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

Member postings for brokenenglish

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

Thread: Veron Avro 504N
13/10/2019 20:03:44

Tom, I don't know whether they could be flown free-flight or not, but the plane was certainly designed for rudder, elevator, throttle. That's the only configuration mentioned in the instructions and Phil Smith's original flew superbly on a 29 2-stroke, at around 5 lbs.

Edited By brokenenglish on 13/10/2019 20:04:20

Thread: Sharkface question
02/10/2019 20:01:15

David, they need to be launched with the thrust line level!!!
i.e. about 10° nose up if you've built as per plan!

Think about it. At the instant the plane leaves your hand, there are no aerodynamic forces except for thrust and weight (no lift). If you don't launch nose up, the downthrust will pull the plane down to the ground before you have enough airspeed to generate lift... A firm throw with the thrust line horizontal should cure your problem.

01/10/2019 09:02:18

Sharkface was revisited, and the plan reissued, in Radio Modeller, February 1989.
Gordon Counsell, the builder/reviewer didn't have the ultra-light gear that we have today. His version weighed 14.5 oz and flew very well, powered by a Frog 100 diesel.

The 1989 reissued plan is clearly marked, "Recommended flying weight 15oz.", although I think that should probably be taken as "recommended maximum".
Anyway, Sharkfaces weighing 14/15 oz. are not rare, so you'll be OK! It's a fast flyer at any weight!

The ultra light examples mentioned are probably all electric (not for me). I have one half-built that will be powered by a PAW 80 or 100 (same dimensions and weight).

Edited By brokenenglish on 01/10/2019 09:04:41

Edited By brokenenglish on 01/10/2019 09:09:59

Thread: Dynam Albatross
16/09/2019 14:59:02

John, It looks to me like quite simply the CG given in the instructions is wrong... It happens.

In my experience, when you get random, inexplicable controllability problems, it's almost always related to a CG too far aft. That may not be the only problem, but when a plane is simply "difficult to control", start by moving the CG forward a bit.

Lastly, don't even think about your age!
This may amuse you. About 3 weeks ago, I went for a quiet evening flying session in a field close to my house, and I just wasn't getting it right. My landing approaches weren't accurate, the landings were a bit "average" and my flying just wasn't "good".
However, I didn't break anything, but I thought maybe I'm just getting old and my reflexes and eyesight are going (I was 80 last week).

It wasn't until I got home and was "putting things away", that I discovered I'd flown through a whole flying session with my reading glasses!
Typing this, it occurs to me that that error may well be due to my age!

Edited By brokenenglish on 16/09/2019 15:01:31

Thread: Indoor model anybody?
13/09/2019 14:27:24

Trevor, or anyone(!), are these small helicopters excessively difficult for an average fixed wing pilot who's never touched a heli, or not?
Is there a reasonable chance of success without destroying it?

Looking at the link, I rather fancy flying one of those in my garden.

Thread: Cyclon 2v cells
07/09/2019 16:19:45

I possess both these cells.

I think the previous poster got his comparison reversed. Anyway, the 2Ah cell is perfectly OK if you charge it before every flying session, like the RC batteries. You may well get several sessions on one charge, but you need some "insurance", see below!

I use two sets of leads. one long set (around 90cm) and one short set (around 30cm). I always start by using the long set, then, when the glow becomes insufficient, I switch to the short set for the rest of that session, knowing that I should charge the cell when I get home.

Using the above "technique", I've never needed the 5Ah cell, but I'll use it one day, just so it's not "wasted"!

Thread: Max Thrust Riot - Upgrades
28/08/2019 18:27:42

I'm flying a Riot and I have to say that I'm totally satisfied. It's probably the best quality "electric foamie" I've ever had.

A 2200 3S battery fits perfectly. No problem. My Orange 615X Rx fits in the receiver bay no problem (OK, it's a park flier Rx, but this obliges me to keep the plane fairly close, which has cured one of my "faults".

Concerning your control throws. This is a very personal thing and depends on your flying.
I think Century (wisely) recommend a setup suitable for the less experienced, and consider that experts will be capable of sorting out their own control throws, to suit their own tastes.
For me, this is the way it should be.

It follows from this that, on an easy flying sport model, there's not much point in asking for other people's views. It's dead easy to play with the rates and expo etc. between flights, and get it right for your style of flying.

The only very minor criticism that I have, on both the Riot and the Ruckus, is that the wheel axle bolts are far too soft. They bend even on gentle, near perfect, landings, and they break when they've been "bent back" a few times. I replaced these, and I must have more than 100 flights on my Riot, and it's still unmarked. Super!

Thread: Acro Wot Alternative
27/08/2019 21:19:13

Apparently the various Wots are coming back into stock.

Thread: What is the minimum slope for a slope soarer?...
18/08/2019 08:08:59
Posted by Foxfan on 17/08/2019 22:20:36:

I have seen youtubes of dune soaring quite successfully.

PatMc, my son lives up that way and it was being up there that made me think of slope soaring.

Cheers,

Martin

Yes, but Pat's post reflects the fact that, in our part of the world, you get onshore winds more often on a "west coast" than on an "east coast".

Plus the fact that, IMO, successful dune soaring depends on identifying "special" spots that give "special" conditions, with a prevailing wind that is frequently "just right".

Thread: Restoring an old Flair Junior 60, Help and Advice needed
16/08/2019 17:27:07

I think you'll need more rudder than that.

Ben Buckle used to say "very little elevator, but as much rudder as you can get".

