Super Sixty - any good mods?

[Bob Cotsford]

I've got myself a BB 4 channel Super-Sixty kit NIB which may or may not stay untouched long enough to be one of this winters projects.

It's likely to end up with "sufficient" power as the choice of engines is really down to a 40 2 stroke or an old 48 Surpass 4 stroke. I'm not thinking vintage style flying, this will be an everyday all-weather hack and not reserved for ideal conditions so does anyone have any known mods to improve the model? Reduce incidence, change the thrustline, any weak spots that need bracing, any over engineered bits that can be lightened?

What's worked for you?

[David Davis]

You could consider reinforcing the fin-to-fuselage joint with some triangular stock but otherwise I'd keep it standard. Mine is pretty quick on a two-stroke 29.

[Andy Green]

Mine flys well on a PAW 29. A 40 2St will be too much. Take a look at my build, I'd use bolts for the wing fixings, aways neater than bands.

I alos added ailerons with a servo in each wing.

Andy

[Dave Bran]

My first RC plane in 1972. Nylon finish, painted black.

I had a twin plug Merco 61 and a large underside trap door to a toffee bombing bay (used at other times for parachutists).

I kept mine the std dihedral and 3 channel.

[Bob Cotsford]

Andy, as I don't own a .29, a 40 or 48 is what it's getting. I'm thinking hot-rod. Ford model A with a V-8.

Actually I suspect that the bigger engine will not mean a huge increase in speed, but a big increase in vertical performance. Twin aileron servos noted, I've not studied the plans but assumed it would be a torque rod job.

David, good point re the fin, one to note down

Dave, I like your style - Merco 61 on a 3 channel!

So will the incidence be good to go as per plan? The reason I ask is that my Eros still has way too much incidence even though I dropped the LE by 3/16" and packed the TE by 1/4". I even added a couple of degrees extra downthrust and still need to mix down elevator with throttle.

[Jimbo565]

Bob,

My S60 ( 100 yrs ago) flew very well on a 26fs.

When I built the scaled up Gamine I had a 48 surpass up front turning a 13x 4 and it flew on tickover so now have it with SC30 fs and its spot on.

Stay cool

Jim

[David Davis]

I'd keep the incidences standard Bob, just bear in mind it's not a WOT 4.

[PatMc]

The Merco 35 was the most commonly used engine when the S60 was the near universal UK trainer model.

[Bob Cotsford]

Posted by David Davis on 28/09/2012 14:37:11:

I'd keep the incidences standard Bob, just bear in mind it's not a WOT 4.

Someone had one at Greenacres and it really impressed me. That was NOT being flown in trainer mode! The 48 Surpass should be just the job for the full wolf in sheeps clothing effect

[jeff2wings]

Hi Bob, here’s my 2p’s worth in answer to your actual question .First reduce dihedral to 1 inch per

wing ,inset rather than strip ailerons, zero the incidence on the wing, solid sheet tailplane and rudder fin and possibly a trike gear ? KK did a ‘super’ super sixty with trike gear and 4ch in the late 70’s like that ,oh,and don’t forget a full depth ply wing brace with tapered ends.

You could go from a Clark Y to a semi symmetrical section for better inverted although I had no trouble doing that with my 3ch super 60,used to freek a few people out at the field when I did ! LOL

[Bob Cotsford]

Funny, I thought the instructions stated dihedral as 1/2" under each wing when I had a quick browse? Maybe I should emphasize that this is the Ben Buckle 4 channel kit. Couldn't resist it when I saw it on ebay still sealed in the box from the factory.

Any particular reason for the inset ailerons Jeff? Zero (or maybe +1 degree) incidence sounds sensible, have you done this? How much downthrust did you end up using? As for altering the wing section, well, maybe if I was building from a plan but that would defeat the point of building from a kit - I'm lazy, not to mention tight!

I don't think it needs sheet surfaces, built up should be strong enough with suitable wood selection, and sorry, but it's staying taildragger! I never did like the look of the trike S60 variants.

All useful points to consider, thanks gents.

[Alan Cantwell]

we flew one years ago, it had a FLAT wing, the ailerons where about 4-6inch long, and where ADDED to the trailing egde, looked wierd, it flew as a super 60 should do, but when it turned on input from the ailerons, it seemed to stop, pivot round the CG, and set off again, it was great fun, power was an ancient OS40 Max H

[jeff2wings]

My S60 was built in 1990 3ch with Irvine 20, made up my own aileron wing some time later, inset ailerons because I thought it looked better. It was made without cabin glazing ,wing seat was made from ¼ x 1 doubled up so when I reduced the incidence it was just a case of re-cutting to suit .Ended up with o.s 46 FX up front for glider towing made the original built up T/P flap a bit at full throttle,think I used a throttle/elevator mix on my JR 347 for that set up .

