Here is a list of all the postings Tony Nijhuis has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: 2016 RCM&E Autumn Special- Free Plan Modellers Choice|
A long time a ago I did build a Flare Pup but hated the rigging and the faffing about....If i do go down the bipe route, the wings would definitely be plug with all the rigging attached in the outer panels.....just two bolts, one at the top and one at the bottom and away you go...the idea would be to make it as easy as putting the wing on a spitfire,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Well the ideas are slowing down now so I think its decision time......... and these appear to be the top two
I although i don't profess to be a biplane fan, I can see the similarities in the hawker variations which will hopefully push a lot more 'build buttons' than a single variant and therefore the potential to be more of a commercial success. Sound like I'm talking myself into it
That being the case some last thoughts on either subject would be good especially power options although I suspect electric with prevail as the most wanted
Ok guys, well give it another week or so as we seem to have reached a plateau of new suggestions.....
Might be an ideal if we can move the thread to a prominent position in the forum so we can sweep up any users who don't normally stray into the TN thread.
Thanks Steve for doing the count up......It seems the biplanes are the favorite for this year so far...
Having read through the recent comments, the subject matter is in your court guys. For the 'Special', I want it to be the builders choice, but I'm happy to give guidance....
The pleasure (or challenge) comes from designing the model and not necessarily the subject itself so I'm really not fussed as to what tops of the list.... (although i said we'll park EDFs & Twins for this year).
My personal to do list is long, but fortunately they can wait for your choice to be done.
Just for a diversion, here are the next 3 plan after special
As for my top 3!!! (that I haven't done)
Keep the votes coming guy
Well, there doesn't seem to be any outright leader yet and the diversity of your suggestions is overwhelming
The obscure design although are interesting do have limited appeal so I don't think i will be considered these (unless of course they are on my personal favourite list,,,,,,designers prerogative)
Nevertheless, I have read all your comments with interest and there is food for thought. I think I'm tending towards keeping this model as simple as practical so I'm going to rule out EDFs and twins (to keep the cost down) for this years special model. So monoplanes and biplanes are still in the running.
Keep em coming
well we have 122 replies and what a selection!!!!
I will resurrect the dog fight double at some point in the next year or so hold tight
It dose seem these double wingers are popular.....
keep the three choices coming guys
Thanks to Barry for doing a quick general count-up........
keep em coming
Oh thank you Steve....you know how to press buttons!!
I would love to do a Concord so maybe that should move up my personal fav to-do list.
Seems like the Zero is getting a few mentions now, along with these double wingers thingies....good to see a pattern forming at last even though neither were on my to-do list.....but hey, you tell me!
Remember, your choice has to be the one you would stop and clear your building board for.....keep them coming guys.....
Keep your three choices coming Guys......and if possible avoid the obscure designs....im have trouble keeping up?
Well that's a great start guys.....seems like the biplane is a popular subject although i do like the idea of a simple high wing scale trainer to get the new-comers in this great hobby of ours... and what could be better to build and then learn to fly on your very own creation....i still remember that great sense of achievement!!...happy days
Keep them coming guys
We haven't conducted a modellers choice for the RCM&E Autumn Special 'Free Plan' for some years now so it would be good to know what's at the top of your 'to build' list so at least we can make some of you guys happy with this years plan subject....
As before, let me know your top three choices and your perferred power source.
Martin, just for clarity, if you extend the main spar outer phenolic tube, it will clip the bottom edge of W4...you may want to stop this tube 30mm before W4 and just extend the ali tube into W4.....its up to you...what I would say is make sure you put a good bead of epoxy where the phenolic tube butts the sheer webbing.
As for the rear tube, its only job is to stop the wing rotating...believe it or not, the tube its some what overkill as I have seen other designs using just a inch long dowel (which appears to work ok).
enjoy the build....
Jon, regarding the 81" plan, it would be around the £60 mark i would guess...we wouldn't be able to cut CNC part for a one off...the cost would be prohibitive!...your comments regarding the spar are spot on as i will explain to Matt
Matt regarding you comments....running a wing tube through three ribs is fine as long as the outer tube is hard up and bonded against main spar and the sheer webbing to create a integral spar where the load is transferred seamlessly from the tube to the wooden spars. This is the key to load spreading...and that's exactly what has been done here if you look! If the spar was sitting free in the middle of the ribs (like some other designs) then I would agree you would need at least a four ribs span but that's not the case here....as for my prototype Vulcan you mentioned, i think that proves I test pretty thoroughly!....