Personally, I agree with that (after half a dozen J60s), especially with the precise control systems that we now have.

The most important thing is to realise that it's an ultra-stable, slow flying plane and that, providing you have "enough" control movement, the precise amount is very non-critical. I never ever actually measured the deflections on mine, and they all flew great.

So just be confident. Ben also used to say "I must have seen hundreds of J60s, and I've never seen one that didn't fly...".

Finally, like I said, and without being precise, all mine have been set up with about 45° each way on the rudder and about 20° up and down on the elevator (just eyeballing). In any case, everything happens very gently!

Edited By brokenenglish on 16/08/2019 17:30:45

Thread: Skyleada Models
12/08/2019 14:27:33

You seem to be a victim of automatic spelling "corrections"...

Thread: What have I got here ?????
06/08/2019 21:39:16

A point I forgot to mention. Note that you have a fuel cut-out, intended to be timer operated, on the tank.
The little knob towards the rear of the tank is actually a plunger. It can be pulled upwards against an internal spring, and the piece of bent piano wire clicks into a recess on the pin (that goes down through the tank, to the fuel outlet pipe). When the piano wire lever is pulled back by a timer, the plunger is released and blocks the fuel feed orifice in the bottom of the tank. This system is again a dead copy of the Micron.
Not very well explained, but just mess around with it, the operation is obvious!

A couple of relevant photos. Note that these things can be flown!

owat 5 cc fixed compression mk i (exhaust side).jpgmicron 022.jpg

06/08/2019 21:09:45

Harry, here's an Owat running on the bench. Video shot by my wife, without my noticing!

There are two types of Owat, a Mk I and a Mk II. The one shown in my video is a Mk I, but yours is a Mk II. They're identifiable by the prop driver. On the Mk I, the prop driver is "flat", and has a square hole that keys onto a square section on the crankshaft (i.e. a dead copy of the Micron). The Mk II prop driver is thicker. It simply has a taper that fits a taper on the crankshaft and depends on being tightened to lock in position. This system isn't as good as the Mk I, but I suppose it must have been cheaper to produce.
Also many of the Mk I engines had a red painted crankcase and tank, like mine. I think there were a few green ones as well. I've never seen a painted Mk II and yours looks to be exactly the way it should be. 

If you like a challenge, it'll be good fun to run on the bench!

Edited By brokenenglish on 06/08/2019 21:22:47

Thread: Playboy Senior
06/08/2019 08:30:24
Duplicate post. Sorry!

Edited By brokenenglish on 06/08/2019 08:32:10

06/08/2019 08:28:41
Posted by paul d on 05/08/2019 17:45:37:

That's the trouble when converting vintage models to modern electrics, it was originally designed for a heavy old sparky.

First thing I would do is replace those rather small wheels with some big fat airwheels.

I presume the battery etc are as far forward as possible?

Try giving it a test glide, you'll be surprised how tolerant those old timers are to the cg position

This is very misleading. The old sparkers normally used are very light, far lighter than modern engines. Browns and Ohlssons weigh less than a modern engine of half their capacity. OK, the light weight of the old ignition engines is partially offset by the weight of the ignition system, but the engine + ignition system will still be lighter than a modern four-stroke.

The problem is more due to "modern" builders not realising that this type of model has to be built very light aft of the wing, and particularly at the tail end, obviously. Modern coverings don't help either... Then the problem is aggravated by the use of electric power, where the main motive power weight (the battery) isn't in the nose, but further back, at least behind the fire wall, and this is very significant in the case of a short-nose model.

My advice would be to get everything as far forward as possible. Then add whatever ballast is needed to get a CG at around 50%, and fly it like that. It should be fine.

Thread: Svenson 1/6 Scale Storch
05/08/2019 14:22:22

Here's the plan:

**LINK**

Thread: ETA 29
01/08/2019 21:09:25

OK, I was just looking at the crankcase and front housing, plus the s/n of course. It's obviously not possible to "identify" the internals!

Also, an original Mk V case doesn't look anything like that. It's very like the Mk VI, with a large V-shape transfer port.

However, I still think an engine should be identified by its main original components, and not by various mods that may have been incorporated!

Issue closed. They're all super engines!

01/08/2019 09:09:56

Pat, respectfully (as always!), the Eta 29 shown in your photos is a Mk III, with a later Mk prop nut on it.

31/07/2019 11:40:10

Paul, my Google must work better than yours. I found a couple of references.
Try this link, scroll down and you'll find info and photos:

**LINK**

31/07/2019 08:47:43

Not many people, especially collectors, realise that Ken Bedford's Eta actually pre-dated American racing glow 29s.
It preceded the Dooling by one year and was concurrent with the first McCoy 29s, which were really just a glow continuation of the spark ignition McCoys.

Peter, do you still have your ST G21/29?
If not, here's an early one (late fifties).
I understand why you might prefer the ST. This one is very powerful and quite gentle to operate, but there's just something about the Eta that makes it irresistible for me.

super tigre 015.jpg

Edited By brokenenglish on 31/07/2019 08:51:10

Magazine Locator

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

Find RCM&E! 

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Pepe Aircraft
Slec
Gliders Distribution
CML
Cambridge Gliding Club
electricwingman 2017
Wings & Wheels 2019
Sarik
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
New Poll - Sticky situations...
Q: How often - when using superglue - do you end up with it on your fingers?

 Every time
 Occasionally
 Sometimes
 Rarely
 Never
 Wear rubber gloves

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us