By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for PeterF

Here is a list of all the postings PeterF has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
05/01/2020 17:48:06

I have completed the skeleton of the right hand wing, spars, ribs, leading edges, trailing edges, shear webs and wing tubes and this fits well with the fuselage. I mainly followed the photo pack. One thing is the photo pack does not exactly stipulate how to set the ribs up and I could not find a note on the plan either. One photo shows the trailing edges all set on the building board, so this is what I have done. I also put the front spar in place as a positioning device whist the ribs were fitted, then lifted it up and glued it in place later in the build. I also added the shear webs before lifting from the board in an attempt to keep everything more rigid once lifted from the board.

Ribs glued in place with the spars.dsc08610.jpg

Rear of the ribs level on the board.dsc08611.jpg

Front spar only used for location at this stage.dsc08612.jpg

Front spar lifted up once top spars, LEs and TEs have been glued in placedsc08620.jpg

Shear webs addeddsc08623.jpg

Wing removed from building board and trial fitted.dsc08628.jpg

Thread: TN Concorde
01/01/2020 18:54:19

Excellent, look forward to hearing how it flies. A chap has one at our club under build. I had a 4 fan plane at one time, the fans all started up at different throttle settings if I opened the throttle very slowly, but once running they all seemed to be in sync.

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
23/12/2019 11:22:10

The exhaust nozzles on the plan are just some thin ply wrapped into a short tube. The advantage of these is that they have a minimal impact on the air stream flowing out of the thrust tubes. I have built the 3D model of the rear former and the air stream and original nozzles to show this.


Greg has then gone on to make a 3D printed version of these.

However, I wanted ones with some conical shape on, but the trouble is that these will interfere with the air stream, so I have made the cone quite small and angled the two cones 3 degree inwards to reduce the impact on the air stream in the middle of the thrust tube. This does mean that the gap between the cones is reduced, but needs must. They have also been angled down 3 degree compared to the outlet former. The 3D model shows the limited impact on the air stream.

If anyone wants the file for the conical version pm me with your email address and I'll happily send it to you.




Edited By PeterF on 23/12/2019 11:23:24

23/12/2019 11:15:29

Progress has been a bit slow in terms of the amount of wood added to the plane. I have tackled the rudder and done this according to the plans and all has gone well. It is quite large, larger than the wings on some of my models so it has taken a bit of work.

The main reason is I have bought a basic 3D printer, my son has a model making business (not RC - wargame models) and he has a number of 3D printers, but he has been inundated with Christmas orders plus he had a special promotion on a new range of kits so he has not had time. Anyways, I have done a pair of pilots, taking the cue from Craig's build photos, pilots were 1/12th scale of Thingiverse and I believe the TN model is about 1/16th scale so printed them at 75%. These are the pilots with visors raised, hopefully more detail will show of their faces when painted. I have used the nose cone and tail cone supplied by Greg, spot on, thanks. I have not sanded the nose or tail cones until I got these. I have designed by own exhaust nozzles, I will post a little bit about these later.






Thread: The Gov't, CAA, BMFA & UAV legislation thread
21/12/2019 09:16:43

Yes because the questions also cover issues such as safe operation of model aircraft which you still need to demonstrate and are nothing to do with flying legislation.

Thread: Scammer/Trojan
17/12/2019 18:59:23

I have sent you a message, you are publicly listed in a very obvious place.

Thread: First full size electric aircraft flies.
12/12/2019 09:01:35
Posted by Andy Ellis 1 on 11/12/2019 20:58:35:

Fantastic achievement, but.. does it really reduce carbon emissions overall? I'd like to know how we produce enough electricity for widespread use of electric vehicles without producing carbon.

I can not comment on the carbon footprint of making an IC engine and refining the fuel Vs making an electric motor and batteries. But what I do know having spent a lot of time working with industry in Vancouver and British Columbia is that with hydro, a lot of their electricity is low carbon, so in this case, yes it does work.

It is certainly not the first full scale electric aeroplane, the link states it is the first commercial one.

Regarding views held about generation of electricity, I believe that most people do not appreciate how much the balance has swung in the UK, there is now very little coal firing, some large stations have converted to biomass etc. See electric generation split at Ofgem generation data. This shows that the nuclear plus renewables is approximately 50% of the total UK generation now. What is also noticable on this is the reduction in electricity demand over the years, increases in efficiency and reductions in heavy industry.

Since 2018 the UK has been running for short periods of time without any coal firing, with runs of several weeks at a time being achieved, with the only use probably being peak winter demand. See UK no coal days.

Edited By PeterF on 12/12/2019 09:19:41

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
07/12/2019 13:35:34

Now the fuselage is straight I have continued with the build per the instructions. The tail cone has been planked and the turtle deck sheeting added. The templates for the turtle deck sheeting were very good, they were a little oversize so could be neatly trimmed down to fit. Before I added the turtle deck sheeting I put some extra formers in place for where the battery hatch is going to be cut, putting in a top hatch because I am not keen on the idea of taking them in and out in the underside. Thanks for the idea Greg.

