Jump to content

Forum members' new models: Let's see them.


Recommended Posts

 

 

mercury marauder still.jpgmerury marauder (3).jpg

Here is my scaled up version of H J Nicholls 1952 glider design, the Mercury Marauder. That's a metre stick shown for scale

Span is 88" and power a 200W brushless motor. More details are on my summary build log on RcGroups vintage forum here

**LINK**

and the you tube video of it flying here

**LINK**

Edited By John Laird on 02/08/2020 15:41:43

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took this glider up to the field today for the maiden flight. 3.6m wingspan "Element" glider by TopModel CZ. Weather was not really up to checking out its thermaling capability, just flew some gentle launches, a couple of full power motor runs and landings getting the mixes set up for launching and crow braking for spot landings. Flew very well, the sink rate was good and it could fly very slowly with a few mm of down flap. Runs on a 3S 3350mAh battery through a Turnigy Glider Drive 3858 4.6 840kV motor and YEP 80A ESC, 14x10 carbon prop pulling just under 600W. Total weight 2.1kg = 4lb 10oz. No one with a decent camera at the field for some in flight shots.

dsc09219 (custom).jpg

dsc09222 (custom).jpg

Edited By PeterF on 02/08/2020 16:58:21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just posted these on another thread, taken at the field this morning at its third flying session. Foamy ARTF obviously, it's the FMS 1400mm Bf109F, flies nicely on 4S. It is beyond my modest modelling skills and patience to create such a thing, I stick to building simpler designs, but I did enjoy applying weathering and replacing the rather small pilot with one to the correct scale. Now I look at the photos, I must do something to improve the wheel hubs!

109f rear.jpg

109f front.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Torsten, that looks great!

Can you tell us a bit more? It looks fully controlled, can you control the dive as well as the parachute descent?

Don't tell me he steers the car too; I'm not buying that as he can't see over the dashboard. You have to get up early to catch me with me trousers...

As Peter says, that's really impressive.

Graham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The parachutist plan and article are freely available on Outerzone here parachutist

I have to say I'm quite taken by this and am considering having a go, but first I've got work out how to get him aloft as I don't fancy building yet another plane purely for parachute dropping.

Perhaps a scaled down version may be easier to accommodate?

GDB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi this is my latest lockdown project --- A Cessna Skymaster .

I used Simon Delaney's plan of May 1993 as a basis .

I've modified it a bit .

The cabin is now fully glazed .

It now has working rudders and flaps . The elevators and rudders are driven by snakes in the booms .

The ailerons and flaps have their own mini servos in the wings .

The wing struts are non load bearing and are plastic loose leaf binder clips pushed over small ali . brackets on the fus .and wing .

The under carriage is a bit too long as I am concerned about prop clearance on take off . It's currently sporting a10"prop .I could go for a 9" three blader as previously suggested but I'll try this out untiI get a feel for things.

It is powered by a Thunder tiger Pro 40 and uses an in cowl silencer .

I'm waiting for some decent weather to see how it performs . To balance the plane about 3 grammes of lead was necessary at the end of the booms giving a high wing loading of about 29oz.. per sq.foot .

Oh well we shall see ! ! !

p1040168.jpg

p1040167.jpg

p1040166.jpg

p1040165.jpgp1040163.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Erfolg on 27/07/2020 12:17:15:

This is not a new model in the strictest definition of new.

wp_20191121_15_53_16_pro.jpg

In that the model was completed in Novemberish, the weather then intervened in delaying the first flight, immediately followed by the Corona Virus and subsequent restrictions.

The first flight took place approx two weeks back. It was most fortuitous that that the grass on the field had been cut, albeit with the cut grass left to be dispersed by the sun to dry it and the wind to finish its removal. My test pilot checked out the model for control surface movements. The model placed in the centre of the field, throttle opened, the model raced across the surface with all the urgency of a racing slug, on Valium. Finally it was eased into the air, swinging left, which was arrested by the pilot. Slowly the model gained height, where a number of checks were made. Firstly response to ailerons, rudder and elevator, secondly stall characteristics. The test pilot then called for a landing, as the power was only just adequate to stay in the air.

We then had a discussion, where it was decided that the model was vastly underpowered, secondly that the CG was probably a little to far forward. I decided that the initial change would be to re-battery from 3s to 4s. I would then move the CG to the mid position (by removing the nose weight) If the power was still inadequate I would re-motor.

