The slope-soaring column in the February issue of 'RCM&E' brought forth a letter from a non- modelling model shop owner who was experiencing divided loyalties regarding his wish to go to church on Sundays and a desire to meet his customers in their natural habitat.
Look at this way. We all need some form of carrot to drive us on through the unpleasant side of this world. Some find it in a spiritual manner while others find it in material things. Personally, I find it very significant that the letter concerned came from a non-modeller. Obviously he does not need the sort of satisfaction that the dedicated modeller does and finds his personal fulfilment in other ways.
So far so good. However, he then goes on to say that, "On a 'practical' level, nothing acts to stabilise an individual more in society than Christianity." Well, sir, I don't like to quibble, but try telling that to the population of Northern Ireland, or certain Middle Eastern factions.
The editor recently published a letter from Philip Bowes (February 'Write hand circuits') taking issue with me about 'real' model aeroplanes. I should thank Alec really, I suppose, for not passing on the letter to me at the time, when any response that I might have produced would have appeared in the letters column. Now I can dwell on the subject at length and get paid for it!
Well now, Philip, I have closely perused all of my writings for this column and nowhere can I find anything which states that scale models are not real model aeroplanes. Let's look at a few examples of what I was trying to say:
1) There are currently a whole host of ready built models available, together with a similar number of models which require only assembly and finishing. We could also mention helicopters (I won't though because helicopter fliers are very sensitive) which resemble a large constructor set (again, I won't use the word Meccano since very few of todays 'modellers' will have heard of it). These could be described as toys, but to avoid a storm of abuse, lets call them 'imitation models' - OK?
2) It is possible to walk into a model shop and purchase a ready built scale model - including contest winners - which have been cast off by its builder for any number of reasons. I know because I've done it myself (cast off a winning scale model, that is). Now, while I would accept that the model is a real model aeroplane it surely cannot be described as anything other than a toy to the person that bought it - OK?
3) In the full size world (Er, perhaps that should be 'piloted' world) there are now several reduced size versions of famous fighters around (Spitfire, Focke Wulf 190, etc.), usually half to threequarter size and powered by a Continental engine. Would you say that these were models?
4) If you insist on the 'miniature replica' definition, how about the growing fad for CO2 powered miniature replica's of large vintage free-flight designs? Presumably the replica is a real model and the original isn't. A little harsh that considering the extra work involved.
Reading that again, it seems a little long-winded. Try this. A half size man-carrying 'Hurricane' is obviously not a model, yet it is a miniature replica. So what is a threequarter size, Telco powered, 'Southerner Mite'?
Surely anything which requires to be built from real wood, with the parts being cut out by the builder, assembled and finished with loving care, and which does not carry human pilot, is a real model by any standards.
Finally, I do not believe that the word 'model' necessarily implies a miniature or reduced scale replica of anything, it is a work of art - and to hell with what the dictionary says!
I now look forward to a host of letters from all those branches of the hobby which I have not mentioned, to complain about what I haven't said!
Have you ever noticed that all of the really major breakthroughs (or press releases) in the world seem to occur in the month of April? This being the April issue, it seemed appropriate to look around for some new and amazing revelation to enlighten you with.
Actually, this one is not exactly new, but a further development of one which was featured in the model press some time ago. Possibly, you may remember the zero displacement engine? The original article was reprinted in the SAM 35 magazine, 'Sam Speaks', a little while ago (no, not in the April issue) and this brought forth another article on further work on the subject.
First, let me refresh your memory. The idea was to produce an engine which had a stroke of zero - in other words, the crankpin centre coincided with the centre of the crankshaft. This resulted in an engine having zero displacement which produced its maximum power at infinite RPM and was completely vibrationless. Another feature, which received little publicity at the time, was that it was completely silent.
It did seem to me at the time that some of the implications of this were being ignored. For instance, the only way to achieve that infinite RPM would have been to use a prop of infinitesimal diameter, which would then have needed to be of infinite pitch in order to produce useful thrust. The prospect of infinite pitch and infinite RPM is mind-boggling, even allowing for the infinitesimal diameter!
The further work on the subject consisted of moving the crankpin even further across the crankweb to produce a negative stroke. This, of course, meant that maximum power was now produced at negative RPM and the engine actually manufactured fuel, instead of consuming it!
One interesting suggestion here was to dispense with the carburettor completely and let the fuel air mixture be blown out through the front housing to give an air bearing (like a dentists drill) which would reduce the friction to manageable proportions. In fact, this may not have been necessary, however, since although infinite RPM implies infinite friction, negative RPM should give negative friction.
Again, it would seem that some of the wider implications have been ignored. Surely, with negative RPM, it would be possible to build the ultimate aircraft with a pusher prop mounted on the front! This would give all the advantages of a pusher (greater efficiency, etc) with none of the disadvantages (less cooling, difficulty hand launching, and so on).
On the other hand, these disadvantages may not be so acute with that infinitesimal diameter and a 'cooling system' which now blows out cold air!
Rest assured that we will bring any new developments in this area to your attention as soon as possible. Though if the coincidence persists, you may have to wait until next April.
The postbag continues to contain letters agreeing with my various remarks on this matter. Please keep them coming, they may be useful.