Graham Davies 3

Surely, if it builds into a great looking, tough, reliable and great flying model, does it matter? Those that really love to get their teeth into a big build project are probably not going to be interested anyway. If we get to the correct end result, a lightweight and realistic funfighter upon which we can lavish a bit of scale cleverness, then our work is done here!

Fantastic Michael. As Martin said, some details and tips on glassing these would be great, Maybe another thread? Graham

Hi Michael, thought about glassing foamboard myself, but I hated doing it on conventional builds! I'd be really interested to see how that turns out. Graham

I can make it on the Sunday Martin. I can bring the Regianne and Pitts, assuming they survive! I could bring the fatty Me109 for giggles too. Graham

Hi Martin, Great news. If I can, I will. I'll need to check the diaries and see if I'm spared. Graham

I might be tempted to make this pair in a slightly smaller (funfighter) size for my favourite 3S 2200 pack size. I like models this size, although acccept that the 'birds look and fly better at a slightly larger scale. The reason to go 42-45" span is to fit 2 fully rigged models in the car and carry them to the strip without needing a lie down! I've done a few more traditionally built models this size, and reckon a foamboard build would be lighter and easier to launch. No-one has yet mentioned twins. Eric has built some absolute beauties. My Ki45 at 60" gets 4+ minutes on a single 3S 2200 pack and is honestly the easiest model to hand launch I've ever flown. It's like launching a towline glider! At this scale, it flies incredibly realistically. The build was my first foamboard job, and I've learned a lot since, but it's a great model. Easily kittable using 3D printed cowls...

Yes, know what you mean. My first 'bird was a 'salvage kit' from Richard of a Tempest. I built it with fixed gear so I could fly it solo on our sometime rough strip. Once I'd really nailed smooth landings (and takeoffs! These often do more damage!) I fitted old school mechanical retracts. Easy retro fit, and totally reliable Graham

Like this? WR Yak3. My favourite 'Bird...

Maybe Eric, but it's not hard to create a kit of precut foamboard and may bring the price down into the area where it's competitive against Dynam etc. Richard's idea of making 'sections' of foam may also be worth exploring as it makes construction even easier.

I might have to knock up said 1500mm FW190 now. I think I heard the gentle clang of a gauntlet hitting the ground...

Thanks Leccy, This was made directly from a 3 view. I could make ANY warbird I choose. At this scale, I can make a wing structure that supports retracts; I'd have to think about how to do it if it were a bit bigger, but it would certainly be possible. The problem is that if we can't currently convince the great unwashed to build a foam veneer/ laser cut kit, then getting them to build a foamboard kit is a big ask. It's not that hard, but calls on a bit of problem solving and manual skill, which is a scarce commodity these days, it seems. Moreover, I think the finishing is the big problem. It takes a bit of time, and it would seem that the non-building sector of our hobby does not have the time to send making these simple models look good. Personally, since Richard showed me some basic techniques, I love this part of a build. It can be done in your armchair, in front of the telly, and really gives you something you can be proud of. Graham

Like this then? Regianne Re2005 55" (1400mm), flies on 4S 3700 packs for 10 minutes. Flies off a rather rough patch and flies from retracts without issue. I went to town and fitted retracts and flaps and it is still just under 5 pounds. Without those and with a set of thumb grips, it would be easy to hand launch and would weigh 4pounds. It's foamboard, a tiny bit of balsa, some expanded polystyrene to shape the nose/ cowl and is covered in brown paper. Emulsion paint finish, and patented Richard Wills finishing techniques. It looks great, flies well, cost hardly anything. Graham

I sympathise Mr Fro. When I started many years ago, the same entry barriers existed. It seems that the model fraternity is predisposed to defending the difficulty status! It' IS difficult and crashing is inevitable for most. But it's only a toy airplane at the end of the day. I taught myself, and loved the process of learning, probably BECAUSE it was challenging and difficult, not despite it. Let's face it, nothing that comes easy holds us for long. My main love is music, and after 40 years, I now feel I have mastered about 15% of the guitar, on a good day... You do you, Mr fro. You have every right to make bags of matchwood, interspersed with pieces of your own fingers. After all, isn't that 'engineering'? 😉 Graham

I'm a total convert to these modelling materials and techniques. I have developed my techniques to the point that I am making models that look similar to my own more traditional models, fly well, build easily and are dirt cheap. BUT... Whilst my club mates are supportive and generally are impressed by what can be achieved, none have so far been tempted to have a go. That's fine, but I suspect it indicates that this route is also too 'niche' to offer a route to a commercial kit. From Richard's point of view, he is hoist by his own petard. He introduced me to these possibilities, and now I can't see much to be gained in buying a kit of any sort! Graham

