Why C/L?

Had a rare moment - a thought occurred to me......

Anyway, why is it called control line and not line control? Surely the latter sounds more logical? Compare it to R/C vs C/R.

Reply to
Pete
Loading thread data ...

Because they fly on the end of a control line?

Reply to
Paul McIntosh

Utterly wild guess--without benefit of any knowledge or research: was there a predecessor hobby of uncontrolled flight on lines? Would anyone just swing a model around on a string without controls attached? Was there a line acting as a tether and another acting as the "control line"?

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

It was also refered to as "U Control." Shouldn't it have been "You Control?"

Pete wrote:

Reply to
Double Ace

Not the way I did it. Brian

Reply to
Brian Lambert

Don't think you control would work with the fast combat planes. At least it didn't for me.

Reply to
Sport Pilot

U Control was a brand name that stuck. There were other methods out there. Of those only Walker's U control and the monoline. The monoline worked with one wire which was twisted the twisting line would turn a bell crank form the twisting motion. Because monoline is not as responsive it is only used for record speed planes where the single line creates less drag.

Reply to
Sport Pilot

| was there a predecessor hobby of uncontrolled flight on lines?

I believe so.

My daughter (almost 4) certainly likes to grab things with a wire on them -- electric razor, receiver (with antenna), etc. -- and spin it around over her head -- in flight, at least until the wire breaks or the device smacks into the wall or my son's (almost 2) head.

I consider this to be uncontrolled flight. And it's very bad on my razors, receivers and son. Which is why I try to keep the first two away from my daughter :)

Reply to
Doug McLaren

Ted shuffled out of his cave and grunted these great (and sometimes not so great) words of knowledge:

It worked for me. I used to fly combat with (this WILL DEFINITELY DATE ME ) an Ambroid "WhipSaw" powered by a "Super Tiger (not Como ) .19 Racing Engine". The "racing engine" was the designation when they were first imported into this country because they were the first (or one of the first ) to have ball bearings in the engine.

That particular combo could out fly MOST of the combat planes with a .29 on them and some with a .35.

As a side note: That plane (combo) was the only C/L setup that could literally turn on it's prop - aka Lumchaveck (spelling ?)

Reply to
Ted Campanelli

From Sport Pilot:

Wow, this is the first mention of the monoline I've heard in 50 years. Had a monoline setup on a McCoy.29 powered plane in 1955. It was very sluggish-acting as you mentioned. Bill(oldcoot

Reply to
Bill Sheppard

"U" control originated because if you visualize it, the bellcrank and leadouts form a letter "U" with the handle being attached to each of the legs. You could also reverse the picture and still have a "U".

Reply to
James Holbrook

There was at least one model flown on lines, with no active control of any flight surfaces.

See

formatting link
for the whole story.

"When things settled down, design work on the new plane began. It was named after his new daughter, Miss Shirley. Although not yet proven, Oba believed if one line worked, two lines must work and four lines would give him full house control. He had no metal control lines, only fishing line that he found stretched in unequal amounts with equal pressure. To solve this problem, he used a large handle. He attached this handle to four poles to replace the fishing pole he used on the biplane. He had already reasoned that his large control mechanism was not necessary and could never be used commercially, but the name of the game to Oba was safety. No way would he take a chance with his dream. The long poles could take up any slack in a second without running to gain line tension. The system could be improved later as it had been on the single line biplane. Oba was asked how he knew where to place all the four lines. He replied that it just seemed obvious to him that all four lines should be slightly behind the center of gravity."

After a court case in which St. Clair testified on behalf of Cox, St. Clair was named "Father of Control Line Flying" by the judge.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

It seems to me that Jim Walker copyrighted the name "U-Control" and then marketed the handles, etc.

Bruce B.

Fubar of The HillPe> When I was a kid we called it U-Control.

>
Reply to
Bruce Bretschneider

When I was a kid we called it U-Control.

Reply to
Fubar of The HillPeople

"Pete" wrote in news:cub0j0$708$ snipped-for-privacy@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:

I think it was because of the modern day marketeering that took the engineer out of sales and put in some bean counter with a masters in a nonscientific field.

In the early days on a drawing, an engineer would denote it with an arrow pointing labeled, "Control Line". Hence the name "Control Line" stuck. Most engineers were sales representatives prior to the Korean War. Keeping things simple avoided a lot of confusion.

However after the Truman administration, it was felt that someone else should earn the big bucks and the engineer should be relegated to design by dictation and off in some enclosed room, where he should not be heard. Modern marketeers coined the phrase, "Radio Control." Previous rule making was tossed out the window.

- HPT

Reply to
High Plains Thumper

Not if you consider the wires formed a U. :-)

RS

Reply to
Red Scholefield

Actually there was a form of modeling where the model was swung on a single line at the end of a bamboo pole. I don't recall what it was called but it predated powered Control Line flying.

RS

Reply to
Red Scholefield

Marty, I didn't know your specialty was history.

Reply to
Six_O'Clock_High

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 03:20:38 GMT, "Six_O'Clock_High"

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

Oba St. Clair had at least one model like that before he went to four (4!) lines on poles.

I suppose there's no reason why others might not have tried the single line, too.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.