Phantom & Phantom II

[JOEBISHOP]

Hi Stan

Yes these sponsons are for the .12 boats. The angle of attack is 3-1/2 degrees and there is no dihedral in the ride surfaces. Joe

 

[KenOlvis]

Joe

Nice work will the boom spacing on the.12 ultra an .12 elite be the same.

Ken

 

[Steven Bryant]

Hi Joe I've been watching this thread will great interest, You've managed to design a great looking boat and I can't wait to see it finished.

Are you planning to design and build an electric 6s version?

Steve

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Joe

Nice work will the boom spacing on the.12 ultra an .12 elite be the same.

Ken

Hi Ken, yes the boom spacing is exactly the same. As I have said before they are essentially the same boat. Joe

Hi Joe I've been watching this thread will great interest, You've managed to design a great looking boat and I can't wait to see it finished.

Are you planning to design and build an electric 6s version?

Steve

Hi Steve, yes I will design an electric boat but will need input from guys like you as I know nothing about electric. I am sure I will only design one PHANTOM II in the electric version. What is the motor size that is mostly used in outriggers (as it compares to nitro engines)? Is there more than one class of electric outriggers? These are some of the things I will need to know. Joe

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Hi Guys

Been a while but I have been very busy getting everything figured out for the ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II A1/2A (.12) kits. I have posted photos below of the ELITE and the ULTRA boats mocked up so you can see what they basically look like. The cowl (ULTRA) and air deflector (ELITE) are missing as I have not built them yet. The ELITE will have no rear sponsons but instead will have a center mounted 1" wide ski. The ELITE only has one vertical fin on the front sponsons. The ULTRA has rear sponsons with air directional vertical fins and will not have a center mounted ski. The ULTRA has 2 vertical fins on the front sponsons. The rear decks and radio covers are also not shown.

As for the construction, you may notice a light colored wood on the inside of the tubs, this is Liteply plywood. Liteply is a very light but strong plywood commonly used in model aircraft construction. The hull sides are 1/8" Liteply laminated on the out side with 1/32" birch plywood. All the bulkheads are 1/8" Liteply except the transom which is a laminated double layer of 1/8" birch plywood. The hull and sponson boom receivers tubes are carbon fiber tubes and the booms are carbon fiber solid rods. The water line from the transom to the engine compartment is also a carbon fiber tube. The outlets for the linkage seals are carbon fiber tubes as well. I am thinking about making the motor mounts carbon fiber, don't know yet.

The sponsons (both front and rear) on the ULTRA are a little tedious to build as they are so small on the .12 boats. A little patience and careful work will go a long ways here! The ELITE sponsons, on the other hand are a breeze to build, there is very little work to them. The hull (tub) is very straight forward and does not require a complicated jig just a flat table top.

The boats pictured below are Ken Olvis's boats. As a Bishop Aeromarine Team Member, Ken will be testing and racing the boats in the South Eastern part of the country. Also Ken will be available for comment concerning the setup and running of the boats. Up next will be Marty Fields' ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II AB (.21) boats. Marty is a new member of the Race Team and will be testing and racing the .21 boats. Marty hales from the UK and will be racing in the UK and Western Europe. Marty is also a World Champion boat racer and is sponsored by Hitec and others. We welcome Marty to our team.

Well Guys, the next pictures you see will be the completed boats without paint or rigging. If you have any questions, please ask! Joe

 

[stan simpson iv]

Looking good...ready to see a 60 rig or a 45. Keep up the good work.

 

[Charles Perdue]

Hi Guys

Been a while but I have been very busy getting everything figured out for the ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II A1/2A (.12) kits. I have posted photos below of the ELITE and the ULTRA boats mocked up so you can see what they basically look like. The cowl (ULTRA) and air deflector (ELITE) are missing as I have not built them yet. The ELITE will have no rear sponsons but instead will have a center mounted 1" wide ski. The ELITE only has one vertical fin on the front sponsons. The ULTRA has rear sponsons with air directional vertical fins and will not have a center mounted ski. The ULTRA has 2 vertical fins on the front sponsons. The rear decks and radio covers are also not shown.