Tail cone plankeddsc08536.jpg

Extra formers for turtle deck at battery hatchdsc08537.jpg

Extra formers for turtle deck at battery hatch, ink markings ran when I wetted the sheetingdsc08538.jpg

Turtle deck sheeteddsc08542.jpg

Edited By PeterF on 07/12/2019 13:35:50

Thread: Use of servo ravel limit to reduce noise
03/12/2019 20:03:31

There was a discussion at the field as we have recently introduced a noise limit at our club. Someone asked if their model was overpowered and over the noise limit, would it be permissible to use the servo travel limit (or end point adjustment depending on transmitter terminology) to limit the rpm to an acceptable figure that gave a pass on the noise meter. You could equally do this mechanically with the servo arm control linkage, but the travel limit on the Tx would be simpler, require less trial and error tweaks and be more precise.

I was sure that I had read somewhere that this was not supported as a noise reduction technique but on searching I can not find anything that states it should not be used. Some people may think that it is easily abused, but if someone wants to flout this then they can easily turn up for their noise test with a large prop on and then change it some other time.

Any thoughts on this, or if anyone knows of any guidance on using throttle travel to limit noise then I would welcome it.

Thread: The Gov't, CAA, BMFA & UAV legislation thread
30/11/2019 08:52:36

I updated our renewal form to have a yes / no choice for CAA registration and an extra note saying "by choosing yes to CAA registration I agree to the club sharing by info with CAA and agree to the CAA privacy policy". I believe that covers it and most members are paying registration through the club so everything remains easy for them to handle. One thing that has made things easier is we have always required an A cert to fly solo, so only the newest members have had to take one of the tests.

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
29/11/2019 16:36:14

Yes I will probably glass it, but I have not done any glassing about 15 years and that was not a great finish so I will have to practice first. The last 2 sheeted models I built were covered with tissue and Poly-C which is light but not hanger rash proof. I believe that glassing is a good idea with this given how the fuselage is built up.

29/11/2019 14:16:04

Update a couple of days later and it is all sortedsmileyyes, slitting the offending sheeting down the spine, soaking the sheeting and weighing the corners down has worked, the two sides are now about 0.5mm out instead of the 5mm, which is well within the accuracy of my measurement equipment. Thanks for all the help. The build continues with the tail cone and the framing for the turtle deck.

Rear of fuselage mounted flatdsc08533.jpg

Right hand side a simdgen below 151mm to the bottom of the front spardsc08535.jpg

Left hand side a simdgen above 151mm to the bottom of the front spardsc08534.jpg

Tail cone framedsc08516.jpg

Turtle deck framingdsc08532.jpg

Thread: Antonov AN124 Ruslan
29/11/2019 09:25:25

Simon, I love the testing, I think it is great do do this sort of thing to understand what we are dealing with rather than just forging ahead blind. I did similar tests for a 55mm fan a few years ago with a similar stand on kitchen scales and got the result that 85% FSA gave the highest thrust. However, I also had the Wattmeter hooked up and a tacho reading the motor pulses for rpm. The reduction in FSA increases the back pressure on the fan, increasing the fan loading, reducing the rpm and increasing current draw. It is not something for nothing, it is in fact slightly less efficient in terms of grams of thrust generated per Watt of power. If you know fan laws, you can then back calculate an average efflux velocity to see how that increases as the FSA reduces. As I was not interested in high velocity flight with my plane, I stayed at 100% FSA. I think I have posted about this before.

_exhaust test 2.jpg

Test stand with open exhaustdsc01166.jpg

Reading recorded by photographdsc01127.jpg

Duct added to exhaustdsc01493.jpg

Edited By PeterF on 29/11/2019 09:32:49

Edited By PeterF on 29/11/2019 09:37:19

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
28/11/2019 10:30:41


That is a good idea about slitting the 1 piece sheeting so I have done that. I have had another suggestion to wet the sheeting and weight the model down with some over correction, the sheeting is soft balsa so I am also trying this. With the cut down the spine the sheeting may be able to give a little easier.


Thread: A new caption competition - winner declared!
27/11/2019 21:34:21

Two old lags fail in their attempt to escape from Stallag Buckminster by home built glider.

Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF
27/11/2019 17:14:44

I have done some more measurements and found that with the trailing edge flat as per previous post the nose, ribs around the fans and u/c bay are all tilted. When I set the front spars at the same height on both sides and let the right hand trailing edge lift everything else comes into line. I expect the front to be true because all of the formers around the fans keeps this area solid.

My belief now is that when I started the top sheeting at the rear, which is much less stiff than the fan area, I have allowed the rear of the fuselage to distort. The top of the fuselage is slightly higher in the middle and I made the first 4 sheets as 1 piece across rather than cutting them at the spine into 2 pieces. I think that this has flattened out the rear of the fuselage and as the sheeting has progressed it has locked this in. Your photos appear to show that your sheets were split in this area and Craig's are on the UK forum.