A check of the motor on 3s was showing a little over 200w pulled, on a 4s this went up to 360w (approx 1/3rd improvement).

The next good day had us back at the field, a bit blowy. On attempting to arm the model, I discovered I had left the conversion plug at home. At present I am going through my collection of models and converting them from Deans to XT60 plugs, which mainly involves the ESC, in this case the ESC was done, this old, seldom used Lipo was still on Deans.

This week-end was yet another good day. Back at the field the model was once more prepared and checked. This time the model raced across the field like racing Pony, on its 360w. My pilot did say, you know with a horse up front or 760w it would be a real monster. Who remembers those lectures with respect to James Watt his horse and deciding that a horse power would be 33,000 ft lb per minute? The good news is now the model takes of with authority, no tendency to swing left being on the stall. The roll rate is adequate, inverted flight good, loops good, spins reluctantly entered in both directions, stall turns fine.

So + 6 months down the line the model is OK. Just about ready for me.

Edited By Erfolg on 27/07/2020 12:20:17

Carl, what is that? looks a little bit like the Webbit (which I destroyed a few years ago) If so than it has a wingspan of approx 110cm. Mine was totally overpowered, could fly vertical.

BR Vecchio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerhard, I call it a Kunststoff Flugel, It is a foam wing bought at our clubs Bring and buy sale, It was intended to have dihedral, soon got rid of that.

The body is a totally novel concept, being a 36" long sheet, by probably 3". Everything else is by standard proportion, and what I had in my vast array of lovingly collected artifacts (some say junk).

I have now managed to squeeze a second flight in before the weather broke. As the Mutti would say "ganz einfach, gewohnliche. It does fly very well, then again, it is ordinary, so no surprise.

I may rename it "Toll", but I do go over the top, sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

img-20200816-wa0001~3.jpgErfolg, not sure if great minds think alike, but my lockdown build hack has had a similar history to yours.

The wing I cut from foam about 20 yrs ago,and as an experiment just gave it a LE, TE, and capstrips stuck on with double sided tape and a little white glue.

After film covering I was concerned about the balsa coming unstuck, so put it in the attic to mature for a bit, and then forgot about it.

Needing a new hack I remembered the wing and retrieved from the attic and it was still in one piece. The fuz was drawn out on the balsa, the tailplane recycled from an old glider. Covering the fuz with cheap coloured tissue and WBP was a bit of a nightmare as it had no wet strength, but not too bad in the end.

At 42ins span, 2.5 lbs auw with a 3s 2200 it is aerobatic but will fly slowly too. Pic taken last Sunday in calm conditions.img_20200803_121517841~2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great minds think alike, is patently untrue. I do not have a great mind, pretty ordinary and more often than and not wrong, my wife tells me.

I have noticed that pragmatic engineers like straight lines, the use of standard sizes. Avoid any any additional than necessary expenditure, to do the job.

Artistic engineers, go for the curves as predicted by UDL diagrams, then a few tapers as they look better, and also follow many theoretical set ups. Only the best will do, whatever the duty,  is often the philosophy of the purists.

I console myself in thinking that the make do FW190D and the FW190H/TA152, many of the more successful marks of the Spitfire were often more successful, or at least as successful as the carefully crafted improvements.

Other than the colour scheme, it appears to be a game of "Snap" with our models.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 22/08/2020 12:50:35

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Erf, snap indeed, but I suppose any parallel chord wing with motor and tail joined with strait lines is going to look similar.

I do sometimes unleash my artistic side (but not often) as in this EPP fuz with lots of compound curves.

If it flies, I hope it will do a reasonable job of pretending to be a DH Venom.img_20200803_093549067.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Peter, there is some de ja vu for me in the suggestion that there is a little or some Swamp Rat, in both models.

Not being contentious or argumentative or confrontational, when the "Swamp Rat" was on the list for a Greenacre Fly-In, I lobbied as hard as i could for it. Why because in my view it embodied the full concept of the idea. A model that all could build, easily, cheaply and would have outstanding performance. What happened , the vote went to a difficult to build, ugly, retro model, with non of the flight characteristics of the swamp Rat (I have seen in the past a few at club level, all disappointing).

I accept both look like many before, no doubt many to follow. Why, because the concept is well founded, in build and flying qualities. My own model is not a true design, it is an amalgam of tried and tested concepts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...