Rascal (oz16870)

 

Do you have a photo you'd like to submit for this page? Then email admin@outerzone.co.uk

User comments

Had one of these back about 1964! Cox .010, F&M Pioneer rcvr, Babcock escapement. Two aborted flights to get it trimmed out, launched for the third excellent flight that turned into a untimed FF! Forgot to rewind the escapement rubber.
50+airyears - 11/07/2026
Would be nice to have plan for wing and stabilizer. They probably weren't included with the kit, but an outline tracing would be very nice to have.
DPlumpe - 11/07/2026
In my humble opinion, this plan is useless due to an absent wing plan of any type. Not even a three view. I understand why this was done though, since it was drawn to be used with the kit which included the die cut wing sheet and kit manufacturers usually did not encourage would be builders to make the model from the plan and also to reduce printing costs. Who will tackle the job of designing a wing plan? I would like to do it but lack of time prevents me from doing so. Cheers. Eduardo (Colombia)
Eduardo - 11/07/2026
SIG made Rascal in different sizes, from their site you can download instruction with printed parts an layout for every size. The most similar for 049 cox.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2281/6393/files/sigrc80rascal.pdf?1161818709039042179
don't forget Bradley plan for top flite rubber version http://www.parmodels.com/
Pit - 11/07/2026
more on plans in pdf:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1008310-%2A%2AFoamie-Rascal-27-36-40-with-plans-and-Video%2A%2A
pit - 11/07/2026
Eduardo, the word "useless" is not appropriate. It is a bad choice. A better choice would be "incomplete". You have looked over the plan and then asked other people to complete it for you. Not to labour the point too much, but a plan that can be completed is by definition not useless.
SteveWMD - 11/07/2026
Eduardo: All plans are the intellectual Property of the kit manufacturer and many MFR wisely decided not to include details and views that would allow for duplication. The Non-recurring cost associated with printing the plan sheets, box covers, tooling dies, raw materials would easily run tens of thousands of dollars. Think about how many kits Top Flite would have to sell at $5.99 just to recoup the initial investment. Other manufacturers used the same approach; VECO, Sterling, and Berkeley to name a few and none are in business today. So, in closing I doubt if any of the people at Top Flite cared (50 years later) that you found this inconvenient and neither do I. Best Wishes !
Ray - 12/07/2026
The outline shape of both the wing and stab is here: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1008310-%2A%2AFoamie-Rascal-27-36-40-with-plans-and-Video%2A%2A as Pit pointed out. That's a vector format plan drawn up by dz1sfb (for a foamie version) so it could be scaled up or down pretty easily. Have added a thumbnail of that plan here [pic 004].
SteveWMD - 12/07/2026
Hello Steve. I agree on your comments, some, not all. I still think that plans available free to download should be as complete as possible in order to be able for any person to build the model. A plan with no wings, designed for kit production is good for those who purchase the kit because the box includes a wing that can be built with no plans. . But if any guy wants to build the model from a plan legally downloaded from the web and not designed for building from the plan, can cause frustration to the would be builder. And if the model is no longer available as a kit and not just discontinued by the manufacturer who is still in business, I agree that the would be modeller should buy the kit, not make from the plans. But Top Flite, our of business for so many years means the kit would be only available from sites like Ebay and others as a collector’s item usually paying very high sums of money. All this said, I think it is perfectly feasible and legal to design the wing or any other part of the model not present on the kit plan in order to build the model, and naturally NOT FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES.
Interestingly, the oldest kit manufacturer still in business: Guillows, include on their beautifully drawn plans every part of the airplane AND all formers and parts. They state that they do this in order to make a broken or damaged parts. And 100 years in busines and going strong. The second oldest kit manufcturer in the world, our own Aeromodelos Britannia, 74 years, also include full size plans in every kit. Plans that include all the components of the aircraft.
Best wishes Steve from Colombia.
EDUARDO
Eduardo - 12/07/2026
Parmodels.org is gone, but it's saved on the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20251216081626/http://www.parmodels.com/jigtime-reproductions.html
Lincoln - 12/07/2026
Hi Eduardo,
from your great collection, have you for OZ the wonderful Vern Clements' Gee Bee Jumbo rubber powered plan? Could be a great addition, thanks for your assistance.
Pit - 12/07/2026
Hello Pit, are you some sort of a magician or fortune teller? How did you guess I was thinking on how to publish this plan? LOL. I DO HAVE THE VERN CLEMENS' GEEBEE GIANT RUBBER POWERED AIRPLANE. The problem is that he sent it to me way back in 1974 and it consists of EIGHT sheets all different sizes and after 52 years, it has faded a lot because it is an OZALID print and despite the fact that I have kept it very carefully. It can be restored but unfortunately, my scanner is a small letter size home unit. It would take me a lot of time to scan, stitch and restore each sheet of the plan to a high quality copy.
There is a printing store in the town I live and he has a professional big scanner but he charges a lot for scanning the sheets with no restoring. Perhaps there is another solution. I hear suggestions. Regards, EDUARDO
Eduardo - 12/07/2026
Thanks Eduardo, in the past I had the same problem. Solved. You can scan in parts with your scanner with a sufficient overlap at 300dpi, quick and rapid. Then post it to OZ, then someone else (me or Steve) can stitch and restore the plan. Please give us this opportunity to save this plan. Vern Clements is one of my preferred designer and when I was a boy I dreamed to build this rubber model that only appeared in a American Modeler 1973 cover. Thanks in advance for your effort Pit.