I am going to have a good think about releasing the upper sheeting on the right hand side at the rear and seeing if I can get the trailing edge to relax down. Then if that does not work 100%, I will lower the rear wing tube a little on the right hand side and pack and fill with some soft balsa to hide the offset.


27/11/2019 14:41:05

I was continuing the build today and going to fit the turtle deck formers and noted on the plan that these are all vertical on the plan, so I decided to chock the model up to the same reference angle as the plan. It was then that I noticed a discrepancy between the left and right hand sides, the left hand side has a slightly higher angle of attack than the right. The photos show that I have the rear of the plane sat level, but when measured at the front, the right hand side is lower than the left. I have measured the angle between the two wing joiner tube holes on both sides using a digital inclinometer and some aluminium angle. This shows an AOA of 1.5° on the right and 2.1° on the left, but this is I believe a bit error prone depending on how well the aluminium angle sits etc. I measured the height of the rear of the ribs from the building board (the board is level confirmed by digital inclinometer) and these were equal. I measured to the top of the front spar, 146mm om the right and 151mm on the left. A 5mm difference over the 822mm length from the rear of the rib to the front spar is a difference in AOA of 0.35°, which is more palatable than the inclinometer results.

I have obviously built in a bit of a warp as I have gone through the sheeting process. The question is, what to do about it. Are there any real gurus out there who could tell me if this is significant or not or suggest the best way forward.

The options that I can identify are are
1. Continue building and hope it can be trimmed out during initial flying if it is felt to be small enough to ignore.
2. Strip off the sheeting from the right hand side, rejig the right hand side firmly and resheet.
3. Continue the build, but move the wing joiner tubes up a bit on the right hand wing and when the wing panel is attached, add some soft balsa sheet and blend this in to hide the step between the fuselage and wing.
4. Start again.

Rear of fuselage sat leveldsc08524.jpg

Front of fuselage sat right hand downdsc08525.jpg

AOA measured on left hand sidedsc08528.jpg

AOA measured on the rightdsc08527.jpg

Front spar heights on the leftdsc08522.jpg

Front spar height on the right.dsc08520.jpg


Edited By PeterF on 27/11/2019 14:44:28

Edited By PeterF on 27/11/2019 14:51:26

23/11/2019 21:10:24

Continuing with the build, following the instruction pack sequence pretty much. The covering has been added over the fan ducting, it is not scale but it does not look too out of place. This includes the front of the covering and marking out the fan hatches. The spars have been added to the top and bottom of the the air inlets.

The cockpit has been planked and how I hate planking. I trim each and every plank down at the front of the cockpit to get a good finish with minimal stepping, but it means that it i s a laborious process of trial and error trimming the planks. I use white glue on the plank to plank joints but glue the planks to the formers with thick cyano to speed up the process. It gives a good finish and is worth the time and effort, but it just drags on and on, it probably took less time to sheet the top and bottom fuselage that it did the cockpit. Ho hum.






Thread: The Gov't, CAA, BMFA & UAV legislation thread
18/11/2019 11:52:48
Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 18/11/2019 11:22:20:

Further info will be going out to clubs on this. However a very easy thing is at a club night go along with a laptop and sit them down for the test.

Exactly what I am planning on doing at our clubs fees night next month. Seems a logical solution.

18/11/2019 10:05:48
Posted by leccyflyer on 18/11/2019 09:30:15:
Posted by Ron Gray on 18/11/2019 09:24:52:

As has already been said by others, aren’t we in danger of overthinking this? My thoughts are that I will comply with the spirit of the law which may actually not be the letter of the law. In other words, my ID will be in the ‘plane but a screwdriver may be required to get to it. Personally, as long as my ID is in place then I don’t think that a prosecution would be brought to bear on the basis that it needed a screwdriver to get to it!

That would seem to be the position that a reasonable person would adopt on reading the text stating that a hatch which does not require the use of a special tool to access the number is permitted. However when some "special tool" seeks clarification of such a term then the outcome may not be what is desired.

From an earlier post within this topic, page 18. This is me copying the text from the previous topic which was not mine, I am quoting someone else's conversation with CAA.

I have had an email exchange with the CAA in which I asked for a definition of 'special tool'. Their response -

"... we will be updating the service with the following:

Where it is not possible to display your operator number on the outside of your drone or model aircraft, you may instead attach it on the inside- within a compartment that can easily be accessed by anyone, without the need for ANY tools or specialist equipment."

Edited By PeterF on 18/11/2019 10:13:46

Support Our Partners
electricwingman 2017
Sussex Model Centre
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Has home isolation prompted you to start trad' building?
Q: The effects of Coronavirus

 Yes - for the first time
 Yes - but Ive bashed balsa before
 No - Ive existing projects on the bench
 No - Im strictly an ARTF person

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!