Jump to content

How are we responding?


Erfolg
 Share

Recommended Posts

I image there's no reclamation possible for the wood.

 

As I recall the resin has to be burnt out of composite in order to recycle the fibres. You "just" have to burn it hot enough... 1000 deg C or thereabouts I think? Balsa will be long gone before that..!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nigel, I know that many dislike Amazon. From my perspective, the post is free if the deal that is offered has a bottom line that is lower, than alternative offerings.

 

There is variability in woods, which includes balsa, which typically will be density, strength (however you wish to define it), and often non laminar characteristics (Isotropic). The plus side is woods do not fatigue as many metallic materials. As a one time engineer a higher margin was required with timbers. I do like timber however. In essence I am rather surprised that balsa is used in preference, particularly as supply seems an issue immediately an probably long term.

 

But things are as they are, which does potentially indicate that in the short term, there could be advantages in reviewing what and how we use materials. Nothing stays the same, the future is full of surprises. I am finishing a model which I started probably ten or so years back. Back then DuPont Blue foam seemed a useful material that could be the basis for lightweight low cost models. The yellow model was an investigation into using the stuff. The red model is slightly different that it is a replacement for a previous pretty much identical model using Depron as available some 20 years back. In the case of Blue foam, it seems to have all but disappeared. Depron as available today has very different characteristics (today it does not cut crisply, nor sand as cleanly and so on) than in the past.

WP_20220629_15_15_02_Pro.jpg

WP_20220629_15_15_57_Pro.jpg

Edited by Erfolg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot find the original picture that PatMac has posted, taken in the Deutsches Museum Munich (München, with umlauts to the Germans). I have seen another done up with the type of livery on the box. One  (in the museum) is a first class piece of kit, the second has more in common with a bears rear quarters.

 

As an aircraft/missile I found it interesting. It would appear that at least 34 were built as part of the development. For some reason designated M, rather than Versuch (experiment, perhaps more correctly development).

 

One was flown as a glider (M-8) by Hans Schubert. Although there appeared to be M-8a and M-8B and M-9 by Lothar Siebert.

 

Powered flight was by a Walter Liquid Fuel main motor, plus 4 jetisioned Schmidding solid boosters for take of.

 

The initial launch was controlled by an autopilot. Did I mention it took of vertically? using a tower, later using tree trunks with rails attached. 

 

At least one powered manned flight took place. The aircraft is now called a 349V (I am assuming for Veruch). The pilot Lothar Siebert was killed, when it is written the cockpit canopy came of, leading to a crash.

 

There are claims that another pilot then undertook at least one powered flight, that the remains of 6  remains were found,  seemingly mounted for a group launch, near München, by the advancing USA army. In a way i find some aspects hard to believe, who was this pilot that cannot be identified. Where would 6 pilots be found and again not identified in later years. I did read of one claimed encounter with one by a USA pilot, in that it appeared then disappeared. By this time the Germans had essentially run out of pilots. Even the factory test pilots were required to defend their factory. 

 

I can see that the concept seems to be you did not know how to fly an aircraft in the accepted sense. Much like a shootem up Video game. The basic problem was there were no video games to get the hang of the concept on. Perhaps the biggest problem was that there were not many German males left, just children to be sacrificed.

 

The aircraft was intended to be separated with the pieces being lowered to the ground by parachute. No conventional landing.

 

The aircraft was armed with 24 R4M rockets. It is claimed that these rockets formed the basis for the development of the USA Mighty Mouse rockets.

 

I find the story interesting non the less

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Ken, my ambition is to engage with other modelers, selfishly, some would say to profit from their experiences and knowledge.

 

Following that theme I have a few more pictures of models i have built, more usefully my experiences with the materials.

 

These two pictures are of models that made extensive use of Blue foam and Depron.

 

In the case of the Bf263 the body is Blue foam. It was built to overcome issues with a Cloud Models 163 I had built. Ib that either a hand launch or a dolly launch was required. The Bf/Junkers 263 had an undercarriage. Although the Blue Foam was light, the material did/does not like compresive forces, without semi/permanent deformation. On that basis a light ply keel was incorporated to take take of and landing forces.  The added weight of the items did not solve all the issues, as the model landed even faster.

