Hi
I have just started to this model and was wondering if anyone has as yet posted a "build thread" with pictures?
|
 |
Gary,
some reference to the 63" Spitfire in the thread "Mistakes in plans" but not found anything else. I'm currently building the model using the Unitracts sport retracts, ASP 61 4 stroke engine and five Futaba S3004 standard servo's. Fortunately I have access to a CNC router at work therefore cut out my own ribs, bulkheads etc. rather than buying the CNC wood pack from RCM&E. Approaching the end of the building stage and about to start covering, still not sure if I am going for epoxy/glass, Poly-C/glass or film.
Going on holiday tonight for ten days (back for Woodvale) therefore don't have time to post any pictures. Will let you know when I'm back.
|
|
Gary,
forgot the retract servo, SuperTec S136GH
|
|
 You could start a build blog Gary, would be good to see.
David.
|
|
Hi Graham
Sounds like I will end up with a very similar setup to you. I did get the cnc pack - which when I added on the cost of the "additional" wood pack found to be quite an expensive combination.
Anyway, I have started and got the wings about ready for sheeting.
Like you, I am not sure what to cover it with but am leaning towards the epoxy/glass solution. Film always tends to wrinkle in hot weather and if it is a painted surface I am worried the paint may crack.
David, I may well start a blog - once I have figured out how to!
|
|
Gary
These days, building from scratch or plan can be a little more expensive than screwing together an ARTF.... but it's not the same of course which is why so many more people build their own - there's so much more satisfaction to it.
I'm just finished a Sig kit - it cost £90 and I've spent the same amount again on bits and pieces (£30 for covering!!) not including the motor etc..
A blog would be great.. look forward.
David.
|
|
Hi
Was about to start a build thread on this forum but have decided against it.
Don't like the fact I have to upload my images to seperate server first and paste the url into the post. Also, there is no preview option.
So, for those who are interested I will add the thread to my club website and add a link once I have done so.
Gary
|
|
OK - for those who may be interested I have started a build thread on our club website: www.chinglemfc.co.ukYou will fond it under the News section and Items of Interest Cheers Gary
|
|
Hi guys, I have started to put together one of these spitfires.I cut the kit myself by pinning through the plan. Wings and Fus are built but I did not like the flat tail sections. I think a model of this size looks better with a scale section. The Brian Taylor 69 inch MK1 spit plan just happens to be the correct size for the Tony Nijhuis Spitfire and builds very light. I have gone for OS70 and Euro Retracts with Futaba radio. Petes pilots does a great pilot for this model. I am going for tissue and dope finish. Simon...
|
|
Help needed by Tony Nijhuis maybe? Finished the 63" Spit. Solarfilm/Spectra finish, YS63S, built-up tail and fin as is my usual with this type of design, retracts using two metal gear digi servos with servo slows to give scale speeds, loads of detail, BUT! It flies like a pig! I need lots of down trim, power on or off. The C of G is on the rearmost limit with 9oz lead up front - blame the retract servos rear of the cg for that (see later). I checked the wing and tail incidences and decided that my tail could be out a little, so removed and reset it to the plan. Result? less down trim but still does not want to fly level. Tried downthrust but no better. I have been flying the smaller version since Christmas and it is faultless, also having two retract servos behind the cg, OS26S and no noseweight. One of my favourite models. Is there a problem with the plan? Cannot detect any differences between the two re incidence. My tail now actually LOOKS at a positive incidence to the fus centre line. Got access to a laser incidence checker tomorrow so I shall see if that reveals the culprit. Anyone else flown one yet? PS. Gary, solarfilm, when painted, hardly wrinkles at all in the sun. Martin.
