Jump to content

Warbird Replicas Spitfire LF mk IXc


Ady Hayward

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

I think we all know this situation has been on the cards for a while . Our modelling and innovation can continue , but for me , it has reached a tipping point that is simply not worth facing all of the challenges . I will show some of the foam board models on the appropriate threads started here on the forum . Having said that , I dont have the stomach for re inventing the wheel and converting my designs to yet another format . There will naturally be a reluctance for modellers to adapt and many will continue to simply carry on while they have wood stock . In the world of miniature warbirds ,we can see the difficulties across the board . Try buying an FMS or Dynam foamie . Or any spares for them . As WW2 fans , we all have our favourites , but it is starting to look like we will have very little choice in the near future . 

Yes, if we detach ourselves emotionally from our hobby, we can see this coming.

 

But, no need to be gloomy. Personally I'm totally invigorated by the possibilities of building with foamboard. I shall take all the lessons I learned from Richard and move gently forward...

 

Graham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

58 minutes ago, Graham Davies 3 said:

Yes, if we detach ourselves emotionally from our hobby, we can see this coming.

 

But, no need to be gloomy. Personally I'm totally invigorated by the possibilities of building with foamboard. I shall take all the lessons I learned from Richard and move gently forward...

 

Graham

What are you doing in Vigorated? 

Is there an ice cream van there?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

Very Nice David . I particularly like your pilot painting skills . Got any tips for the gang ?

Tall late version rudder is also a nice touch . 

 

I spent a whole day painting it up using tips from this youtube video and the very same set of paints (the day I tested positive for covid!):

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a great video tutorial David . I often look at the plastic kit builders world with envy . Their stuff is so realistic that it makes most rc models look toy like . 

The trouble is , we have spent a huge amount of time building something before we get to this stage and by then  I am seriously looking to cut every corner I can !!

However, I think there are things to be learnt from their world . This technique they use for painting vehicles/planes with black and white features before adding the main paint scheme is definitely worth a look . Well worn military equipment is rarely a constant colour . For our purposes I have (and still do ) masked off panels on a "finiished " Camo scheme , then dusted just one or two panels with a very thin coat of light grey/white . This does achieve the faded panel look in a quick way . 

I think the Spitfire in particular looks good with hood slid back . Plus its fine to leave it back , as many wartiime pilots left it back when at low level . That creates extra interest in the model and invites a little more detail in the cockpit . 

There is so much more we could do , especially now that we dont have to worry about the virbration and fuel proofing of the past . 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just joined this club....... kit ordered from Richard for building once I've finished my Phoenix Chipmunk.

Now to read this thread through- although I've probably read it all piecemeal, as it was posted, it'll be my go to resource if I need a helping hand and an inspiration for detailing, etc.

More as & when.............

Kim

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kim Taylor said:

I've just joined this club....... kit ordered from Richard for building once I've finished my Phoenix Chipmunk.

Now to read this thread through- although I've probably read it all piecemeal, as it was posted, it'll be my go to resource if I need a helping hand and an inspiration for detailing, etc.

More as & when.............

Kim

 

There's a similarly brilliant thread on RCGroups with some different photo's and ideas too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Hazell 1 said:

 

There's a similarly brilliant thread on RCGroups with some different photo's and ideas too.

I'd forgotten about that one - thanks for the reminder.

At the moment, I'm thinking that I'll base it on the modified MkIX of the RAF Special Service Flight, based at Northolt and flown by F/O Prince Emanuel Galitzine.

Modified to save weight, and painted (according to the pilot) "a shade similar to Cambridge blue", BS273 was involved in the highest recorded combat in WW2 at heights up to 43000 ft above Southampton in September 1942.

The only unknown is what colour is Cambridge blue, bearing in mind that todays hue is much 'bluer' than earlier versions. My own thoughts are that Galitzine would have been talking about the blue used in the 1930's, which is blue - green, somewhat like RAF 'Sky', but I'm still researching this. I have found an article online, but the colour chosen for the illustration, on my screen anyway, looks like a slightly cleaner version of PRU blue, which I don't think could ever be described as Cambridge blue!

Of course, I may change my mind altogether, which isn't unknown!!

Anyway, can't wait to get started, although I must get the Chippy finished 1st, otherwise SWMBO will have a go (again!!)

Kim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ended up with a kind of Spitfireish. I have Johnnie Johnsons Decals on a late mkIX with the larger pointier rudder. I realise it's not going to please the purists and I have since found TE566 which is pretty much what I should have based it on. I'm happy with it though - not maidened yet as I crashed my low wing "trainer" DB Gringo into a tree and realised I need to spend a lot more time on throttle management on approach to avoid stall yet maintain reduction in height and velocity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, David Hazell 1 said:

I ended up with a kind of Spitfireish. I have Johnnie Johnsons Decals on a late mkIX with the larger pointier rudder. I realise it's not going to please the purists and I have since found TE566 which is pretty much what I should have based it on. I'm happy with it though - not maidened yet as I crashed my low wing "trainer" DB Gringo into a tree and realised I need to spend a lot more time on throttle management on approach to avoid stall yet maintain reduction in height and velocity!