It depends on how much of a ‘hot-rod’ you want to make I suppose ,went back to 3ch and a SC25 it was more fun . BTW never liked the look of trike set up on min-super

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Mike Etheridge 1]

Well mine has got an Enya 40 fitted and on full throttle the take off rivals the Space Shuttle! its OK on about half throttle but of course with a larger engine the flight times are reduced as fuel consumption is relatively high. In 1961 the original was shown with an ED Racer (2.46 CC) and the recommended engine limit was 3.5CC. My junior 60 with an ED Racer is most economical!

MJE

[Peter Miller]

My first SUper 60 (that I was able to fly) had a Fox 25.and two channels.

My second had ailerons and a=one of the first Saito 30s in the country. Upset the local club that insisted on fitting Merco 61s becasue I could fly the same aerobatics if slower.

My next had two OS 20 FS in it.

Reading some of the above modifications suggested such as semi symetrical wing section,, no dihedral, zero incidences, masses of power, I do wonder why they don't just buy an average off the shelf trainer.

[David Davis]

Well this is mine re-engined with a genuine Merco 35, an eBay purchase. It flew beautifully until I accidentally broke a small wire in the transmitter and the model flew away. The RAF found it but there's repair work to do I fear!

[Foxfan]

I was given 2 S60s by an old chum and I am restoring the crashed one, using as much of the original nylon covering as possible (it's over 40 years old), regluing all the joints, bracing the fuzz a bit more and fitting an Enya 29. That came with ailerons inset and the good old fashioned central servo set-up with push rods and bellcranks.

I have a choce of two builtup tailplanes, one with slightly bigger elevator. I love the idea of saving these old kites.

The other one? Well, why build two the same? So I've carried on his ancient build but with a low wing layout. Never seen one before, so why not? It isn't costing me much in wood as I have a load from WAY back anyway.

Martin

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Foxfan]

Oh well, at least somebody else thought it was an idea! I've so far had a chorus of NOOOO!!s about it, but that never worried me<G> I simply cut out the same shape as the top of the wing in the bottom under where the wing would normally go and boxed it in with layers of soft 1/16th, brace inside with ply for the fixings. Haven't decided on how the cabin will look yet.

I also figured a low wing trainer as a follow up to the standard old Super Sixty I already have.

Cheers,

Martin

[Djay]

Mine has a 27 year old OS 48 Surpass four stroke in it, swinging a 12 inch prop.

It is a delight to fly, plenty of power, but mostly flown on around 1/3rd throttle as this is the best speed to enjoy the model.

Only mod I done to mine was add wing bolts instead of banding the wing on.

It is one of my favourite planes and flies in all weather including high winds. Couple of pics in my albums.

Just build as per the kit and it will be fine, no mods needed to the construction.

Darryl

[Handyman]

Hi Bob. Great that you are having a go at the old Super Sixty. I picked up an old 3 channel one recently that was sold by Ben Buckle kits. I wanted an aileron version and I Contacted Colin Buckle and got a separate wing plan showing ailerons. You are correct about the dihedral. It is only 1.2" under each wing tip for this version.

This aircraft is not meant to be a "Speed machine", but a aircraft that will give you hours of very steady flying and makes a good trainer. I built and flew one of these when I was in the Army in Germany in 1960,Hildesheim to be exact, and I got to use the grass airstrip when there was no flying taking place. I would have said that for a flat bottomed wing, a 40 engine would be the maximum that I would use, as for changing the airfoil section to a semi-symmetrical, why change a classic. If you want a model with that sort of wing, then go for the venerable classic "Wot 4".

Never the less, enjoy the build, its my next build when the weather gets too bad to fly.

[Handyman]

One thing that I forgot to mention, When I first started to use nylon as a covering on my aircraft, an old modeller said to me, and I quote," You will always have a bag to carry the bits home in". Do you know, he was correct. The nylon covering always seemed to keep all the broken pieces of balse inside and repairs were always easy to carry out.

[Bob Cotsford]

After 12 months I'd just about forgotten I'd still got this kit as other builds had taken priority, thanks for reminding me about it!

[Mike Etheridge 1]

Don't forget some modellers have suggested the wings should be strengthened around the centre section if the Super 60 is going to stunt to any degree.

MJE