By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for The Wright Stuff

Here is a list of all the postings The Wright Stuff has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: Unrecognisable ARTFs - new paint jobs!
23/02/2018 08:37:24
Posted by Trevor Crook on 22/02/2018 20:07:29:

Some great paint jobs and mods above. Goes to show that an ARTF doesn't have to mean no modelling.

Absolutely, Trevor. That's the main reason I started this thread. I'd love to have the time for a full on plan build, but "family reasons" don't currently allow it. This sort of work keeps projects possible and sanity intact!

I'll look out for the finished Saunders Roe SR53...

Thread: aliphatic glue
22/02/2018 14:28:46

Yes, apparently.

Thread: Unrecognisable ARTFs - new paint jobs!
22/02/2018 14:14:16

No laughing here. Love the 'Vulcan'...

Thread: What are the rules?
22/02/2018 14:03:20

Interesting David. Just to prove that I am still following with interest, do you know from the book what the actual definition of 'cruising speed' is in this context?

Obviously, there are various definitions based on cruising altitude, maximum efficiency, etc, but I wondered whether there was a unique aerodynamic definition (presumably based on a particular point of the lift coefficient curve).

I ask because basing it purely on fuel efficiency doesn't make sense in the diagram, because (presumably) this is dependent on the thrust (number and type of engines), which doesn't affect either the weight or the wingspan in any fixed way...

21/02/2018 17:37:11

Not sure I entirely agree with your comments about 'scale speed', David. Surely the true linear scale speed is pretty well defined (and proportional to the time it takes any given aircraft to move forward a distance equal to its own length).

Whether it 'looks scale' or not is indeed a human perception matter.

What is clear, that if you want a model to look to scale in all details, fly at a scale speed, AND have scale response to control input (i.e. fly in a scale-like way) then you are very much restricted to 1:1. cheeky

Edited By The Wright Stuff on 21/02/2018 17:38:51

21/02/2018 16:09:02
Posted by David Mellor on 21/02/2018 15:48:27:
There are no phenomena in the field of engineering in general (with the possible exception of quantum computing) or elsewhere in nature on earth that span this range.

Electrical resistance is the obvious exception, but yes, I take your point!

21/02/2018 12:46:46
Posted by David Mellor on 21/02/2018 12:39:27:

What TLAR tells us is that good RC models of Spitfires have around half the value of the real (full sized) plane's cubic wing loading.

.. it is actually accurate over a range of different wingspans of interest to model designers.

I'm a little wary of dividing aircraft into 'full size' and 'models', and then saying it applies to a range of wingspans.

Surely the 'half the value' must be a continuous function of wingspan, otherwise how do you reconcile the value calculated for a 99% size scale model.


20/02/2018 13:23:25

Martin, both explanations are 'correct' in the sense that they relate the observed behaviour to other measurable parameters around the wing. They just consider different quantities, and are useful in different situations. A discrepancy only exists if the two explanations predict different behaviours.

Just like light can be described as either a particle or a wave. Similarly, objects fall down under gravity either because they want to minimise their potential energy, or because a net downwards force is producing an acceleration. Two different explanations in terms of two different sets of quantities. But you cannot say one is right and the other is wrong.

Personally, I believe the more pertinent argument is: "How is best to teach the theory of lift?"...

Thread: Unrecognisable ARTFs - new paint jobs!
20/02/2018 08:17:42
Posted by stu knowles on 19/02/2018 18:35:37:

looks very nice, What paint did you use?

Thanks Stu.

I used Humbrol Enamel - #19 (basically Post Office Red) - it's almost but not quite the same shade as Red Arrows red. I happened to have a big tin of it left over from my boat modelling days. I brushed on the paint, and used the thin Tamiya masking tape for the canopy.

I then sprayed the whole thing with satin varnish after the stickers [thanks to Pyramid Models] were on... I'm very happy with the finish...

Thread: Model Black Box
19/02/2018 14:49:34

Absolutely. Plus of course, on board logging is only any good if you retrieve the model. The black boxes on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 didn't offer much help...

Thread: Unrecognisable ARTFs - new paint jobs!
19/02/2018 13:13:23

I thought it might be a nice idea to start a thread on repainting ARTFs and RTFs.

Not having a huge amount of time for building at the moment, and no crash damage to repair this winter, I turned my hand to refreshing some of my ARTF models with a new paint job. I started with my current favourite winter hack - the HobbyKing Skipper. I don't fly it from water, but it certainly handles boggy fields and long wet grass - in fact the boggier the better!

It seems to me that aeromodellers don't tend to merge scale with 'what-if's in quite the same way that, say, railway or boat modellers do. I'm not sure why, but this is my thought process.


In RAF red, the model is vaguely reminiscent (to me, when high up, anyway) of the Avro 707. Not so much 'stand-off scale', but 'standing-on-the-ground-when-the-model-is-at-100-feet' scale. When delta wings emerged on the drawing board, the characteristics of such aircraft were not well known at the time. The 707 was experimental, and built to test the tailless thick delta wing configuration chosen for the Vulcan (aerodynamically, it was a one third scale version). Suppose the tests had been unsuccessful, and a subsequent version with a conventional tail added had been built. What would it have looked like?


