Golden age of R/C: More "good" history

Model Airplane News, Mar 1998 by deBolt, Hal

LAST MONTH, WE DELVED into the history of probably the most famous R/C'ers, the Good brothers, and their model, Big Guff. We want to continue with this "Good" tale. The brothers competed in the '49 Nats with Big Guff and won again. If you recall, Bill was working in Syracuse, NY, and Walt was in Maryland. Perhaps the 600mile separation brought an end to their close collaboration in R/C; Walt was the only one involved in R/C thereafter.

In the late '40s, R/C made solid progress, and more and more modelers showed skill at designing and flying R/C. New planes and systems came into vogue, and Walt realized that the Big Guff's heyday was past. Competition required increased agility; that plus other needs led to specialized R/C designs. Converted freeflight models would no longer do!

Walt took off a year to review the situation and develop what many consider the first all-R/C model. Walt showed up at the Nats with his new Rudder Bug and once more dominated the competition. The Rudder Bug was as different from Big Guff as an apple is from an orange.

It was obvious that much thought had been given to the need for single-channel, rudder-only flying. The Bug's size reflected the major advances in both engines and R/C. The Bug was only about two-thirds the size and weight of Big Guff. New tubes and relays and fewer batteries negated the weight handicap of previous radios. With the advent of WW II, distinct advances were apparent in the engine field. Lessons learned during the War resulted in even more impressive engines in the postwar period; .29s now produced more power than the first .60s! Improvements in both areas favored R/C; no longer was a large plane required to carry the previous heavy weight with barely sufficient power. A more realistic size was possible!

Less weight and more power dictated the Rudder Bug's reduced size. Walt's design still followed Charlie Grant's excellent design philosophy. The 6-foot wing retained a thick, high-lift airfoil, while the horizontal tail had a moderately thick symmetrical section. Grant's doctrine allowed the use of a relatively small vertical tail, which enhanced spiral stability while increasing rudder effectiveness. A high thrust line kept the "zooming" tendency when exiting turns and maneuvers to a minimum. If there were a shortcoming, it would be the use of a free-flightstyle force arrangement; but a force arrangement suitable for R/C was yet to come.

The use of tricycle landing gear to assist R/C takeoffs was probably pioneered by Jim Walker, and Walt realized its value. Walt once said that a side effect was about as nice as the improved takeoffs: the front wheel acted as a "bumper" during those "oops" landings, saving props!

Structurally, the Bug followed free-flight methods with the generous use of "sticks" and little sheet wood. The nylon covering provided the needed strength. Walt realized the need for radio accessibility by retaining the "side door," as featured on Big Guff.

As the name implies, the Rudder Bug was developed for rudder-only competition and did an outstanding job for newcomer R/C'ers of the era; many Bugs were seen!

Apparently, the Rudder Bug was never kitted, but Berkeley Models did produce a smaller version labeled the "Royal Rudder Bug."

After the Rudder Bug, Walt developed another smaller rudder-only design called the "Wag." It featured a deep "step" on the fuselage bottom to produce drag, which would hopefully prevent speed buildup while exiting maneuvers and on landing approaches.

In the R/C world, both of these designs were relatively short-lived. R/C was rapidly advancing beyond rudder-only, and multi-controls were on the horizon. More simplistic designs were appearing, and R/C kits came on the market.

The "Good" story would not be complete without mentioning Walt's Two-Tone Pulse-Width (TTPW) R/C system-his answer to the multicontrol desire. The basis of the TTPW system was two separate audio signals. The carrier was modulated with two audio frequencies that were separated in the receiver and relegated to vertical and horizontal control. The transmitter had a "pulser" for each channel, arranged to vary the width of each pulse. If the center of the variation was neutral, then as the pulse was narrowed, the control could move one way; widening the pulse would move the control in the opposite direction. Because the amount of width pulse was infinite, there was potential for proportional action.

As with most pulse systems of the time, the control actuators were of the "Mighty Midget" motor style-one for rudder and another for elevator. Such a system was labeled "Pulse Proportional"-this in the heyday of reed systems! Unlike other simplistic pulse systems, there was very little control dithering with the TTPW.

A sign of the times was the complexity of the TTPW circuitry. With no transistors or integrated ciruits, the tubes needed a lot of circuitry and critical components to do the work. Walt published a TTPW how-to that caught the fancy of numerous R/C'ers. The complexity soon drew a nickname: "Too tough to peddle with!" I doubt if Walt will ever live that one down!