As for the construction, you may notice a light colored wood on the inside of the tubs, this is Liteply plywood. Liteply is a very light but strong plywood commonly used in model aircraft construction. The hull sides are 1/8" Liteply laminated on the out side with 1/32" birch plywood. All the bulkheads are 1/8" Liteply except the transom which is a laminated double layer of 1/8" birch plywood. The hull and sponson boom receivers tubes are carbon fiber tubes and the booms are carbon fiber solid rods. The water line from the transom to the engine compartment is also a carbon fiber tube. The outlets for the linkage seals are carbon fiber tubes as well. I am thinking about making the motor mounts carbon fiber, don't know yet.

The sponsons (both front and rear) on the ULTRA are a little tedious to build as they are so small on the .12 boats. A little patience and careful work will go a long ways here! The ELITE sponsons, on the other hand are a breeze to build, there is very little work to them. The hull (tub) is very straight forward and does not require a complicated jig just a flat table top.

The boats pictured below are Ken Olvis's boats. As a Bishop Aeromarine Team Member, Ken will be testing and racing the boats in the South Eastern part of the country. Also Ken will be available for comment concerning the setup and running of the boats. Up next will be Marty Fields' ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II AB (.21) boats. Marty is a new member of the Race Team and will be testing and racing the .21 boats. Marty hales from the UK and will be racing in the UK and Western Europe. Marty is also a World Champion boat racer and is sponsored by Hitec and others. We welcome Marty to our team.

Well Guys, the next pictures you see will be the completed boats without paint or rigging. If you have any questions, please ask! Joe

Joe, OKay, OKay, I give up.

I will have to say first that I have never been a yes man. As hard as I have tried, I just cannot see where your boat design has lived up to the hype. Not to spoil your party but it is just another "Stick Boat", being built with "Old School" design and materials. The only thing that I can see that is different is the arrow feathers, the vertical fins on the sponsons, are on the wrong end of the boat to be of any assistance other than cosmetic

.

When you began describing the boats that you were going to design and build, I really had my hopes up. Now you have completely let me down.

There is nothing personal about my critique Mr. Joe. But it is what it is.

Please back up and start with a clean sheet and give us something new.

Charles Perdue

 

[KenOlvis]

Hi Guys

Ken just sent me a copy of my own plans (Phantom CE) from 40 years ago. When I spread them out on my drawing board, it hit me like a bullet! I said I will design the Phantom II but what I have been designing is a whole new boat. Well whoa, backup here for a minute! What I need to do is actually design the Phantom II. It will be recognizable as a Phantom but be sleeker, lighter and have all the latest technology. The new boat I have been working on will become the "Switch Blade" which I had planned on designing after the Phantom II. The Switch Blade will be an all new concept. It will utilize features never before seen on RC race boats or full scale boats for that matter. As a safe guard from possible copy cats, I will not mention its revolutionary features just yet but soon. Anyway, thanks Ken for your efforts, you have put me on the right track! Joe

Charles maybe read the whole topic this was posted earlier

Thxs

Ken

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Charles, **** man, I am sorry I don't meet your expectations! Lets examine what you have said. "Old school" materials? The materials I am using is the current materials every other manufacturer is using plus I added Liteply to the equation. "Old school design", maybe so but all that means to me is that no other manufacturer spends the time with aerodynamics that I do. When I designed the original Phantom back in the 70s, it was way ahead of it's time in that respect. I have a real problem designing anything that I consider to be ugly! If you looked at the side view of the boat, it is pretty **** sleek.

"Stick boat", now there is a term I haven't heard yet! I really don't know what to say to that one! An outrigger hydroplane is an outrigger hydroplane! Just exactly what would you have me change in that configuration?

"Cosmetic fins", OK I will elaborate on that subject. Directional fins, whether vertical or horizontal, start becoming effective above 50 MPH. The sponsons of an outrigger is subjected to all kinds of disturbed water, coming from all directions. This disturbed water wants to throw the sponsons all over the place. A current way of counteracting this is to use an over sized steering fin (commonly called a turn fin) The vertical fins on the top of the front sponsons counteract these hydrodynamic disturbances and help the boat continue traveling in a straight line. They do not have to be on the rear of the boat! One of the greatest fighter planes used today is the Sukhoi SU-35 which has forward canard fins that work very effectively. If you look a little closer, you will also notice vertical fins on the rear sponsons as well. Boats traveling at 70+ MPH can greatly profit from the use of directional fins. As for parasitic drag, they create very little. In order to create parasitic drag, an object needs to be concave on one of its sides. The fins create equal and opposite pressure on both sides.