Okay, okay, probably not too much like this, I know. But for the sake of a couple of evening's work, I quite like the result!




Anyone else?

Thread: Electric Cars.
16/02/2018 17:11:03
Posted by Ikura on 16/02/2018 17:07:45:

It's not just the charging, it's also the capacity of batteries.

Look at our beloved model LiPo batteries. 6 to 8 minute flights and then recharge before using the battery again. That's ok for model aircraft but work that into a fully integrated transport system? Never going to happen.

Totally agree, Ikura. Using 3S 2200 mAh LiPos (intended for model aircraft) to power electric cars is never going to happen.

Thread: Decals or paint?
16/02/2018 17:08:29

Sabre, I would recommend you use enamels rather than acrylics, TBH. It's harder wearing.

Thread: Electric Cars.
16/02/2018 16:57:06

Just because I don't have all the answers and you don't have all the answers doesn't mean that there are no answers.

I can't imagine that the car companies in question would be investing billions in electric cars if they didn't envisage the above problems being solved. Have some faith...

Thread: Insuring my models
16/02/2018 15:46:27

I have to agree that self-insuring and spending the cash on beefing up security instead is my advice. The trouble with specialist insurance for things like this is that a few years down the line with (hopefully) no claims, you'll find you've spent as much on the premiums as the cash value of the stuff you're insuring.

Keeping the Little Albatrosses out in the first place has got to be the best solution...

Thread: RCM&E March 2018 issue
16/02/2018 08:50:33

I was interested to read Mike Kitchen's letter about expo, which referenced this thread, and questioned the implementation of a cubic function rather than a true exponential. I had thought about this at the time, and I came up with two explanations.

Firstly, a common way to compute a true exponential function is to use a Taylor Series expansion, which is an infinite series of polynomials added together, and converges on the exponential function as more and more terms are added. Because we want anti-symmetry through the centre (so moving the stick in the opposite direction moves the servo in the opposite direction), then we are restricted to using only the odd terms. If we truncate the series (to save computational time) between the cubic and quintic terms, then the stated cubic function is the natural result.

Alternatively, one could argue that since the only purpose of the function is to soften the stick sensitivity near the centre, and increase the sensitivity at the end of the throw, there is no actual mathematical requirement for it to be exponential at all: almost any non-linear continuous function with an increasing gradient will do. However, I assume the function name 'EXPO' was thought to be a sexier name to put in the manual, so it stuck.

Thread: Holy Grail - Full House Electric
15/02/2018 14:31:12
Posted by MattyB on 15/02/2018 13:13:40:

The legacy concept that customers should all pay more for more channels is simply nonsense in a digital age - extra channels are just a few lines of code in the firmware and cost literally nothing (bar the cost of the pins on an RX on a non-serial bus RX). It's a concept the big name manufacturers continue perpetuate though as it drives valuable revenues.

I see no big conspiracy or harm in that, Matty. Even if there is no technical difference, this is just the laws of economics. If people will pay more for more channels, then why would any sensible business wanting to stay in profit not charge more?

It's the same principle of the range of coffee prices in Starbucks. They all basically cost the same to make and serve, but the way to maximise profit is to charge what customers are prepared to pay. So yes, because it drives valuable revenues is surely a good enough reason?

Thread: Electric Cars.
15/02/2018 14:26:01
Posted by Cuban8 on 15/02/2018 13:42:54:

So, clearly, they'll turn away punters wanting tyres, light bulbs, wipers, brakes, paint chip repairs etc. all nothing to do with the electric drive train?

Well, if you take the sign literally, yes, although I suspect it could equally be a grammar failure...

Thread: Goggles
14/02/2018 14:58:36

Hi Geoff,

Quite a few previous threads on this, if you want some extra ideas 'for free'!

e.g. here

Thread: February 2018 RCM&E
13/02/2018 13:32:56

Well, the March issue has arrived, and I'm still reading the February one.

I have to say, the article on engine safety, and particularly the use of suitable mounts delivers an important message. But please, if you are going to write "Wankel" on an engine stand to be photographed in a national magazine, please write it out in full... blush

Edited By The Wright Stuff on 13/02/2018 13:33:21

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Email News - Join our newsletter

Love Model Aircraft? Sign up to our emails for the latest news and special offers!

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Expo Tools 14 July
electricwingman 2017
Gliders Distribution
Airtek Hobbies
Wings & Wheels 2018
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
How has your building graduated?
Q: Did you start with ARTF and move to building from kits or vice versa?

 Started with ARTF moved to building from kits only
 Started with ARTF moved to building from plans only
 Started with ARTF moved to building from kits and building from plans
 Started with building kits or from plans and moved to ARTF
 I only build from kits or plans
 I only build ARTF
 I only build from kits
 I only build from plans
 Other (Please specify in thread)

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us