Piper Super Cruiser (oz5450)

 

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

User comments

Friday, May 10, 2019: Attn: If anyone still has this vintage FS-8 kit, would you be willing to draw up a sheet (or sheets) that contains full size trace outlines of each of the fuselage bulkheads/formers? If so, please send an email to me Bill Jackson: wjcm8883@aol.com to advise of your charge for this service. I would like to build this model. Thanks.
Bill Jackson - 11/05/2019
Bill, Sterling also produced this aircraft in a 36 in wingspan kit and that plan has the bulkheads. Outerzone has the plan see oz1424. Seems you could photocopy using the enlarge feature to fit your needs. It probably is double, but compare the wingspans to get the exact percentage difference. Good luck with your build.
Bill Hibbets - 12/05/2019
12 May 2019, Bill Hibbets:Thanks for the information.
Bill Jackson - 13/05/2019
The E series Sterling Piper Super Cruiser is in no way identical to the larger FS-8 version. The number of fuselage bulkheads is different. The wing is different. The tail pieces are different. There is no simple interchange of enlarged parts from the E series plane with the FS-8 version. You will never get an F-8 plane by enlarging the E series plan. The result will be an enlarged E series plane, which is good.
MS - 08/05/2020
I agree completely. Both models have in common only the fact that they are Piper Super Cruiser and that they were kits made by Sterling. After carefully checking the plans of the large version, I can see the formers can be developed because the fuselage section is not round but made with straight lines. Only the nose might be a problem, but this section can be taken from any three view plan of the aircraft. Anyone who can handle Photoshop or any other similar software, can develop the formers. Concerning the width, it can be taken from the wing center section, and the three view plan. I would do it but I am short on time despite the coronavirus lockdown. And yes, wingspan is 72 inches. The problem is that I was confused since the year in which I built the model was 1968. Stupid confusion. And finally, anyone building this model, YOU MUST REINFORCE THE WING CENTRE SECTION!!!!! My wings folded and that was the end of my SC. The original structure, was not designed for full house radio control. Just for free flight or single channel. Best wishes from Colombia.
Eduardo - 09/05/2020
My Piper Super Cruiser made from the Sterling kit in 1968 [pic 003]. It had a Torpedo Greenhead .35 and an Orbit 6-12 channel radio with only three controls. no ailerons. Monokote covered. Unfortunately, the wings broke up and there was no more Super Cruiser. I recommend anyone building this beautiful model to reinforce the wing center section. Best wishes.
Eduardo - 10/05/2020
I purchased a partially built Sterling Super Cruiser kit (including the original box, plans and parts) from a modeling colleague in 1968 for $10.00 when I was a sophomore in high school. He was a chaplain in the USMC and was being transferred to Japan and he couldn't take the model with him. The fuselage was nearly completed, but I had to construct the wings and tail feathers, plus the usual covering and radio installation. After completing the wing, I noticed that it didn't seem that strong so I attached a medium weight fiberglass cloth with polyester resin across the entire sheeted center section. This greatly strengthened the wing and it hardly flexed when significant force was applied. After completing everything except for the radio installation, it sat idle for more than 20 years while I obtained an engineering education my career. I installed a 4-channel Futaba Attack radio and an Enya 60 in the early 1990's, and successfully fly it a number of times. I had previously tried various engines, starting with an Enya 29 and even an Enya 45, but they didn't have enough power to easily get it airborne on our grassy and slightly rough field. The Enya 60 handled it around easily and it could be nicely flown at 50 to 75% power once airborne. At full power, one could perform basic aerobatics. After flying it a number of times, I parked it and have not flown it since, which is more than 50 years after I purchased it. It now sits in one of my storage closets, and is still in great shape. All glue joints were done with Elmer's white glue and are still strong. The original silk and Aero gloss dope on the wings has gotten brittle, so I removed it, vowing to refinish the entire plane someday. I was looking at the plans and was thinking that with today's CAD software and supporting measurements, one could easily design the fuselage formers that are missing from the plans. Some of the formers located in the wing section are visible, and paper templates could probably be made. The others would have to be drawn using the plans as a guide and also direct measurements from the built model. I have the original metal cowl and made the wing struts as per the plans. I was thinking that a version which was about 50% larger (about 9 foot wingspan), would be perfect for one of today's gas engines.
Patrick Mills - 06/03/2021
Add a comment