I am sorry that I have let you down but I really don't know what you were expecting! I had no intentions of replacing the conventional outrigger design with something else but rather try to improve on it. You maybe can't see it in the pictures but the hull is not a parallel, rectangular shape, it is a wedge shape. When I get the time and apply for a couple of patents, I will release drawings of the SWITCH BLADE. Maybe it will be able to impress you, if it doesn't, than I am not capable of impressing you! Joe

 

[KenOlvis]

Looking good...ready to see a 60 rig or a 45. Keep up the good work.

Stan

I talked to Joe earlier today .67 drawing near complete he will start hull soon an to rig it up for me just as before.

 

[john urbowicz]

Joe

Nice work will the boom spacing on the.12 ultra an .12 elite be the same.

Ken

Hi Ken, yes the boom spacing is exactly the same. As I have said before they are essentially the same boat. Joe

Hi Joe I've been watching this thread will great interest, You've managed to design a great looking boat and I can't wait to see it finished.

Are you planning to design and build an electric 6s version?

Steve

Hi Steve, yes I will design an electric boat but will need input from guys like you as I know nothing about electric. I am sure I will only design one PHANTOM II in the electric version. What is the motor size that is mostly used in outriggers (as it compares to nitro engines)? Is there more than one class of electric outriggers? These are some of the things I will need to know. Joe

hi joe, this video may help you configure electric version. my friend don pinckert (father of the outrigger ) allowed me to use his plans of his daytona to build this abs electric version. 6 cell lipo .45 nitro size boat. ran very nice. around 70 mph.

 

[Charles Perdue]

Charles, **** man, I am sorry I don't meet your expectations! Lets examine what you have said. "Old school" materials? The materials I am using is the current materials every other manufacturer is using plus I added Liteply to the equation. "Old school design", maybe so but all that means to me is that no other manufacturer spends the time with aerodynamics that I do. When I designed the original Phantom back in the 70s, it was way ahead of it's time in that respect. I have a real problem designing anything that I consider to be ugly! If you looked at the side view of the boat, it is pretty **** sleek.

"Stick boat", now there is a term I haven't heard yet! I really don't know what to say to that one! An outrigger hydroplane is an outrigger hydroplane! Just exactly what would you have me change in that configuration?

"Cosmetic fins", OK I will elaborate on that subject. Directional fins, whether vertical or horizontal, start becoming effective above 50 MPH. The sponsons of an outrigger is subjected to all kinds of disturbed water, coming from all directions. This disturbed water wants to throw the sponsons all over the place. A current way of counteracting this is to use an over sized steering fin (commonly called a turn fin) The vertical fins on the top of the front sponsons counteract these hydrodynamic disturbances and help the boat continue traveling in a straight line. They do not have to be on the rear of the boat! One of the greatest fighter planes used today is the Sukhoi SU-35 which has forward canard fins that work very effectively. If you look a little closer, you will also notice vertical fins on the rear sponsons as well. Boats traveling at 70+ MPH can greatly profit from the use of directional fins. As for parasitic drag, they create very little. In order to create parasitic drag, an object needs to be concave on one of its sides. The fins create equal and opposite pressure on both sides.

I am sorry that I have let you down but I really don't know what you were expecting! I had no intentions of replacing the conventional outrigger design with something else but rather try to improve on it. You maybe can't see it in the pictures but the hull is not a parallel, rectangular shape, it is a wedge shape. When I get the time and apply for a couple of patents, I will release drawings of the SWITCH BLADE. Maybe it will be able to impress you, if it doesn't, than I am not capable of impressing you! Joe

Mr. Joe, I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED in your design. I was expecting much more.

