The first thing that must be said about the Hangar 9 Camel ARTF is that it is an absolutely superb model in nearly every respect.  The covering, the build quality and the generally "authentic" finish are of a standard that I have never seen equalled in any of the ARTF kits I have assembled.  I have been slipping in the occasional ARTF now for about 8 years and some of them have been simply awful.

What I want to report though are issues which just take the gilding off the lilly.  I would like to hear from anyone else who has built this model and especially in respect of the points I will make.

The first and most irritating error occurs on page 13 of the otherwise excellent instruction manual.  You are told that the distance from the forewall to the front of the engine thrust washer must be 5 1/2 inches (140mm).  That distance is determined not by the physical size of the chosen engine but by the depth of the annular engine cowl supplied.  After figuring out how I would get my RCV.91CD engine to present its thrust washer at 5 1/2 inches I decided to add the required extension to the firewall in the shape of another 9mm of plywood lamination.  After all, weight is not an issue when a ballast box is provided to take several ounces of lead.  Doing this meant that access would be very difficult to the socket head bolts securing the for'd cabane strut tabs.  So I attached that first only to discover when finally offering up the cowl the crankcase was sticking well out beyond the front!  I reckon that the distance from firewall to washer should be 4 7/8" or 124mm.

The aluminium tabs for anchoring the cabane struts are made from an alloy which is far too soft and one of mine has already broken - yes one of the for'd pair.  So I have had to modify the attachment.  Finally, the aileron tape hinge was so tight on all four wings that I could not get any up aileron at all.  Horizon Hobbies are in the process of replacing these. 

Thanks Geoff

 You could leave a review in our products section ...

David 

Hi David,

I have written a fully illustrated review of this build submitted yesterday (Tuesday 30th) to your Editor.  He declined the article (sent to him as a draft pdf document) saying that the topic might be suitable for your review section.  However, 200 to 300 words is nowhere close to being sufficient headroom to cover these issues which though very few in what is otherwise a superb product, are serious failings.  The poor temper of the aluminium cabane tabs could in the extreme precipitate an accident in my view.  Working against that is the fact that providing one can assemble the entire mainplane array and leave it in that state, the composite structure of interplane struts and especially bracing wires, should prevent fatigue in those tabs.

I would be interested to learn the distance between the firewall and thrust washer in the RCM&E review aircraft and the depth of the cowl ring.  My cowl ring is 95mm front to back. 

We've sent you words to Pete Lowe Geoffrey and will get back to you.

No, the review section on this site is a database that anyone can add to, keep it short and brief but it's a good way of comparing user experiences. Threads like this drop down the list and disapear in time but the database is a quick reference area just a few clicks away. 

 Just click on the products tab above...choose a category and find the model in the list. 

Geoffrey, thanks for that heads up - I am due to receive one of these from Santa, although I will be electrifying mine. If you have any other comments or would like to exchange information please contact me at my email address via the red banner envelope icon. Tim.

PS Or indeed send me acopy of your review which they didnt want  

Hi Timbo,  Tried emailing you through your personal page but thrown out saying "no longer exists" or similar.  Blowed if I can find the "red banner envelope"!

I have the review c/w photographs all tied up in a pdf file if you want it but you'll have to give me your email address.

When completed the Camel flies magnificently.  Using an RCV 91 however, it required 25 ounces of lead in the ballast box provided.  I fly a great deal of brushless lectric stuff and using a 5S, say circa 4000mA pack as far up front as you can get it, you will still need a great deal of lead.  In fact, I'd be surprised if you required any less than I have with the i/c option.

Hi Geoff, I will inform the admin that the personal page info is broken.

If you look at the red banner above everyones postings ( IE straight up above this writing ) over on the right hand side - the grey bit to be accurate

there is a little icon of an envelope, click that and Bingo!!

Thanks...

I plan to use 2 x4s packs at 3200 m/a each ( 6.4Amp ) and wondered now from waht you say whether I should go to 5S.

What size prop worked best on it Geoff ? 

This is the future of scale RC models .

 http://www.rcuvideos.com/item/SD9W24R3837T1G7C

yeah I watched the vid, Its like the boyracers boot in the front of that thing,

Just a pointless waste of money, Cant see the point at all,

Hmmmmm

nuff said

Lee

Well I have to say that the video /sound recording does not do it real justice. I have actually seen a model fitted with this sound system, and it was excellent - bigger mnodels lend themselves to it better, as decent size /weiight of speakers is needed.  Sure it is not perfect YET. As for the point...well it is simply another dimension in this ever developing world of R/C scale modelling, there doesnt have to be "a point"

Not that long ago, I remember certain people at my old club making similar disparaging remarks about a "new fangled computerised transmitter" whats the point one said, I can adjust everything I need to on my clevis' and horns, and I just use the right servo to make sure it goes it the right way" I wonder what transmitter he has now ?...if he is still alive.

As was also said by someone quite famous for governing ( and a certain amount of philandering)

" we choose to do it not because it is easy but because it is hard".

This is a development towards recreating a more authentic representation of a real aeroplane, and it is this pursuit of realism that some aeromodellers enjoy. I cant say I am that obsessed with realism to the point that I would count how many rivets a scale model had like many folk would , but I do like scale /semi scale , as well as foamy fun. I appreciate and marvel at the time and effort and skill that goes into true scale models, and this latest development can only serve to inmprove the overall objective of realism.

There is room for all in this hobby, and the technical development involved here is to be applauded.

I suppose as a bit of techie geeky type it appeals to that side of my nature too

Each to his own gentleman, each to his own 

Well said Timbo.

Kelvin

Ok point taken

Lee

LEE as you are obviously online right now I will be cheeky and use forum comms

cant get to phone alone, and we are away in London from tomorrow morning, until Monday - is all set OK- for you know what

All is in place for a fantastic picture mate

Just don't know if royal mail will get it to you in time

lee