None taken! Given that Snoopy pilots an ME109 that looks like someone has inflated it, I think there are bigger issues for the scale police... 😉

She flew! A few trim issues, and a bit of an emergency landing, but all good! Thanks to Peter Miller for some great photos. Graham

All being well, the B&Q underlay foam Pitts (version 2) is ready for maiden. Final weight 4 pounds 12 Ounces ready to go. 4S 3700 pack, 3641 700kv motor turning a 14x6 prop. made from 3mm and 6mm B&Q (Diall) underlay foam with carbon rods to stiffen the wings and tail. Covered in brown paper/ PVA, then painted in emulsion and 2 coats of B&Q water based gloss varnish. The pitts log and legends printed onto photocopier paper didn't work too well as the varnish smeared the ink, but it will look OK as it flies past, if it gets that far! Graham

Yes Steve. There will always be a torque reaction, but I have managed to easily trim my PS so it flies pretty straight, regardless of throttle position. It doesn't 'zoom' under power and any torque reaction is easily managed. I fly mine on a big old 14x8, and even so it's quite benign and neutral. Like Peter, I can't remember when I last applied any changes to the thrustline of a model. I can't imagine you'll have any issues if you rigg it at zero/ zero. Graham

I am the lucky owner of Peter's Peggy Sue. I can testify that it is rigged zero/ zero (I converted it to electric!). Whilst I could argue a case for downthrust, I can't really say that the model needs either. With a bit of attention to the rudder trim, it loops straight, and flies circuits fast or slow without significant retrimming. As Peter has seen, it flies uplines for stall turns pretty straight, and I can tool around in slow low circuits without any real issue. However, it is extremely aerobatic if you open the taps, If I were you EB, rig it zero zero. If you can fly solo, you won't have any trouble and you'll love it. Graham

Love the finish on the Legionnaire Jeff. Great job.

Thank you. Yes, mostly UHU Por, and mostly as a contact adhesive. There are some ply doublers internally to tie in the firewall, cabanes, lower wing leading edge and undercarriage and there is some epoxy to fix the hard points to these. This is my 6th foamboard model, and I'm starting to refine some techniques and design ideas. I really enjoy working with it, and can't see me making a conventional balsa model in the foreseeable as this material really suits the sort of models I like to fly. I have a nice simple method and it allows me to reproduce scale designs as practical sports models. Graham

Not quite ready, but I got excited and couldn't wait... I've had a love affair with Pitts Specials since I was a kid. There's something about them that encapsulates everything I love about aviation. However, I've never had a model that flew well, so I'm on a mission. This is the second foamboard version following on from the 'Ukrainian Aerobatic Team' (fictitious!) version I made earlier this year. That had some good and bad points, but after repeated problems with trim, it had a few too many hard landings and was retired. This version is a touch larger at 45" span and is set up to fly on 4S 3300 packs. It is not quite finished, but weighs 4 pounds 2 Ounces with maybe 6 ounces of finishing to add. At 4 1/2 lbs, we have 14 Oz/ Sq Ft, so should be good. It's made from Diall (B&Q) laminate underlay sheets. Mostly 5mm, but 3mm for the fuselage skins. The wings contain 6mm carbon tubes, the tailplane 3mm carbon tubes. This is to stiffen the wings which were rather flexible in the Mk1. It uses a 3541 700kv motor turning either a 13x6 or 13x8, depending what my Wattmeter tells me. It's covered with brown paper/ PVA and painted with emulsion (all freehand! It looks good at flypast distance...) nd will then get a coat or two of clear gloss water based varnish to bling up the finish and make the foam tougher. I've trialled this and it seems to work well. Should be ready in a few weeks; just in time for the brief window between unflyable summer winds and winter... Graham

Glad to hear it went OK Eric. It's a great looking model Graham

Look forward to that Martin. We need another injection of foamboard ingenuity! Working on a Mk2 version of a Pitts Special at the moment. I never got to the bottom of the problems with the Mk1, but suspect airframe flex wasn't helping. Mk2 is a bit bigger at 45" and uses some carbon rods to stiffen up the wings. Lots of slight tweaks to our arsenal of techniques, but more on that if they prove successful! It's going to be covered with brown paper/ PVA and painted with emulsion before a coat of gloss water based varnish. I've trialled this already and it seems to offer a good tough semi gloss finish. I'll keep you posted, but vacate your thread for now! Graham

The big thing for me is about completing the illusion. we put a lot of emphasis on the finish of the model, and rightly so. Approval of our peers, and our own satisfaction are important to us. But we can so easily shatter that illusion if we fly the model in a way that is only possible with a model. Even my little 42" spitfire looked really good if I flew big, sweeping lines and used the height/ speed exchange with some thought. The difference for us is that we can easily open the taps and ruin this illusion...