Please look around for inspiration. Have you ever seen a long, square shaped bird. No rounded front ends. No triangle shaped wedges. Birds could not fly shaped like that. Must be for a reason. They are the original aerodynamic shapes.

The Indians sure must have had it all wrong by putting their feathers on the back of their arrows. Maybe history would have been different if they had put them on the front.

As far as your materials, I was at the least expecting some use of carbon fiber, maybe using some carbon nano tube and nano diamond enhanced epoxy for added rigidity. Maybe some honeycomb carbon composites and perhaps some titanium in use somewhere.

The front carnard winglets on the fighter planes are used for steering assist when it it is making hard, drastic manuevers. The particular ones that you mentioned is made by a unique process using fused one piece titanium honeycomb with a solid surface to handle the tremendous loads they encounter when used for mauevering.

Whoever was your teacher in aerodynamic and hydrodynamics did not do a very good job.

Nothing personal, just disappointment.

Charles Perdue

 

[KenOlvis]

Charles, **** man, I am sorry I don't meet your expectations! Lets examine what you have said. "Old school" materials? The materials I am using is the current materials every other manufacturer is using plus I added Liteply to the equation. "Old school design", maybe so but all that means to me is that no other manufacturer spends the time with aerodynamics that I do. When I designed the original Phantom back in the 70s, it was way ahead of it's time in that respect. I have a real problem designing anything that I consider to be ugly! If you looked at the side view of the boat, it is pretty **** sleek.

"Stick boat", now there is a term I haven't heard yet! I really don't know what to say to that one! An outrigger hydroplane is an outrigger hydroplane! Just exactly what would you have me change in that configuration?

"Cosmetic fins", OK I will elaborate on that subject. Directional fins, whether vertical or horizontal, start becoming effective above 50 MPH. The sponsons of an outrigger is subjected to all kinds of disturbed water, coming from all directions. This disturbed water wants to throw the sponsons all over the place. A current way of counteracting this is to use an over sized steering fin (commonly called a turn fin) The vertical fins on the top of the front sponsons counteract these hydrodynamic disturbances and help the boat continue traveling in a straight line. They do not have to be on the rear of the boat! One of the greatest fighter planes used today is the Sukhoi SU-35 which has forward canard fins that work very effectively. If you look a little closer, you will also notice vertical fins on the rear sponsons as well. Boats traveling at 70+ MPH can greatly profit from the use of directional fins. As for parasitic drag, they create very little. In order to create parasitic drag, an object needs to be concave on one of its sides. The fins create equal and opposite pressure on both sides.

I am sorry that I have let you down but I really don't know what you were expecting! I had no intentions of replacing the conventional outrigger design with something else but rather try to improve on it. You maybe can't see it in the pictures but the hull is not a parallel, rectangular shape, it is a wedge shape. When I get the time and apply for a couple of patents, I will release drawings of the SWITCH BLADE. Maybe it will be able to impress you, if it doesn't, than I am not capable of impressing you! Joe

Mr. Joe, I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED in your design. I was expecting much more.
Please look around for inspiration. Have you ever seen a long, square shaped bird. No rounded front ends. No triangle shaped wedges. Birds could not fly shaped like that. Must be for a reason. They are the original aerodynamic shapes.

The Indians sure must have had it all wrong by putting their feathers on the back of their arrows. Maybe history would have been different if they had put them on the front.

As far as your materials, I was at the least expecting some use of carbon fiber, maybe using some carbon nano tube and nano diamond enhanced epoxy for added rigidity. Maybe some honeycomb carbon composites and perhaps some titanium in use somewhere.

The front carnard winglets on the fighter planes are used for steering assist when it it is making hard, drastic manuevers. The particular ones that you mentioned is made by a unique process using fused one piece titanium honeycomb with a solid surface to handle the tremendous loads they encounter when used for mauevering.

Whoever was your teacher in aerodynamic and hydrodynamics did not do a very good job.

Nothing personal, just disappointment.

Charles Perdue

Charles its sad that you throw stones its a boat (outrigger!!) as for round flys better lol penguin,chicken an ostrich there all round they dont fly very well move on Charles this topic is beening watched by many ppl that see what Joe Bishop is doing with older Phantom redesign to PHANTOM II my point is worked for Dodge an Chevy they redesign the Challenger and Camaro.Your comment you expected more means you know Joe is capable of more and it will happen soon in another design

(switch Blade).your not a happy camper so put another log on the fire you have started dose no good but makes a bigger fire.

