Here is a list of all the postings Gazza58 has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Air Cadets ( ATC)|
1147 Barking Sqn, part of West Essex Wing. I joined at 13 and left as F!t Lt. Fabulous organization.
Took me to Germany, Malta, Cyprus, Canada as well as all over the UK.
Flying Chippies at Marshal's, gliding at Swanton Morley, 303 at Purfleet. Every weekend kept me busy.
I just wish I was able to thank all those wonderful gentlemen who steered so many of us in the right direction.
My gliding instructor when i was 16, was an elderly chap of around 24 years of age. When my son came home from his gliding course, he told me about his ancient instructor, a certain Sqn Ldr Horsley. Yup same man.
Thank you gentlemen
|Thread: Gary,s Ballerina non thread|
Thanks John,and kc
I'll stick with what I am familiar with and give it a 'bit' of down/side thrust using washers behind the engine mount for down and between the mount and the engine for side thrust.
OK chaps thanks for your answers.
I apologize if this question has been answered but I haven't found any mention of it before.
I am considering a couple of degrees/washers between the bulk head and the engine mount. I think I would prefer a neutral response to height change when I open the throttle. I am still open to the subject as I haven't mounted the motor yet.
My Ballerina is nearly finished as regards the fuselage. I will be laying down the wing this afternoon in the fashion suggested by the highly esteemed designer. I have not built up a wing in this way before but will give it a go.
The point of my raising a thread here is to ask about the thrust line for the engine mount. I would normally have a few degrees of down/side thrust. As this cowl is not detachable, I would like to get it right previous to mounting the nose ring. Once the nose ring and cowl is constructed it will not look good if the thrust line needs altering as the cowl and spinner will be out of line.
I would be grateful for any suggestions.
|Thread: 2016 RCM&E Autumn Special- Free Plan Modellers Choice|
A Shoestring SVP or at least at lookalike
|Thread: Passing of David Bowie|
Alladin Sane first LP I ever bought.
His music is a force for good.
Yes Dave his music has been in my life forever.
|Thread: storage / transporting your birds|
l really dont want to be a 'Black Catter' but I even have a Hoover (Dyson) special for my workshop.
|Thread: Mark's Ballerina MK1|
Thanks for your input. I'll go lookout some cyparis at the lms.
I'm only relieved that I didnt turn up at the patch with a pair of 3D glasses.......
What's 3D...? I can just about keep it airborne
BEB... That is precisely the reason I asked about mixing Spruce with balsa. (Cross ply & radial on the same axle).
In all honesty I am not sure if we worry a little too much about weight in an instance like this where the difference is but a few grammes. A large wing like this will easily support such minor weight differences. Indeed I believe that Ballerina will fly with a considerable weight strapped to it. Nevertheless, I am trying to build the model as light as I can whilst still ensuring structural integrity.
I saw Peter mention that rock hard balsa spars are needed if not spruce. I can see that it makes sense to use all spars from one material. I looked for 'rock hard' balsa and found nothing even close. I am thus leaning toward spruce at the moment, unless I can be persuaded otherwise.
Thanks again for your thoughts
I have made a start with the fuselage and am turning my attention planning wise to the wings.
I have both 1/4 balsa and spruce on my stock shelf and am considering what to use as spars. My question is should all three spars be spruce... or just one or two. Its been a looong time since I used spruce and this model will address that on wings and fuselage. The 1/4 balsa is not particularly hard and obviously there are three of them with webbing between both.
I ask this only in the light of building a Tomboy Senior with the single spar as shown on the plan. It lasted about 3 minutes before clapping hands and plummeting to Earth in a spectacular way. I have now built a new wing for it which is much stronger. I would like to avoid this with Ballerina
|Thread: Preparing for the 2016 Mass Build|
Put 'em on the front and the back if you fancy it. Ain't no one gonna shoot you for it.
This is indeed a question that aeromodellers have considered at great length over the years. I too have pondered over that very matter when one has a moment to sit and think. Sometimes I just hold a scrap of balsa while I consider its future in the grand scheme. Truth is....I just can't bring myself to just !ob it out. Ever.
It goes into the box called 'that'll come in handy'.
Oh yes...just a thought.... Don't you go throwing all that nice balsa sanding dust away. Keep it in a jar....comes in dead handy when mixed with glue or dope to make filler...!
Edited By Gazza58 on 03/01/2016 12:33:14
|Thread: Classic Ballerina|
ok Bob I can see an advantage there.
