Here is a list of all the postings Daithi O Buitigh has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Veron Fokker DVIII 46”|
I've the Profile booklet in pdf here. It should be available for download in a couple of weeks from outerzone (it's number 67 and, at present, their latest is number 62 (it's not terribly accurate in the main drawing with a lozenge covered spreader bar - Platz actually intended that to be an auxiliary fuel tank so fabric covering would have definitely been a no-no).
As I said earlier, colour on the wing undersides is hard to tell - the film used at that time tended to darken blues to almost black
It's very doubtful if they had a two tone scheme - it's more probable that they would have used the IdFlieg standard which was a streaky olive on the upper surfaces and blue under. It's hard to tell if it was blue under in the old photos but the photos you posted are from a replica and not an original (I don't believe there are any originals left anyway)
The story is a lot deeper and more mysterious than that Tom. There was a distrust of monoplanes following a crash in 1912 of a Bristol-Coanda (which had nothing to do with it being a monoplane) and also the negative comments from RFC personnel on the Morane Saulnier Type 'N' (the landing speed was 'too high' among other issues). That had the result of the Bristol M1 being sent to the Middle East and not the European Front (on a side note - why is it always referred to as the 'Western Front' when it was actually in the EAST. The GERMANS called it the 'Western Front' )
But aside from that, there was a total discarding of German technological development after 1918 - the cantilever wing structures of the Fokker DVI, DVII and DVIII which removed the need for drag-inducing rigging wires was completely ignored, The all metal monocoque construction of the Junkers J series was also consigned to the abyss.
I'd be a shade sceptical of the flamboyant colour schemes - I've seen drawings showing them but nary a photograph of one, which makes me wonder just where they came from, bearing in mind that their actual squadron use was such a short period (which didn't give enough time for the erks to do any fancy paintwork before it was 'alles kaput' )
All totally irrelevant to Simon's posting really
Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 12/11/2017 14:05:56
There is actually a difference between the EV and the DVIII due to the modified wing construction. From Profile Publications Number 67 "Production of the EV was resumed late in September 1918. The wing-spar flanges were, at the request of the Flugzeugmeisterei, increased in thickness by 2 mm as a safeguard against manufacturing errors. Aircraft with the new wing were to be re-designated Fok. DVIII. It was laid down that aircraft built as EVs were to be given the new designation; this does not seem to have been done in every case, however, as a few examples of the type survived the armistice bearing the EV designation."
As it didn't go into operational service until the 24th October 1918, the designation would have been 'DVIII' anjd not 'EV' in line with the Luftstreitkrafte designation (even though some did have the 'EV' marking).
Seems a bit strange though that an aircraft that was in operational service for less than three weeks should have such a reputation :D
One point though Tom. The 'D' for Doppeldekker had actually been phased out and all subsequent Fokker fighter aircraft used the 'D' designation, including the DXXI used by the Finnish Air Force
Simon, the building instructions (from the original kit/plan) are over on outerzone.
Regarding dihedral - The D VIII had no 'dihedral' as such -- the upper surface was flat but the under surface was tapered up towards the tip which gave a dihedral effect.
Sheeting the wing is more accurate (scale wise) as the original did have a wooden wing (and also the airfoil spreader bar on the undercart). As neither of those were fabric covered, they did NOT have the lozenge camouflage which was only used on fabric
|Thread: RAF's Finest Biplane? Hawker Fury MkI|
I think there's an exemption here Danny: From the relevant legislation:
s32.—Illustration for instruction Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of instruction does not infringe copyright as long as not for commercial purposes."
Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 11/11/2017 12:38:39
|Thread: Ideas for articles in RCM&E|
Pat, that's ALL the CE mark does and it only applies to commercial equipment. It's not necessary for home brew gear, however, that doesn't mean that you can flout the regulations (you have to be able to measure frequency deviation, spurii and a few other things or the RIS boys will land on you like a ton of bricks. All the CE mark does is to tell you that a sample piece has been tested to see if it complies with the EMC regs and that it's electrically safe.
Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 09/11/2017 01:12:32
Part of the problem is hat with the 'cheap and cheerful' electronic equipment of all sorts, it simply isn't feasible to actually build your own gear. I have a ham radio license and, while I could build my own transmitter, etc, I couldn't do it for the cost of an 'over the counter' Icom or Yaesu (not to mention the fact that physical size has shrunk to such an extent that it's almost impossible to manually assemble it). The same applies to radio control gear: while it is permissible to build your own (and the 'CE' certification doesn't enter into it) you can run into severe problems with the Radio Investigation Service boys if your gear spatters and interrupts someone's viewing of 'Neighbours'. I'm not sure on the legality of model control equipment, but licensed amateurs are permitted to build their own transmitters (and can pump 400 Watts into a multi-element beam) but they have to be able to check on Electro Magnetic Compatibility (in short - no interference). I would doubt that many builders/fliers would have the equipment to do that. I did, back in the 27 MHz, button pushing, single channel days, build my own transmitter and receiver (the transmitter was built into an Oxo tin ) and I had it checked out by a friendly IBA engineer (after I bribed him with a collection of old 'Wireless World' magazines that I'd acquired - they ended up in the IBA library at the local ITV transmitter). They dated from the 1940s to 1950s and had the Arthur C. Clarke article foreelling satellite communication. But that's another story for another day.
|Thread: Hobbyking returns|
To the best of my knowledge you can return faulty items to Elmslett, irrespective of where they were purchased. Unfortunately you still have to pay the P&P but it's a lot less than the cost of returning it to Hong Kong or the Netherlands
Tucking a pair of alligator clip leads on a LiPo charger multi-connect loom out of the way by clipping them to another lead. Result, one completely burnt out wiring loom when I went to charge up a 3S pack (and scorched fingers when I didn't let go of the loom fast enough)
|Thread: Hi from an old newbie|
We used to refer to them as 'die crunched'
True on wood quality - I recall a C/L Graupner FW 190 where the balsa could have substituted for plywood (I actually broke fretsaw blades as if was impossible to cut with a knife) and also Keil Kraft and Veron kits where the quality ranged from cheese to brittle
|Thread: Upgrading to 2.4ghz|
Percy, I've had very expensive equipment fail - more expensive does not (and never did) mean 'better'. I've used the Banggood gear and never had a problem if it passed range test. If it didn't pass that, BG simply replaced it FOC
That's where range checking comes in Percy (if it fails that, then you complain - besides which you'd pay as much for a pint of beer these days). Banggood have an excellent replace service for faulty items and very rarely will ask for a return - you submit a photo of the item, the label and they will replace with no further questions asked
the link doesn't wok, but try either of these
Both under four quid including P&P
|Thread: "Preowned rx's"|
Two aerials mounted at 90 degrees to each other - seemples :D
|Thread: Micro Aces Bristol F.2b|
Them Vickerses are Lewises
|Thread: Warbird Replicas Bf 109 club.|
Nooo - it was a clean Sweep (and he'll Sue anyone who disagrees)
|Thread: Ebay sellers...|
I love the blurb "Barely used edf jet. Just needs a bit of a clean up."
|Thread: New hazard in China|
Drones flying near airfields are bad enough, but this has been happening in China
|Thread: Warbird Replicas Bf 109 club.|
Where? Where? (details, details per-lease)
I'm torn between Adolf Galland's Emil and Hans-Joachim Marseille's Gustav
Edited By Daithi O Buitigh on 20/10/2017 23:44:44
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!