side up mounted engine I had (other than .049) was my TF combat streak. Now that you mention it, it probably had that tendency, but the inside wing was bigger than the outer so I may have chalked it up to that. I only had one, and it didn't last long. Stuck to the value packed Double Voodoo kits after that with soldered up 3 in 1 oil cans for fuel tanks. Tissue and Ambroids and Dope, oh my! I think one of those fox bellcranks was in half a dozen planes. Must have been defective ;) >> Ah, the Imperial Ringmaster. A Ringmaster profile wing with a built up >> fuselage, IIRC. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > I think one of those fox bellcranks was in half a dozen planes. Must > have been defective ;) Now that I think of it, I built the Super Combat Streak (Flite Streak with a fuselage?). Another fellow built the Imperial Ringmaster. Neither flew as well as their profile equivalents - at least to me, probably because of the additional weight, as you indicated. I was a Voodoo fan myself. I loved that model and built so many of them that I can't remember how many. I even built some when I first got out of the Air Force. I also built a Top Flite Nobler while in the Air Force. Instead of buying the venerable Fox .35 Stunt, like I should have, I was working part time at the base hobby shop and fell in love with an Enya .29 TV engine. They cost about the same as I recall ($14 plus change). That started my love affair with Enya engines. However, the Enya turned out to be a terrible choice for the Nobler. It made it grossly nose heavy. I should have bought the Fox .35 Stunt. I have been trying to remember the name of the upright engine combat ship for decades. It was really popular back then. I think it was a Midwest kit - a Quickie Combat? Ed Cregger > I have been trying to remember the name of the upright engine combat ship > for decades. It was really popular back then. I think it was a Midwest kit - > a Quickie Combat? I can't think of one off the top of my head, other than the TF Combat Streak, of course. Only kits we had at the four seasons store seemed to be Goldberg, Sterling, TF, and Airtronics, in about that order. Hence my collection were Shoestrings, Jumpin Beans, Q tee, Square Soar, Ringmasters (a few sizes), Voodoos, Streaks, and a lil Satan or two. Black Widows powered most of my stuff, along with a Fox 29, 35's, 36's, and BB15 Here's an RC conversion pic I found on the web. Stock came with a mono wheel gear http://tinyurl.com/b9f7a >> I have been trying to remember the name of the upright engine combat ship >> for decades. It was really popular back then. I think it was a Midwest [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/b9f7a Boy, does that bring back the memories. And to think that I used to power mine with a Fox .36X. Those control lines eat up a lot of power. Ed Cregger > I'm surprised no one jumped on the original poster about > his plans to do all of those modifications to the mambo > kit. Kind of defeats the purpose of building the old kit, > IMHO. Start from scratch if you are going to do a lot of > changes. Sorry old bean, to commit sacrilege by descrating the VSRC spirit of the kit. I'm scratch building from an old John Pond plan. Having built a couple Sterling kits, there's always room for improvement. How about this, a mod-durn trike landing gear! May the flees of a thousand camels infest your reed and pulse proportional equipment! SignatureHPT > > I'm surprised no one jumped on the original poster about > > his plans to do all of those modifications to the mambo [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > May the flees of a thousand camels infest your reed and pulse > proportional equipment! Bah, I say, Bah! I was fortunate enough to start with a Sanwa 8020 two channel. Got a halfway finished Ace five channel with that lovely prismatic case after that. Got it working but traded it before I left Germany. Didn't get another four or more channel till about 86 or so when I got a Conquest. I flew mostly 049's and gliders, and of course control line, until that point. I had a Sterling Fledgling on two channel with a Fox 35. That was not a Sunday flier. Later changed it to 3 channel with a K&B 20 and taught several people to fly on it. >> > I'm surprised no one jumped on the original poster about >> > his plans to do all of those modifications to the mambo [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > not a Sunday flier. Later changed it to 3 channel with a K&B 20 and > taught several people to fly on it. I knew a fellow that used to compete in Novice and then Advanced pattern while flying the Sterling Fledgling powered by an OS.40 or .45 FSR engine. That thing would smoke. He used to win regularly, with a flat bottomed airfoil equipped trainer. Neat. Ed Cregger >> > I'm surprised no one jumped on the original poster about >> > his plans to do all of those modifications to the mambo [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > 3 channel with a K&B 20 and taught several people to fly on > it. I could understand, your Fledgling pro'ly flew around like a quickie racer with that .35 Fox. I started out with an Ace Pulse Commander on 26.995 MHz (brown), Baby Twin Adams actuator and a Top Flite R/C Schoolboy with .020 Cox Peewee. Flew it at the Naval Amphibious Base in Little Creek, VA while in "A" school. Also had a Sterling Beginner's Eindecker with .049 Golden Bee that I flew U control with. While in college in the late '70s on the GI Bill, I built a kit Charlie's R/C 5 channel system. (Charlie was Bill Cannon's wife.) Flew 2 channel with it in an Airtronics Q-Tee with .049 Black Widow. Also flew my R/O with aux. throttle Top Flite Schoolmaster with OS Max .10 R/C. My radio was another Ace Pulse Commander on 72 MHz with KRD quick blip sequential throttle servo. SignatureHPT Still have a Mini Mambo in the garage with a K&B 049, I keep it as a reminder of how good stuff is today. All those Sunday's climbing tree's or driving around the block looking for it. > Still have a Mini Mambo in the garage with a K&B 049, I > keep it as a reminder of how good stuff is today. All those > Sunday's climbing tree's or driving around the block > looking for it. I've still got my Mini. I'm changing out the .049 R/C Bee for a Norvel .062 and making it R/E. Great little R/O plane when used with auxiliary throttle. With the new mini equipment, add an elevator to the stab, voila! No more tree climbing. (But no guarantees against Figure-9's.) SignatureHPT I built a few Sterling kits. Poor wood selection and parts fit. Ove designed. Good experience though -- mode > I built a few Sterling kits. Poor wood selection and parts > fit. Over designed. > Good experience though. True, but if one was willing to do a little wood substitution, would come out okay. This was acceptable consider that the kits were relatively inexpensive back in the late '60s through '70s. One thing though nearing the company's demise, they were substituting luan ply (same stuff cheap wood interior doors are made of) for model aircraft ply, definitely inferior wood. I paid something like $8.50 for my Mini-Mambo from America's Hobby Center in the late '70s. I saw Mini go for $80 on E- Bay. That's okay for a kit collector but for a builder, just a little too much. One exception though, I bought a Lou Andrews S-Ray for $75, but it is a kit I've always wanted to get but didn't and rarer than the Mambo. It's a builder, not a collector. Kit was pro'ly around $12 in the '70s. SignatureHPT >I paid something like $8.50 for my Mini-Mambo from America's >Hobby Center in the late '70s. Does anyone know of a current source for the Mighty Mambo plans and templates? The Minie Mambo was my first plane and would like to build the 4 channel if I can find decent plans. Thank you. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.