|
|
Martin, I am nearing the end of the building stage and am getting ready for adding the detail, painting etc. I don't like the sound of the 9oz of lead up front and a rearward c.g. have you got a weight for the finished model and how does it compare to the 7lb quoted in the magazine. Graham
|
|
Hi Graham, don`t worry about the weight, mine is now 7lbs 10oz inc. the 9oz noseweight and the two heavy metal geared digi servos behind the cg. If you are using a single retract servo near the wing L.E. as suggested you should not require so much lead, but I think that some will be needed. The model is not heavily wing loaded. My retract equipped smaller version with a similar set up weighs 3lbs 9oz as against the original quoted 2lbs 8oz and is very reluctant to spin let alone stall. No problems there with the 63 either. The cg is exactly the same percentage of the wing chord in each case. Tried the laser level today - confirms that the tail is still one deg. too negative despite a previous change of 1.25 deg. The plan appears to be correct; apologies to Tony. Must be something to do with the centre line distorting when pulling the rear fus together around the curves. Strange that it did not happen with the smaller one though. Being basically an aerobatic flier, I am always normally careful to get the decalage correct. Do not use excessive control surface throws on this model as they are all fairly sensitive. If you can, try around 40-50% expo on aileron and elevator. Don`t know what motor you intend to use but as a guide the YS is a bit of an overkill. MM.
|
|
Martin thanks for the info, I will check the wing & tailplane incidences before fixing. I'm using a ASP61 4 stroke up the front end which according to data slightly lighter (15g) than your YS63S. I covered the wing in Poly-C and 0.6oz glass and will probably go for glass on the fuselage and tissue on the tail surfaces to keep the weight down at the back end. What type of paint did you use ? Graham
|
|
Gary, what an interesting and informative club website you have - more should follow suit. your Spit build so far looks great so the best of luck. MM.
|
|
Graham, I used Spectra (previously Spectrum I believe) on top of primol coated silver Solarfilm (which, incidentally, is much easier to apply than the solid colours) , the first coat of each colour being applied slightly thinned with Spectrum thinner, then a full strength coat of each, applying the lighter colours first then, when complete, making the contours with 4mm wide strips of masking tape. I applied the second coat as soon as the first was dry (about one hour) then removed the masking when dried to a matt finish so that the masking tape adhesive did not get time to set hard. Any rivet or panel lines you wish to add should be done prior to painting. By that I mean raised (rivets) or indented (panel lines) . When completely dry you may add pencil/ink lines then roundels/ transfers. The whole model should then be Tuffcoated using a 3/4-1" very soft brush. I normally mix gloss and matt 50/50 but it seems that the latest batch of Tuffcoat matt is not so matt as it used to be so you may wish to use neat matt. Must take this up with Ripmax. Do not rely on the Spectra alone to be fuel proof especially if you use any nitro at all in your fuel. Coat the canopy with gloss Tuffcoat. Martin.
|
|
Martin, thats a great help. I assume you applied the Spectra/Spectrum paint with a brush, approximately how many tins of paint did it take to cover the model ? I feel a paint order coming on ! Graham
|
|
Graham, it comes in 125ml tins which will do several Spits and a Lancaster to boot! Even Humbrol enamel which is an expensive alternative, would only require 1-2 tinlets of each colour, because it covers better. I use this for roundels etc., applying to plain paper circles which are then glued together with PVA and centred with a pin. Just apply to the model and smooth down with a cool iron. PVA acts as a contact adhesive if applied to each surface, but it takes a little practice. Martin
|
|
 Martin, Hope you get the problem sorted. The 62" as you can guess was a direct enlargement of the 45" (just hit re-scale on the CAD). Being that bit larger the prototype 62" flew much better than the smaller version and was real peach. Not sure what effect the built up tailplane would make but it is likely to give better lift characteristics than the sheeted version so the incidence should be reduced slightly...say 0.25 of degree less Secondly keep to the Cof G...If it flys like a pig then that is a reward C of G problem rather than incidence problem. Don't be concerned about addiing nose weight the model will take it...a slightly forward C of G will improve the stability and smoothness but you may have 'nose tipping' problems on the ground. Good luck Tony
|
|
Thanks Tony, will remove and reset the tail again. CofG does not seem to be any problem. I have run it into the long grass and it does not tip over. Would at a guess be OK with it even more rearward. The RAF 30 tail section (modified) has proven to be OK on a Spiteful (not a recommended subject to model). Martin Mc.
|
|
Reflown the Spit today with the tail set to zero with respect to the wing section centre line using a laser. Very slight up trim as expected. Now flies like a dream. MM.
|
|
denotes 