My2cents

Ken

 

[Steven Bryant]

Personally I think Joe has done a great job re-designing the phantom, he has produced a great looking boat with a few interesting features which will prove themselves once the boats hit the water.

Keep up the good work Joe and when your ready to design the 6s rigger give me a shout and I'll give you details regarding motor/batteries and weights

Steve

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Charles, this is the last time I am going to indulge you! This forum was started to inform interested parties of my progress on redesigning the original PHANTOM. It is not for your jealous rants! You are trying, with no success, to insult me and I do not appreciate it! I am sure the guys following this forum don't appreciate it either! You seem to not be able to read and comprehend what you are looking at.

As I have said, "this is the last time I am going to indulge you" and with that said, as for my education in aerodynamics and hydrodynamics read the following!

Dr. Carl Burgey- Chief engineer for Piper Aircraft Corporation for 25 years. Professor of Aerospace engineering, Oklahoma University for 31 years. Designer of the Piper Cherokee line of aircraft. Owner and chief engineer of Burgey Wind power. And last but not least a long time personal friend of mine. He and I worked on several projects ranging from speed mods for certified aircraft to prototype aircraft design and builds.

Dr. Earl Renoe- Chief engineer for TGV Rockets. Builders of sub-orbital space vehicles. Earl and I worked on concepts for vertical takeoff and landing, rocket powered vehicles.

Ron Jones- Builder of aluminum honey comb unlimited hydroplanes, example Pay N Pack "Winged Wonder" I have had many interesting conversations with Ron.

Eddie Hill- First person to break the 5 second barrier in Top Fuel Hydro. Eddie and I have been friends for many years and now fly R/C airplanes together.

This is just a few of my tutors!

Now to my design ability! It is obvious that you have no conception of designing a "PRODUCT" for sale to the general public. All this exotic crap you are talking about can not be incorporated into a product meant for sale to R/C boat racers. I have to design a product that can be built and raced SUCCESSFULLY by the most novice builder/racer to the most experienced builder/racer not to mention the cost of such nonsense. Did your way, the kits would be out of the price range of 99 percent of potential buyers.

As for the example of the Sukhoi SU-35, you completely missed the point! The point was that the canard fins were on the FRONT of the aircraft and that they were very EFFECTIVE! The SU-35 uses forward horizontal fins to maneuver and I use forward vertical fins for high speed, straight line stability. Your reference to a "Native American's" arrow is non-relative to this subject and absurd. I only referred to an arrow, in the first place, to give an example of straight line stability. It was never meant to define my approach to straight line stability!

OK Charles, your attempts at belittling me are not going to work! I really don't know what is your problem but you need to take it elsewhere! This forum is for guys interested in building and racing outrigger hydroplanes. It is not for venting jealous rants! I really think you could be a very helpful contributor to this forum if you would get off the attempts at insulting me and really try to add something constructive. The choice is yours! Joe

 

[Andy Brown]

Hi Guys

Been a while but I have been very busy getting everything figured out for the ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II A1/2A (.12) kits. I have posted photos below of the ELITE and the ULTRA boats mocked up so you can see what they basically look like. The cowl (ULTRA) and air deflector (ELITE) are missing as I have not built them yet. The ELITE will have no rear sponsons but instead will have a center mounted 1" wide ski. The ELITE only has one vertical fin on the front sponsons. The ULTRA has rear sponsons with air directional vertical fins and will not have a center mounted ski. The ULTRA has 2 vertical fins on the front sponsons. The rear decks and radio covers are also not shown.

As for the construction, you may notice a light colored wood on the inside of the tubs, this is Liteply plywood. Liteply is a very light but strong plywood commonly used in model aircraft construction. The hull sides are 1/8" Liteply laminated on the out side with 1/32" birch plywood. All the bulkheads are 1/8" Liteply except the transom which is a laminated double layer of 1/8" birch plywood. The hull and sponson boom receivers tubes are carbon fiber tubes and the booms are carbon fiber solid rods. The water line from the transom to the engine compartment is also a carbon fiber tube. The outlets for the linkage seals are carbon fiber tubes as well. I am thinking about making the motor mounts carbon fiber, don't know yet.

