Here is a list of all the postings TIM Shaw has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Rolling Circles|
Personally, I would work on your slow rolls and maybe 4 point rolls first. You need to be confident you can at least point the nose back up again should you need to in a hurry.
There are 2 distinct types of rolling circle ( actually, if you go far enough back, there's a third one, but can't get my head around that one myself).
If you want to do continual rolls whilst performing a flat circle its actually quite simple.
All you do is roll slowly and hold the down elevator you would use for inverted in until you have rolled to 270 degrees, then release it and hold a little up elevator while continuing the roll to 90 degrees, ease off, and feed in down as you approach inverted, and hold it again until you get back to about 270 degrees. Repeat until the circle is complete.
If you want to so a one - roll circle, ie performing a single roll around the circumference, so that you pass through knife edge at the quarter point, reach inverted at the diameter and continue the roll to opposite knife edge at the three quarter point you need to use rudder s well - but I find that variation a lot harder.
In fact, I might have fooled myself I've almost got it once or teice, but I wouldn't try it with anyone watching....
|Thread: My latest Tiddler|
Got to maiden it in the mist and mud yesterday, flies like its on rails.
Cold and damp, only got the one flight in.
Been back today though, even saw some sun and remarkably I had the field to myself, so I burned off the best part of half a gallon of fuel and got it pretty much dialled in.
It is quick,smooth, and pretty much neutral, although it does seem to have a slight tendency to pull to the U/C in knife edge using left rudder, Strangely though, not with right rudder.
Might be due to the big wheels - they do spoil the lines a bit, but they work well on our field.
|Thread: Mode 1 or Mode 2|
Right handed Mode 2 fliers are also at an advantage launching by themselves, particularly on the slope. Less so with power perhaps, as clubmates tend to snigger at me opening the throttle with my teeth....
But I support the "stick with whatever you were taught to fly" principle. I used to run boats and car on twin stick sets, but I fly mode 2, simply because the first group of guys I met when I joined a club flew that way in 1986.
I have "rescued" the odd trainer on mode 1, but like to get rid of that responsibility as fast as possible. If you remember throttle controls your height, elevator controls your speed, I can usually get it down alright, as you are pulling back on both sticks, but you will likely be in trouble if you have to go around again.
We also had a guy who flew mode 2, throtlle reversed, and he would not change it, saying its the natural way a throttle should work. Told him I'd hate to drive his Merc, must be a devil seeing where you are going while pulling on the accelerator!
|Thread: JR closing down?|
I switched to JR in about 1987 after an unfortunate experience with an (admittedly S/H) Field Force 7. Over the years I have had several of their sets and I still have an X3810, PCM9x, PCM 9X2 and a DSX9. With the exception of the 9X, which has a flat back-up battery, which seems to be impossible to replace, I have had only one radio related problem in all that time.
That came about when I returned to IC flying and put a cheap 2.4 RX (which I had flown for years without problems in gliders) in a scaled down Mach 1. Went into failsafe and wrote it off at just 14 days old.
I agree with the statement above about the feel of the JR sticks, and particularly the balance of the 35meg gear, in my view the DSX9 does not balance in the hands as well due the lack of the old style ariel.
After that crash I decided I was due an upgrade and went to see what my LHS had. I found they no longer deal with JR, I didn't like either the styling or the price of the new JR sets, nor the lack of compatibility with the earlier RXs.
I now have a Hitec Aurora 9X which I like a lot and find much easier to program.
I also bought one of the earlier Taranis sets but I can't seem to get on with that at all - the sticks feel nasty, and I think you need to rewire your brain in a way mine doesn't seem to like. It has to be said though that several of my club mates have them and love them, so I guess it's just a question of preference.
We do have a few Jetti fans in the club, but I would say most fly Spectrum.
|Thread: Dave Smith Models|
PM sent Scott - trust you got it ok?
Just had a call from a friend who is looking to offload a NIB Excelsior 188, as he is moving and doesn't have space for it.
Open to sensible offers.
I fear its too big for me - anyone interested?
|Thread: My latest Tiddler|
All the bits are now nailed on and it tips the scales at around 1.75Kg, or 3lb 14ozs.
However, I am not happy with my U/C, which I fuz mounted for durability, and I have an interference problem with the aileron servo and linkages.
If I were to start this again I would definitely use a separate, mini, servo for each aileron and would almost certainly mount the U/C in the wing.
The reason I say this is that I am unable to get the CG back any further than the most forward recommended position without adding lead to the tail, which is something I would rather avoid.
Just thought I'd mention it in case anyone else is contemplating a similar build.
Yes, its just over 53" span, and since you ask, the empty weight is 1.01Kg, or 2lbs 3ozs in old money....
My Mach 8 (0.8 sized Mach 1) was a bit smaller at 40" and just short of 2Kg all up.