 

The Canard has the main wing made from Depron, shaped with abrasive paper on a long piece of wood. Then the wing was covered in very light weight glass cloth, using Ronson Hardglase (WPV) as the adhesive. There are two spruce spars in the wing, which is 5-6% thick.

 

As models all have been OK, in their own way. Yet not as universally good as balsa. Which due to porous cellular structure is strong relative to its weight.

 

What has surprisingly become apparent with age, is that Blue Foam shrinks, at least in some directions. The Bachem now has some glue ridges, where the foam has shrunk back from the adhesive (Polyurethane, Gorilla Glue). The second issue that if water based adhesive such as Polycell is used , the cellular material, puckers up. This needs sanding back , before tissue paper is glued to it. Does not seem to be the same issue with WBV (which i have used on wing tips on a Do335, I have been building for some years. Any way it is no longer an issue as Blue Foam seems to have disappeared.

 

In the case of the Depron wing, I though I had struck gold. That is until the Depron available today does not seem to be anywhere as good as it was. Does not sand as well, spongy (youngs modulus and all that stuff is less than ideal).

 

It just shows that Polymers change with time and who makes it.

 

I also have purchased a pile of foam boards from the Hobby Store? The issue i need others experience of how it can be used.

WP_20160119_19_27_36_Pro.jpg

Almost.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful with glue. 

Cyano is surprisingly good as it reinforces the paper. Avoid super thin - gets hot and melts the foam. Thick stuff is ok.

Pva less so. Soggy paper if not careful. 

Contact adhesive is dubious as it melts the foam. 

 

Excellent for ribs. Non structural formers. Etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nigel, I have used PVA or what appears to be PVA sold as Resin (502) on Depron. The limitation appears to be it takes a day or so to bond, due to the low porosity of foam.

 

Do you think it will be similar with foam board?

 

As a aside the Canard has large fins (could not locate a photo with fins) which made use of Depron, with Christmas Card outer laminations. Again using 502 adhesive, they have been around for many years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to sound dense gentlemen but what IS foambord?

 

Is it expanded polystyrene foam with paper on both sides? Do you leave the paper on it when glueing it to balsa wood? Which glues are recommended?

 

I am going to build this vintage model which will double up as an ab initio trainer. https://outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=7378 The plan calls for 1/8" (3mm) balsa wing ribs. With the price of balsa wood being what it is I was thinking of using foamboard for the wing ribs.

 

Will foambord be suitable for this purpose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a foam with paper on both sides, I am not sure what kind of foam. The Flite test version is a less dense foam and light paper. The Westfoam from Hobbycraft in the UK is slightly thicker, denser and has heavier paper as it is coated paper for an art board. However it is still not heavy and is good on mid-size models. 

I have not used it for ribs, mainly for whole models. The straight wing on that model would work well with a Flite test style folded foamboard wing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been down South for a week visiting my son as the weather was not great I bought some foam board to pass the time while he was at work, this is the result of two afternoons work , it is based on the Tony Nijhuis Sunderland plan 72" span. The under wing panels are also cut and will be made the same way as my Mosquito which is also 72" span. the formers are not glued on yet as I am going to cut some holes  to lighten the structure. I use UHU Por and hot melt glue for construction, it will be clad with maker foam and covered with brown paper.  I have built 3 models now with this method and all fly very well, the first was a Flite Test kit Lockheed Lightning but the paper on their foam is not easy to paint as it has a waxy surface and comes off easily, brown paper stuck on with thinned PVA is very strong and takes water based paints very well, 

20220703_201415[282]sunderland 1.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some very good ideas and thoughts on this thread. I have been experimenting with white polystyrene from Wickes for wing cores and using lining paper for skins. The paper is of the heavy weight variety and weighs about the same as 1/16 balsa sheet. The resultant wing is stiff enough, it will be interesting to see how it copes with flying. I am also looking into using grey mount board 1mm to 2mm thick for sheeting. I see online that cardboard can be stiffened with wood hardener, so I am going to try a few experiments. For me the high cost of balsa wood has forced me to look for alternatives, hopefully I can maintain the pleasure/to cost ratio of the past. Thanks James.

white eps with  heavy lining paper.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An old foam board model I am fixing up is a 20 plus year old Ezee Pzee trainer from Paper Aviation who were best known for their Regal Eagle 30's style air racer. Very little wood in it's construction other than built up control surfaces, bulkheads and broomstick wing joiner. Sorted and ready to fly now, will give it a go next time out.  Quite a large model for a trainer with an 84 inch span.

