Piers Bowlan

That is a great incentive, the PSSA similarly have their mass build gathering on the Great Orme during the Summer. Once Richards’s prototype model have flown there should be quality videos posted on the forum of them flying as does Richard Harris with his autogyro builds prior to the plan appearing in RCM&E. Likewise a mass build 2024 article in the Mag would be good for those who don’t frequent the forum.

I have never met anyone who has shelled out £500 for a foamy warbird but I would suggest that no matter how cheap, in the main, they would be unlikely to buy, build and finish a kit. If they have money to burn they will just go out and spend another £500 on their next ARTF foamy when the last one gets battered or destroyed. Just my view.

Meanwhile… back to the OT. Earlier in the thread Richard said £90 for a kit could be too much for a newbie (to paraphrase). I presume ‘newbie’ as in new to building, not new to the hobby. A FW190 in the hands of a tyro pilot will not last very long I suggest. As others have said, there are loads of dyed in the wool builders on this forum, so why lose sleep over how many newbies these kits will attract? There just has to be a reason for mass participation. What better motivation would be the ’RCM&E 2024 WR Mass Build’. These mass builds have attracted a lot of participation in the past. The PSSA A4 Skyhawk mass build sold over 70 Sarik Hobbies kits apparently. Forum members could encourage participation by their MFC, as Ron and others have suggested - mass builds within the RCM&E mass build. The multiple build threads on this forum would encourage others to join in. A thread on covering techniques perhaps. Someone would inevitably try and put an IC engine in one even though they are designed for electric, just to be different. It all adds to the fun. All this hinges on a couple of kit designs being available for delivery late December (many people have spare time available over the Christmas period. The idea is to finish the model in 2024, you don’t have to wait until 1st January to start it! Can a couple of kits be developed in that time frame? Over to you Richard.

I have found a foam hot-wire cut wing whether EPS, EPO, EPP or whatever, if reinforced with thin carbon fibre strips let in, is immensely strong. Especially if the wing is then brown paper/PVA covered. Light too 💕. I havn’t found using large pieces of carbon necessary, for my applications at least. Keep it simple:- foam + carbon + brown paper/PVA 😃

I think Richard’s comment was a bit tongue in cheek David so don’t take it personally. We all finish our models as best we can whether scale or not, taking into account time constraints. As long as we are happy with it, it is all that matters.

I have a feeling it is dissolved by dope or acetone. When glassing, epoxy resin/glass is OK but polyester resin/glass will dissolve it. I use brown paper and thinned PVA but add thin carbon fibre strips let into the foam as spars. The brown paper shrinks slightly as it dries providing a good surface finish for painting. I cover both sides ( top and bottom) in one session to avoid warping.

Personally I would prefer a F4F Wildcat in preference to a Hellcat. I think the reason why the Wildcat is not often kitted is its feindishly complicated retract mechanism but if you are going for belly landings it is not an issue. As an alternative to the Pacific theatre blue scheme there is also the camo scheme of the British Martlet version too. The Tempest is not often modeled which is a pity, although I have one of the World Models kits (but sadly not flying yet). Incidentally I built a PSS Blackburn Firebrand out of foam using 3 view images I downloaded from the internet. Once I had cut the fuselage formers from thin ply, hot wire cutting the fuselage sections was easy and quick, which were then just glued together. Once reinforced with thin ply and carbon fibre strips the structure became very stiff, paricularly when I had it covered with brown paper and PVA. A kit of uncovered foam (EPS) sections plus a few reinforcing pieces of wood for the wings and fuselage would be cheap and quick to produce (?). How many people would want to try their hand at brown paper covering is another matter however. I suspect some people would rather spend £500 on an RTF foamy and not have the hassle and mess of building something themselves. Each to their own.

Hey Fu (Futura57 is a bit of a mouthful) your Quark seems to fly very well and appears to be a simple quick-build model. Have you considered submitting it to RCM&E for publication as a pull out plan? Tony Nijhuis scale mini 1960s EDFs are really delightful if numerous and Chris Williams scale gliders are things of beauty but how many have we had now? Quark would be different and a quick build to boot. A popular combination. NB, a nice hi-viz Quark contrasting colour scheme might go down well with the management 👍

I must have been about seven when my dad built a KK Conquest glider. It had one flight, it flew beautifully until our excited wire fox terrier trashed it after it landed! I used to ride my bike to the little park at the end of the road to fly my rubber powered Frog interceptor. Later, a control line KK Hurricane. For my 14 birthday I was given the coveted macGregor SC radio and like Windymiller in an earlier post, built a Snipe from the Aeromodeller 1970s plan. It regularly used to crash on Epsom Downs after the elmic escapement jammed and I would spend the following week carefully piecing the balsa jigsaw back together again. The little Cox Babe Bee engine always seemed to survive and in fact I have it to this day although it is a bit like Tiggers broom, so many parts have been replaced!

I will have to put it on my build list (it’s a long list!)

Ron, if your PS2 wings weigh the same (model laterally balanced) and it has a slight tendency to roll with no aileron trim applied, it may well be rolling as a further effect of yaw caused by the propeller slipstream. A small amount of rudder trim may also correct a tendency to roll as one is a further effect of the other. This is just theoretical and of no consequence to how one flies. Engine offset (or not) is a matter of personal preference. All the above assumes no warps of course (I will quickly add, most unlikely with Ron’s model!)