Normally when changing a servo lead I would just plug the new one into the old one and pull it through but I can see the virtue in not having to negotiate each rib hole. This is a bit like a Rolls Royce having two golf tees in the glove box......
Nice piece of carpentry.
My first model had laminated tips and tail surfaces. It really wasn't that difficult and the tips weighed next to nothing and were very hard. I think it was called a Navigator. It flew first as a free flight model with a pee wee up front and later as a single channel RC model. Those laminations took plenty of knocks without damage. I remember soaking the individual 1/16 strips in hot water and then using a rolling pin on my mums pastry board to get the balsa to curve nicely without splitting on the tighter curves.
I'm sorry to gloat at your thumb injury but I am glad I am not alone in leaving my DNA forever in a model. It seems to happen every time but hey ho.
Regarding the paper tube, I am ever so slightly mystified as to its presence. I usually lay a length of cotton in the rib holes and feed either the servo leads through it or as shown with Ballerina, a bell crank push rod. This would only be necessary in a pre covered wing such as an ARTF. In this instance, surely we would do all of this before we cover the model...? This is not a criticism, I just cant see the advantage. Please help me out here...?
I have started with the fuselage on mine, and have not really paid much attention to the wing other than the centre section which I will simplify as I intend to put a servo in each wing half.
I am enjoying the build thread and wish you all the best with it. I am learning a few new dodges too on other builds which is all to the good.
|Thread: Preparing for the 2016 Mass Build|
Great thing this mass build malarky. No stress... easy build model...great design from the master designer.
I have already started mine, not that Im going to discuss it here coz I don't want to get shot down in flames by our resident experts. (Mr Miller excluded because he really does know what he's talking about.) I can feel a little stress coming through on his posts, maybe even exasperation. Poor bloke has done his best to give us something that should be such fun and now I'm seeing stories of modellers throwing half finished models in the bin and even 'discussions' about what is the proper pilot.
Now whilst I agree that the dimensions, wood thicknesses, Piano wire thicknesses are all shown, I would go so far as to suggest that I'll build it with whatever balsa I have to hand. Thus the fuselage of my model is 1/8th medium balsa and not 3/32. Why...? well because thats what I got. The undercarriage will be whatever piano wire comes out of the rack. The ply doublers are thin liteply. They are wobbly and look about the right thickness so I've glued them to the balsa and put them in a press to keep them flat. The whole point I am trying to make is that this is not an exact science yet I am seeing nit picking on a scale we should be ashamed of.
This is supposed to be fun. My Ballerina will fly well. It will look like a Ballerina, I even like Peter's colour scheme. Under the solartex there may be several formers, ribs, centre section, that may be to my taste but it WILL be a Ballerina.
I appreciate that many new modellers who are building for the first time would like to get it as right as possible and to get the wood stocks as published but an extra 1/32 on the fuz sides ain't gonna make a jot of difference.
I am looking forward to this build getting underway and will enjoy the posts of others. However, there seem to be a few who only accept that their way is the only way. As for poor Peter pointing out that we should read the plan properly, we should be aware that we are (for the most part) males. Apols to our lady builders. Men are well known for not reading instructions. Particularly Chinese intructions. Instructions are a last resort, not the first resort and we should maybe exercise some patience for the less experienced. We all make mistakes, probably in most models we build. Most of my models have my DNA in them. Not intelligent revisions to the published plan but real blood from one or more scalpel cuts.
There, I feel better for getting that off my chest. I would like to thank Mr Miller for his Ballerina plan and to the mag for publishing it.
Mine is going to be a right little cracker.
Best wishes to all for the New Year and I hope the MB is a success.
|Thread: 2016 Mass Build - Sign Up Thread|
|Thread: Mass Build 2016 - The Voting Thread|
|Thread: New Spektrum DX6 Owners' Thread|
Standard servos are being used throughout. We'll see what happens in the morning.
Thank you yes....he is very advanced for his age and has a special Tx tray on his pram. I had to tell the wife that it is very educational for the boy to have tecky stuff that I could perhaps borrow from time to time.
The thing is....the advertising blurb and instructions all state that it is a full range receiver. However, Spektrums own site and instructions also state that it is for use in models up to .91 size engine. I can't get my head around the engine size, or the size of the model itself impacting on the efficiency of the receiver.
If anyone has any comments, I would be only too happy to hear it. Don't want the boy chucking his toys out of the pram.
Ps...I didn't really buy it for the boy.......fortunately the wife is a blonde ...
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!