I think we can get too carried away with absolute accuracy sometimes. It's your model, a representation of what you wanted to build. My current build Chipmunk will be similar, in that I'm doing it as the WP964, the 'Spitmunk', which in real life has green / brown camo on top and undersides. For orientation with my ageing eyes, I'll be doing the underside in light sky, so bite me!!! Your Spit looks great btw, to my eyes anyway - just seen the pictures you posted previously.

Hard luck with the Gringo - what idiot put a tree in your way??

Kim

p.s. Sorry for the o/t ramblings, I'll shut up until I get the kit started now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never worry about the "Scale Police" . I go for believable plus practical . Any rivet counters that come along are welcome to make their own version .

As a few chaps are starting to get their Spitfire Kits . I thought I could offer a bit of an overview . 

I have flown quite a few other club members Spitfires that have been built very nicely but to the letter of the instructions and plan . 

One beauty weighed 7lb , but I didnt know it till after the test flight . In fact it flew so well that I was happy to do some low passes and victory rolls for Glynn's camera . 

Having said that , you will find a 5.5lb Spitfire much more forgiving . So here is the thing . I will give you a few tips that will alllow you to build a better flying Spitfire . 

Now , you might say ," why dont you just modify the kit for everyone ?" 

Well , the reason is , that if I , for example substituted a nice 5mm balsa tailplane in "a proper wooden kit"  ,with 5mm foam board, a lot of people would reel back in horror , screaming that nasty foam had entered their beautiful traditional kit . 

More on this fascinating subject to come .

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Kim Taylor said:

I think we can get too carried away with absolute accuracy sometimes. It's your model, a representation of what you wanted to build. My current build Chipmunk will be similar, in that I'm doing it as the WP964, the 'Spitmunk', which in real life has green / brown camo on top and undersides. For orientation with my ageing eyes, I'll be doing the underside in light sky, so bite me!!! Your Spit looks great btw, to my eyes anyway - just seen the pictures you posted previously.

Hard luck with the Gringo - what idiot put a tree in your way??

Kim

p.s. Sorry for the o/t ramblings, I'll shut up until I get the kit started now.

 

Not off topic as far as I'm concerned because it's all relevant:

 

Gringo: I got a friend to just trim her out for me and then had a go. Took me at least 4 attempts to get her down the runway without pulling strongly to the left. Might be slightly overpropped... In the sky, nice as pie, but pulling back too hard on the elevator when not absolutely humming along reveals a tendency to tip stall (which then instantly recovers itself, but going in a 30 degree to the left different direction. Probably my bad when I separated ailerons before sheeting and one of the ailerons doesn't quite follow the exact line it should... 

 

So coming in to try a landing, right to left when we usually have prevailing winds the other way and generally come in left to right... I'm banked over on her right wing with her coming towards me and aiming for a gap in the trees. I realised I probably wasn't in the middle of the gap enough and pulled up a bit harder. Gringo dutifully tip stalled, went left and introduced herself to the tree. Damage to wing tips and ripped the motor off the plane at the firewall. I should have just opened the throttle and gone around again. Lesson learned hopefully (need to be more active on the throttle too)! I'm repairing at the mo!!

 

So, spitfire in all likelihood is going to also pull to the left on trundling down the runway and might also exhibit a similar tip stalling trait - so I consider Gringo ideal training for hopefully success with my beautiful Spit! ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Gringo (and me) feature on the DB web site.  It was an old kit that happened to be in my regular very old fashioned model shop with foam wings over 20 years ago.  As I recall, it wasn't a brilliant flier (or more likely I was an even worse pilot than I am now!) and I eventually lost it in the rape crop planted at the side of our runway.  It took me a couple of days to find it.  IIRC it was powered with an Irvine Q40.  I suspect Richard's (at DB) design works a lot better than my original, which Boddo himself denied having anything to do with when I mentioned it to him at one of the RR club's scale events.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, David Hazell 1 said:

 

So, spitfire in all likelihood is going to also pull to the left on trundling down the runway and might also exhibit a similar tip stalling trait - so I consider Gringo ideal training for hopefully success with my beautiful Spit! ?

 

 

Yes, likely to pull to the left when taking off, like all tail draggers, but from everything I've heard, no tendency to tip stall (providing you don't provoke it). That Gringo just sounds nasty - maybe twist a bit of washout into the wings as you rebuild it.