I am glad you are firing on all cylinders again Cuban8, so time to drag out all those old projects to see where you are. No time to waste! 😊 So why is it that we get distracted and lured into starting a new project and leave our current one to languish? (At least I do) Personally I like ‘sculpting’ a new model; sharp tools and soft wood (or foam) etc. The covering or painting I find a boor plus the myriad of jobs needed before the first flight. It you hit a snag the project can drag on and become a chore rather than fun. As hobbies are supposed to be fun I start another project. 🤭 That is my excuse anyway, I wish I could be like Paul 😇

My dark secret is that I am a serial ‘non-finisher’. There, it’s out! I do finish models of course but I have a long list of various models in various states on built, usually awaiting covering! These include Peter Miller’s Alley Cat, Derek Woodward’s Holly, Peter Rake’s CL215 and my OD PSS Blackburn Firebrand, that just needs painting. Post house-move I am itching to get them finished but there is always the prospect of that ‘exciting new project’ that beckons temptingly!

I was tempted to build Max’s very stylish Diamona when it was featured in the EFI mag some years ago but other projects (and life!) got in the way. Are there any aerodynamic advantages with a box wing configuration, possibly reduced wingtip vortices and drag reduction? Maybe it’s USP is that it looks cool 😎!

It’s a great looking model Martin, I hope you have her fixed up and flying again soon.

The torsion-bar type undercarriage is incompatible with the spats being glued to the bottom of the wing! Personally just fill the hole (balsa & lightweight filler, it’s non structural) then leave a gap between the top of the spat and the wing so that the leg can bend backwards somewhat in the event of a ‘ firm arrival’. Not scale but it would survive a firm landing. The full sized had oleo struts which compressed on landing and the spats had ‘trousers’ which could slide up and down with the oleo leg.

Personally I cannot see what a wing jig will provide that a flat building board won’t. On the other hand the Great Planes type jig requires the holes in the ribs to be cut with laser accuracy as kc pointed out. The steel or carbon fibre rods are the ‘datum’. A datum is provided by a flat building board. There might be case for a wing jig with a semi or a fully symmetrical wing section but I have built those before on a flat building board too, either using rib-tabs or by shimming the LE & TE with care. So not really a problem. So rather than spending money on a wing jig I would buy more balsa, but that is just me! 😁😁😁

To add a further note on building wings, I mark the rib positions on the LE And TE stock. I then make a small indentation maybe 2mm deep so the TE & LE of the ribs fit snugly into the stock to increase glueing area. It is surprising how much stronger the joint is than just butt jointing and you end up with perfectly spaced ribs 😊. (A couple of old blunt hacksaw bladed taped together make a nifty tool for cutting small slots) If I am cutting my own ribs, I normally make them a little longer to start with but if they are from a laser cut set I don’t lose sleep if the chord is reduced by a few mm! Just my 2p worth!

I think modellers have been making wings straight and true for decades using just a perfectly flat building board with balsa parts pinned to it. Either plasterboard (my local B & Q sells ready cut pieces) or self adhesive cork squares available from eBay, work well. An alternative to pins is to use a magnetic building board. Some people swear by them and I have seen them for sale at some of the model shows in the past. Thinks 🤔:- must try one sometime. If the wing has washout just place a strip of balsa along the TE at an angle, such that the root rib is flat on the board while the tip rib is raised by the strip. If you are worried about glueing the ribs to the strip, cover it with some shiny sticky tape.

Yes, unfortunately high impedance between the cathode and anode is another issue with this technology, which they are working on… If they had solved all the problems we would likely be using them now but they have the potential to be a game changer. A little light reading 😉 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01187-y

I wonder how often has an eminently qualified and respected expert said something along these lines, ‘…could not see any prospect of a fundamental breakthrough because… ‘ There follows a reasoned explanation why. But, unforeseen discoveries prove them wrong again and again, (eg. Jet engine, transistor/IC, LCD screens, computers, The Internet!). Solid state batteries have for some time offered the elusive prospect of a step change in efficiency and charge density. Cycle life has hitherto been a major drawback but perhaps no more? https://www.anl.gov/article/new-design-for-lithiumair-battery-could-offer-much-longer-driving-range-compared-with-the-lithiumion#:~:text=“With further development%2C we expect,than lithium-ion batteries.” They are also supposed to be safer and if aluminium is used instead of lithium, a lot cheaper, potentially.

I am pleased Balsa Cabin are now selling the Wild Thing. Everyone should have one that has access to a half decent slope, whether beginner or expert. It is indestructable and will last forever, if not longer!

Beautifully smooth flying, very realistic 👍

There are some large scale experimental projects out there with serious money behind them. For instance there is a Dash 8 regional airliner flying with one of its two engines replaced by an electric motor powered by a hydrogen fuel cell. Light aircraft trainers are emerging with electric motor options. Pipistral Velis Electro and Diamond Aircraft for example. There are several lines of research under way using different battery technologies. Metal/Air, solid state to name but two. Some may come up against an insurmountable problem (blind alley) only to reemerge when some bright spark (sorry!) comes up with a work arround some time later. Developing a new battery is not just about charge density but cycle life, internal resistance, safety and cost are other considerations. The reason why so much money is available for research is the prize if successful is very great.

I expect you know Nigel but SLEC sell quality wing bands of all sizes.