Martin, If you wish to extend the outer spar tube through into W4 to give yourself reassurance, then best do it when the wing is being built, open over the plan so you can slide the tube further and mark the position on to W4 and then cut a hole accordingly.
Yes it certainly adds up I agree, but as the starting point is a free plan, you can't argue with that....The great thing about a free plan is doesn't preclude any one from having a go, irrespective of financial limitation....Already a number of builder are cracking on using just the free plan and no doubt they will succeed at a fraction of the price...good on em I say...the more the merrier.
The Brain Taylor mossi is some what cheaper but you only get the formers and ribs and no wood stock or wing tubes so add another £100 to the Traplet price, and you'll get a comparable price.....The BT Model is also 'of its time' and never truly a production plan.....A lovely model but I gave up building one as the complexity was frustrating...
Simple designs to the masses...that's my philosophy.....
|Thread: RCM&E Autumn Special 2015- New 72" Mossi|
Should able to organise a canopy only....not sure of a price but be around the £15 mark. Email me a reminder through the web site and I'll confirm
No Matt, but you will see on our plan (not the free pull-out plan) that we show all the cnc parts as they would be laid out on the sheets if one had bought the cnc pack. It also shows the sizes of the sheets and the wood thickness. This firstly give you understanding where the parts are on the cnc pack so you can label them before pressing out. However, it also allows the non cnc builder to gauge which materials are extra and then gives the builder the information to accurately layout the parts on blank sheets of wood to get the best economy
|Thread: New 78" Vulcan for twin 90mm DF|
Interesting point Matt about pitch sensitivity and tuck under....if the wing geometry of your Vulcan is incorrect especially when introducing the under cambered wing profile towards the wing tips (as per the real Vulcan) you are in danger of too much lift behind the CofG. The consequence of this is when you put the nose down the the main inner wing section produces less lift but the out part is still lifting well behind the CofG.....QED as a result the model will pitch down and accelerate and then tuck under....its a vicious circle and only carefully up elevator control (a throttle) can retrieve the situation from desaraster!!!
However when the Vulcan wing is in normal level flight or climbing the wing is extremely stable and delivers very high lift characteristics, which is exactly what a bomber had to do.
To descend a Vulcan you need to reduce power and keep the nose level then raise the nose slightly and the aircraft descends The rate of decent is check with engine power.
On my Vulcan designs I tried to make the wing a little more forgiving so the under camber was not included and so pitch sensitively is not a problem, nor is tuck under. The purist may say its not scale but the idea is to make something that works well rather than a 'scale' hand full in the air....
David, on delta's, tip stalling is not a problem so no washout is required.....What washout does is reduce the wing tip lift and bring it inboard.....QED if the lift is reduce at the tips, the chance of tip stalling is reduced. With the Vulcan wing and the fact delta's do not tip stall, the AVRO designers actually made the tips a flat bottomed high lifting section so the payload carrying capabilities of the Vulcan could be vastly increased with still no chance of tip stall....
Now redesign and the part being cut for a new one........and strangely looking forward to build
AUW was 18lbs and although the runway was quite boggy on the first test flight, after the last few days of rain and the grass covered the wheels (54mm dia), she fairly raced along and was airbourne in no time. Each fan is capable of 10lbs of thrust so ground power is good...soon as she's away you cut the throttle to two thirds and she climbs away with gusto!...after that, haft to a third throttle is all you need, until you want the 'Vulcan climb'!!!!!
Only a slight disappointment Ian.....there is always a greater risk when test flying a design without any sort of covering applied. Of a model this size, one would glass cloth epoxy the structure which locks in great strength. Part of the reason for failure was no covering was applied so i was asking a lot of the balsa. The other reason was too much 'on the hoof' redesigning (cutting & carving) which had weekend the structure
What is useful is now i have the wreckage to analyze, i can see where the problem are. There is always a positive to any disaster
Yes Piers, 78inch span
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!