Received my Spitfire kit today - thanks Richard - and I have to say that I'm impressed, both with the quality of the kitting (probably the best I've seen) and also the overall presentation, from the box art to the glossy build instruction booklet.

But as I've already said, back to work on the Chipmunk (very semi scale compared to the Spit) to get that finished quickly, so that I can make a start........... ?

Kim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Geoff S said:

My Gringo (and me) feature on the DB web site.  It was an old kit that happened to be in my regular very old fashioned model shop with foam wings over 20 years ago.  As I recall, it wasn't a brilliant flier (or more likely I was an even worse pilot than I am now!) and I eventually lost it in the rape crop planted at the side of our runway.  It took me a couple of days to find it.  IIRC it was powered with an Irvine Q40.  I suspect Richard's (at DB) design works a lot better than my original, which Boddo himself denied having anything to do with when I mentioned it to him at one of the RR club's scale events.

 

Last mention of Gringo for fear of going off topic. The Richard version has built up wing, barn door ailerons. Any issues with the way it flies is down to my poor attempt at wing building - I weighed down far too much when skinning the wing and cut the ailerons off too soon - all bad choices - the wings are slightly bowed the ailerons aren't quite true. As I'm doing some rebuilding of the wing I can correct the issues with the aileron, but the wing isn't ever going to be perfect. The guy who trimmed her out for me flew some beautiful barrel rolls, said she flies lovely (and that it particularly reminded him in flight of the Precedent Fun Fly). So it's on me and my lack of awareness of impending stalls that are mainly the issue I reckon! So you're the smiling face with the yellow model? I still think the model is pretty. I will get her back in the skies and aim to get a few more hours out of her before I turn her to dust!

Edited by David Hazell 1
added a bit more
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Chaps , se here is a little more on the Spitfire Kit .  

There is no real concern about adding weight forward of the spar . However anything behind that line is an issue .

You can , if you are careful, build one from the standard kit , without an ounce of lead in the nose . However , any extra paint or "clever Dicky" ideas at the back and you will be on a slippery slope .  Ultimately we have a coke can up the front instead of a Merlin !

Why leave it to chance ? Here are some things you could do . 

The central crutch is your first port of call . Behind the cockpit , you can whittle most of it away . It is only a tool to keep the fuselage straight . You can chop bits out and then take even more out from underneath as a final measure once the rear decking is built . 

The lower half of the rear fuselage needs to be really egg shaped , so if you haven't sanded enough away to see parts of the triangular balsa coming through , you havent gone far enough !

Now , for the serious weight losers , (feeling brave ?) how about replacing the horizontal stabilizer with 5mm foam board available from Hobby craft ? (only £4 per sheet ) . I recently did one for a friend with just two laminates of 3mm balsa round the edge . Then simply covered just the balsa . That left me with a tailplane , ready to paint at half the weight of the balsa version . 

I also use 9g MG servos throughout and move them as far forward as possible . Have a look at the weight of the push rods too . 

You dont need the outer all the way . You can use bits of outer supported along the way . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

Ok Chaps , se here is a little more on the Spitfire Kit .  

There is no real concern about adding weight forward of the spar . However anything behind that line is an issue .

You can , if you are careful, build one from the standard kit , without an ounce of lead in the nose . However , any extra paint or "clever Dicky" ideas at the back and you will be on a slippery slope .  Ultimately we have a coke can up the front instead of a Merlin !

Why leave it to chance ? Here are some things you could do . 

The central crutch is your first port of call . Behind the cockpit , you can whittle most of it away . It is only a tool to keep the fuselage straight . You can chop bits out and then take even more out from underneath as a final measure once the rear decking is built . 

The lower half of the rear fuselage needs to be really egg shaped , so if you haven't sanded enough away to see parts of the triangular balsa coming through , you havent gone far enough !

Now , for the serious weight losers , (feeling brave ?) how about replacing the horizontal stabilizer with 5mm foam board available from Hobby craft ? (only £4 per sheet ) . I recently did one for a friend with just two laminates of 3mm balsa round the edge . Then simply covered just the balsa . That left me with a tailplane , ready to paint at half the weight of the balsa version . 

I also use 9g MG servos throughout and move them as far forward as possible . Have a look at the weight of the push rods too . 

You dont need the outer all the way . You can use bits of outer supported along the way . 

 

I wish I'd whittled more of that crutch out of the way, but never mind. Mine, with the sound system transducer in its first location (at the rear of where the cowling sits) proved a bit tail heavy, but moving the sound system forward as far as I could within that section trimmed the CG nicely. I can effectively now use the transducer to offset the bigger batteries I have versus the smaller ones. That's the theory anyways, still not maidened her yet!!

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...