By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Scale rescale

Modifying a scale plan

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
kevin b10/01/2017 20:20:56
avatar
1456 forum posts
150 photos

I wonder if anyone can offer advice please.

I have been looking for a nice scale biplane to put my OS 40FS in. Something a bit "different", but vintage.

I have found a nice plan ate 41ins span (1/9th scale), but it is for a 45-60 four stroke.

I wondered if I reduced the scale down to 37.5ins (1/10th scale) and build light, would that be about right for my engine ? Scaling down plans is not a problem to me.

I did consider trying to build the original very light, but of course there is the drag factor as well.

It's curious that when I look at the old free flight plans the engines are all under half the size of the modern RC equivalents, but I suppose they weren't intended to perform aerobatics (intentionally) !

Denis Watkins10/01/2017 20:32:51
2042 forum posts
103 photos

You are on the right track Kevin, I fly 3, .40 4 strokes and they all comfortably fly 4.5 lbs, and I estimate 0.6hp to be about 450 watts. All 3 models are high wingers, but one is 50inch span. A biplane as you know doubles on wing drag, but you are in the ballpark and should consider weight also. I ran one motor in on a Boomerang, it was not sprightly, but it served as a platform, and that is 62inch at 5lb, or more. I would build the 41inch light as you say, as below that wingspan, flying can become a little twichy.

Edited By Denis Watkins on 10/01/2017 20:35:07

kc11/01/2017 19:49:31
5221 forum posts
159 photos

I would expect an OS 40FS to be fine for a 41inch span biplane or up to about 48 inch span, depending on the performance required. Only a bipe like the Pitts or Ultimate that need excessive power for vertical performance would need larger.

Early 4 strokes were not as powerful as later models so that might account for the 45 to 60 being specified, however it might also be because the model had a very short nose and used the weight of the larger engine for that reason.

Martin Harris11/01/2017 19:57:16
avatar
7117 forum posts
177 photos

My Puppeteer (60" biplane weighing 8 lbs according to Flair) flew perfectly well on an OS 40 FS with no meaningful compression - so your one should be a doddle (even unscaled) unless you're looking at Pitts performance!

kevin b11/01/2017 20:20:45
avatar
1456 forum posts
150 photos

Thanks for the information guys.

I think I will go with the plan as is. If I build light and it is ok, fine. If not I could always put a bigger engine in it. I have a spare Irvine 60 2 stroke !!!

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

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
Overlander
CML
Gliders Distribution
SHREK
electricwingman 2017
Wings and 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