Flew great on the TT36 and I'm hoping this one will be even better
Edited By TIM Shaw on 14/12/2016 20:41:18
Edited By TIM Shaw on 14/12/2016 20:42:26
Yes Piers, I believe you are.
Anything to promote these old classics is encouraged, if I have got the aims of this group right.
The long nose might cause some balance issues, and the gear install is rather tighter than I expected.
My original full size one from about 1988 was pretty quick with a piped Webra Speed 61 in the nose, and I am hoping this smaller one will feel every bit as quick, without using quite as much sky
Thanks for the kind words Martin.
I've no intention of ruining it on purpose, but I do need a tool to get a regular fix..
Actually, I normally ruin a model by covering it - it's a black art I've yet to properly master...
It is indeed a Challenger, but scaled to 80% and intended for Thunder Tiger Pro 36 power, as a winter hack.
I did acquire some lightweight retracts for it, but bottled out of fitting them in view of the state of our field in winter, regretting it a bit now - though, maybe next time.
Been a bit busy nailing together a replacement for my ill - fated (and short-lived) Mach 8
Build is about done, installation to start but I thought I'd share a couple of pics.
Edited By TIM Shaw on 12/12/2016 19:55:54
|Thread: Dave Smith Models|
The view at the field today, from messrs Wragg, Ward, and Limbert who have all had them, is that what I have here is indeed an Aerostar 69, with a "modified" vertical tail component.
There was also a view that the proposed Hanno Special might be a bit marginal, and I should perhaps be looking at a 75 or even 91 AX instead.
Not sure I want to go down that road though, I have a liking for slightly smaller models.
How would we go about holding a classic pattern meet at our field, would there be any interest in coming up to frozen wilds of West Yorks sometime next year??
Matador is nice too, but the canopy on mine is very much a DSM one.
Also, span is nearer 170cm
Thanks for all the input guys, I was aware of the smaller Aerostars and Dalotels, Saphyrs and Joker, but I think - though I may be wrong - that most of the stretched stuff came about after the Turn around Revolution and the move to bigger, slower 4-stroke powered planes, possibly under the Marvik name, although its a long time ago and I could well be wrong.
ES - as it is, the fuz weighs in at 2lbs 4ozs (890g) and the Fuz at 2lbs 10 ozs (1200g)
Wheels, tank and motor mount are in, but no engine, pipe or gear, so, although it feels very light for such a big thing (by my normal standards) its probably going to end up around the 7lb mark if I am lucky.
Ok, sounds a lot to me but my much smaller (50" span) Mach 8 clone came in over 4lbs.and flew just fine on TT Pro 36.
There is snow on the ground here today and I am part - way through an 80% Challenger project (for reasons of transport, fuel cost, and ease of handling in winter weather), so it could be a while before this bird moves on much.
Couple of other issues...
Transport could be a problem.....
And would this be an appropriate power train?
So... I came across a ex-member a while ago, in the Leeds model shop, and during conversation it transpired he had a mate who had a DSM Dalotel built, covered, no gear and unflown, which he was desperate to offload as he was moving house, and talking about putting his foot through it and taking it to the tip.
I thought that was a really bad idea, and the ex-member turned up on my doorstep last Friday with said model to be re-homed.
Its beautifully built and nicely finished - not at all like my normal efforts, but I am sure its not a Dalotel!.
Wing tips and fin are the wrong shape, and its way too big, being 70" span and a similar length, once a Spinner is fitted, not quite what I was expecting.
Get a better view of the tips here
Now, I know Carl (the builder) was not averse to changing the shape / size of his rudders, and this one looks a bit too broad to me, and I was thinking its probably an AeroStar? Although, again, wasn't the Aerostar a bit smaller?
Any ideas Guys?
Apparently, he also has an Excelsior 188 NIB - anyone know anything about that one?
Edited By TIM Shaw on 08/11/2016 14:27:06
|Thread: Which Low Wing Trainer??|
There is a lot of good advice on here already. Personally, I credit the Foss Acrowot with really teaching me to fly (got my sixth kit in the garage, to start when it warms up a bit), and I think this is - still - the benchmark all sport models should be judged against.
But I agree that stepping straight up to one from an electric trainer might be a bit much, depends on you a bit though too - I know that peoples aptitude can vary greatly, and what is necessary for some folk may not be needed for others.
I love the Wot4 too, but I would go for the Classic rather than the Mk3 personally. Power it with a decent 46 or so engine, which will fly the AcroWot you know you are going to want next, rather than going for a minimum engine size - you can always throttle it back!
I don't agree that you will be running back to electrics either - I've recently gone back to IC having flown Slope and electric for years, and find it much more rewarding, although I would freely admit a warm battery pack is better for your fingers than a soaking in glow fuel at this tine of year....
I think the best advice is to talk to the club instructor you are going to rely on to help you move forward, he may very well have some fixed ideas of his own....
Love Model Aircraft? Sign up to our emails for the latest news and special offers!