pit - 12/07/2026
Hello Pit, Of course I want to collaborate, especially with a very hard to find plan. That's no problem. The issue is TIME. I am involved in kit production, short kit production and several other tasks that I have to do every day, apart from sleeping, eating, watching Netflix, go out to fly, spend time with Paloma, my daughter and also film photography in my dark room and camera collection which is another of my activities. But I will solve the problem, jusr be a little patient. EDUARDO
Eduardo - 13/07/2026
Eduardo: I don't agree with most everything you said. I shared the box and plans as I received them which were in outstanding shape for their age. The kit was incomplete but it wasn't too difficult to layout and fabricate missing components, IMO any scratch building modelers could do it. Had you asked me for some assistance, instead of being rude I would have been happy to accommodate you. Well that ship as left the port, so to speak and that is all behind us now. BTW I am a retired Aerospace Engineer, 2 years shy of 50 years in the industry
Ray - 14/07/2026
I agree with Ray. Calling submissions "useless" is rude. Rude and unhelpful. Likely to cause frustration. Likely to cause argument. I think a simple apology would be appropriate.
SteveWMD - 14/07/2026
Steve: I meant to include my mid-wing Rascal adaptation I called the "Red Head" in honor of my Mom [pics 005, 006]. The Cox .020 on it was brand new and still in the sealed packing when I bought it in 1972 at Polk's Hobby shop. I have the layout somewhere, having started in the industry when drafting sets were still required.
Best,
Ray - 14/07/2026
Some more photos of the Rascal [main pic, 007-010].
Ray - 14/07/2026
Hello my friends, My intention was not to be rude or not respectful. To those who were offended, my most sincere apologies. Sometimes I'm just bothered to see situations that might frustrate a would-be builder. But naturally, there is always a solution for everything.
Have a wonderful rest of day, my friends.
EDUARDO
Eduardo - 14/07/2026
Many thanks Ray Jacobelli for providing this T/F instruction set and Steve and Mary for publishing. Even though it lacks the flying surface parts and outlines, one can go to:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1008310-%2A%2AFoamie-Rascal-27-36-40-with-plans-and-Video%2A%2A
and download the plan and pattern PDFs there. It is a foam version I believe of this same 27-in. R/C Rascal. Use the outlines as a basis for this balsa version.
Some may wonder why earlier plans did not include all patterns or full size plans. The late Joe Wagner, model aircraft designer and engine guru explained a time ago it was because then, kits were extremely competitive in cost. Thus due to printing costs being based on the size of paper. They provided what would allow the modeller to successfully complete the model but keep costs down so they could make money on increased sales over their competitors.
This is why also kit boxes were compact and fully packed to the brim leaving little air space inside. Kit engineering sometimes required splicing fuselage sides, longerons, wing spars, leading edges and trailing edges, and etc. This reduced warehousing space, used as much of the balsa sheets as possible reducing waste and made shipping easier and cheaper. It also allowed hobby shops to keep more kits in stock.
The splicing was still done in a manner to leave a model that was strong enough and could successfully fly. Many children and adults participated. Thus, most were sport modellers, building and flying for the fun of it. (This was before TV watching, Internet, computer and computer devices like cellular phones overtook us.)
Serious competitors may have use a kit for basis, but substituted better quality and lighter weight wood, use solid versus spliced pieces, and etc. It was a different mind set then.
George Hostler - 14/07/2026
EDUARDO, Thank you for the apology, we move forward as fellow members of this get hobby in the sprit of cooperation. I will get what information I have to fill in the "blanks" so that you and all modeler's have the necessary patterns to finish this fine airplane. I would be remiss if I didn't suggest that we all thank Steve and Mary for this devotion and OUTSTANDING contribution to this great hobby of ours. Thank you both !!!!!!!!!
Ray - 16/07/2026
Ray: I love the mid wing variant- looks nice. I presume it is a one piece model?
I too am a retired aerospace engineer (graduated in 1976 and retired in 2013 - only 47 years though). I am currently working on a short kit for the Rascal and I might do a mid wing version too. Thanks for the inspiration.
Mark.
Mark Winstanley - 16/07/2026
Mark: No the Mid-wing design does not have a one piece contiguous wing. It is secured by rubber bands in tension and supported by functional lift struts. Its my knock off wing design for FF but for RC with ailerons a one piece wing would be more practical. The wing has a shorter span with a more "Spitfire" plan form and greater depth of chord. I have my layouts and will post a picture.
Ray - 18/07/2026
Steve: What you titled a "tracing" is in standard industry practice (actually) reverse engineering as it contains dimensions, stock sizes, and processes NOT contained in any Top Flite kit data. There isn't even an outline of the wing.
Ray - 02/08/2026
Ah, ok got it. My bad. I thought it was literally traced from the wooden part. Ok. Renamed that file as Wing Plan, now.
SteveWMD - 02/08/2026
Steve: You were not far off, the OML was traced from the actual wing (and why not) I could have established a datum or wing reference lines, plotted points and connected them with a spline and French curves but that would only provide a close approximation. The outline alone would be a tracing. What I provided was the plan for building the wing, it may not be pretty but its certainly functional.
Ray - 03/08/2026
Add a comment