The sponsons (both front and rear) on the ULTRA are a little tedious to build as they are so small on the .12 boats. A little patience and careful work will go a long ways here! The ELITE sponsons, on the other hand are a breeze to build, there is very little work to them. The hull (tub) is very straight forward and does not require a complicated jig just a flat table top.

The boats pictured below are Ken Olvis's boats. As a Bishop Aeromarine Team Member, Ken will be testing and racing the boats in the South Eastern part of the country. Also Ken will be available for comment concerning the setup and running of the boats. Up next will be Marty Fields' ELITE and ULTRA PHANTOM II AB (.21) boats. Marty is a new member of the Race Team and will be testing and racing the .21 boats. Marty hales from the UK and will be racing in the UK and Western Europe. Marty is also a World Champion boat racer and is sponsored by Hitec and others. We welcome Marty to our team.

Well Guys, the next pictures you see will be the completed boats without paint or rigging. If you have any questions, please ask! Joe

Neat looking .12 boat Joe! Keep up the good work! Our hobby needs more guys that are willing to build good outriggers. There are not many.

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Hi Andy, nice to hear from a friend and fellow designer. I design boats for the pure love of designing and hope that what I do brings enjoyment and satisfaction to those that use my product. I have no animosity towards other designers and manufacturers but rather admiration as to their very unique designs and their obvious success. Again, after some of the last posts, you are a breath of fresh air! Thanks! Joe

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Hi John

Thanks for the great video! I am amazed that electric boats sound almost like nitro boats, LOL! I greatly appreciate being able to rely on you, in the near future, for guidance with the electric motors, batteries and rigging. Also any suggestions as to possible hull and sponson configurations as it pertains to electric power plants. I assume a 6S boat would be the size of a .45 nitro boat? Anyway, thanks again! Joe

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Hi Steven, between you and John, I think you guys will be invaluable in my effort to design a quality electric outrigger. My order of things is to finish the ELITE and ULTRA .12 boats then do the ELITE and ULTRA .21 boats. At that point I will finish the already started .67 boats. Next will be the .45 boats which will consist of the ELITE and ULTRA nitro boats and the specially designed electric 6S boat. That sounds like a long way down the line but not really because the real consumption of time is in the initial concept of the PHANTOM II. Once that is established, building the different classes and sizes will be very quick. Joe

 

[JOEBISHOP]

Hey Guys

I am about finished with the ULTRA kit, PHANTOM II, A1/2A boat. Finish the rigging, paint and decals and it's finished. What I thought I would tell you guys is the weight of the boat with every thing piled in it, all in it's appropriate place. It weighs 2 lbs and 8 oz. Granted there is no paint on it yet but the way I intend to paint it, I really don't think it will pickup much more than a few more ounces. One of my goal was to keep it under 3 lbs and that is very much a possibility! Here is the kicker, the ELITE boat will be even lighter yet.

Lets touch on painting for a moment. I notice a lot of guys coat their boats with epoxy resin. Even manufacturers suggest doing it this way. They paint on one coat, sand it down and then apply another coat. After sanding they go to the paint process. Back in the day when I originally started producing Phantoms, I coated the inside of the boat with a thin coat of epoxy resin but the out side of the boat was not coated with resin. K&B used to sell a very good epoxy paint. I would prime the outside of the boat with epoxy primer, work it out to perfectly smooth then spray on a couple coats of K&B epoxy paint. My boats never got water under the paint! I never noticed wood grain raising due to water leakage. I am searching for a good epoxy paint to replace the K&B Epoxy as I don't believe they offer it anymore. I will again finish my boats in this manner as I think it is much lighter.

An example of the bare wood to epoxy paint is my Phantom 90 boat which is now 38 years old. The pictures below was taken about a month ago. Looks pretty darn good to be 38 years old. The black & white Photo is my original Phantom CE back when I was racing it. Later! Joe