Ezee Pzze.JPG

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Had a go with the Ezee Pzee this afternoon, did not go well. Took off fine but soon had to throttle back some as Irvine 61 was more than enough. However a little later the engine went flat out on its own accord and did not respond to the throttle stick but model was flying fine if rather fast for a trainer. Soon it was high up and I was doing gentle turns to prevent it getting to far away as I waited for the juice to run out.

Then I notice it was now in a steady decent and getting faster and found I had little elevator control.:classic_ohmy:  As it came lower the reason why could be seen, the elevator was fluttering like a tarts eyelashes and the only option left was to steer it to a safe crash in the field hitting the ground at a shallow angle but at speed. 

Inspection showed all the radio including throttle servo still working. Looks like the throttle snake had gone hard and brittle after 20 years + in a shed and let go. Should have done a better job of checking control links. 1766580272_crashoneezee.thumb.JPG.252ca197f982e467389bdaee8a510e40.JPG Ah well there you go.1376510879_.thumb.JPG.96f4eedad050f707ee03657babe53d8c.JPG

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, what a nuisance, thx for being honest enough to share your experiences. We have all been there one way or the other. As its confession time.....................most of my models these days come in one piece (jets / foamies etc.). Last year I was flying a put-the-wings -on -before- you- fly large aerobatic jobbie. Blasted off down the runway and pulled vertical.............at which point the wings folded much to the amusement of my so called club mates. Note to self.............fit the supplied substantial wing joining tube to wings as part of construction process, this helps to hold the wings together and prevents hours of grief from club "mates"!.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting bored, haven't built or flow anything for 2 years. Whether the 'magic' has gone, the changes in weather, old age, (just turned 79), some health problems really have finally got a grip on me, or just can't be bothered, who knows. Even the forums, (not just the UK ones), don't seem to have much in the way of interest.

 

The dilemma now is what to do. I doubt I will get round to flying again, though may still occasionally build something

 

Get rid of everything ?, I hate the thought of someone mistreating thing I couldn't. Watching some YT videos, there are still plenty of maniacs about with little respect for models.

Leave them in my hangar, (shed), and occasionally clear the cobwebs (yet never see any spiders, strange).

 

Anyone else just don't want to get rid of models they may have built, and have feelings for them, (no, I don't feel in love with them, just respect).

 

Ray  My 'home page showing some builds'

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it will come to us all. However you seem to have given it a little thought.

Why not have one last day with your favourite(s) and easy to fly stalwarts and make a few more lasting memory's. It may not rekindle anything and perhaps confirm your 'retirement'. 

As for disposal it is difficult I know, have helped others to divest themselves of a lifetimes accumulation.

In any event good luck with what you do next and I wish you well with your health issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 24/06/2022 at 18:55, Graham Bowers said:

All we can be sure of, is nothing stays the same. The internet has made sharing information (and misinformation) so easy, as well as online shopping. And Moore's law seems to be as relevant now as it ever was.

 

I really don't know what the most meaningful measurements are that indicate the health of the hobby. I suppose if pressed, it'd be how many youngsters are taking it up - or perhaps the financial value of modelling purchases. Anyway, in my opinion anybody who flies toy aeroplanes are part of the aeromodelling community, whichever technologies they choose, so it must be very hard to come up with an aggregate number.   I have the Impala I built in my 20's. I just  just took delivery of a 700 series flight controller for the quad I originally built with a KK2.1, and am 80% through building my first 3D printed model.

You are so rigth. Internet has changed everything (us, our behavior, our style of life, )Even making my last plane, first I found out something special for it in the internet. Thanks to it we can ask and help each other.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...