Leaderboard

Final piece of the jigsaw on this build - I decided to gather my thoughts in a video review. Not done one of these before, and there was a lot of annoying background wind noise, but production values aside it's an accurate reflection of my thoughts about the kit - its' design, the build experience and of course how it performs in the air. It's quite long, so if you just want the highlights - I think it nailed the brief almost perfectly. I'm impressed!

Having not documented the build elswhere I thought I'd share my efforts here, was hoping to maiden today but alas, was not to be..

Favorite word of all TV announcers and reporters today " Unprecedented" drives me nut's, some do not even say it correctly.

A dream to fly with 2 Saito .45 Specials, 8 years old now.

In the last picture above , you can see that a lot has happened since picture one . So lets explain how to follow . (In fact if you visit the FW190 thread , there is quite a lot about weathering effects ). The lines were drawn as you saw . Then the little rivets added . The model would still look too toy like and clean . So what we need to do is make each panel jump out . On the full sized aircraft each panel would sit slightly differently and collect dirt and wind differently . The up shot of that is, that dirt stain would appear downwind of a panel line . So what I do is put a piece of masking tape along the panel line on the "upwind" side and then smudge some charcoal from the tape backwards towards the trailing edge . Sometime a circular motion with your finger works best , going onto the tape to pick up the black dust and then round onto the lower panel. When you pull the tape off , the panel will appear as an individual piece . If the panel line crosses a black stripe or other dark area, you can use white chalk in the same way . The other thing you will notice is the silver . It is just one of those "shaker pens " with a little ball bearing in . The silver sort of runs out like little blobs when you press on a surface . What I do is dot a little paint on , then quickly smudge it for and aft of the model . It simulates the way the plane would wear if people slid over the wings . The edges are also very effective . You just blob the edge , smear it along the edge very fast then drag the paint with your finger toward the middle of the wing . You can imagine pilots and ground crew constantly chucking parachutes with buckles and other scratchy kit onto the wing skin .

It’s a shame that some feathers have been ruffled but I’m glad this has worked out well for you Aiden. Personal taste has a lot do do with whether others might adopt your solution but the alternatives have been aired (pun not intended) extensively so it’s time to close the thread here.

Can we draw a line under this please. There will always be differences of opinion on forums but we don’t need to resort to sniping at each other. While I understand the frustration of seeing repeated advice seemingly ignored, a new poster will be unaware of past advice so perhaps a little more tolerance would avoid this sort of situation. Please don’t respond to this post (PM me or another mod. if anything is unclear) and let’s return to the subject of sharing information about the Galaxy/Pegasus Hurricane.

I think that’s a bit unfair on Jon. The “development” of the boxers was a minor exercise by all accounts and its well documented that he didn’t feel that he was getting the support he wanted from the owner of the parent business which, after Neil’s departure, was felt to be very much of a sideline. I understand that Jon had no financial interest and was purely an employee - admittedly with a keen interest in the product. Any “beef” should be with the owner of the company who made the decision to terminate not only his company, but any (remote) possibility that Laser engines could carry on in different hands.

Well the wind has come back again , so its back to painting the Tempest . I quite enjoy this bit as I can do it indoors and its relaxing ! I have some fine indelible black pens . You can buy a whole set of different thickness nibs for about £8 on line . I dont get too hung up on getting the panel lines dead right . Lets face it , I'm not going to meet anyone who actually built a real Tempest am I ? So a three view in A4 size downloaded from the web is fine for accuracy . I already have a scale plan as I needed it for the design stage . I just draw on the main panel lines first in black . Then highlight the lines in some places with a white gel pen (from WH Smiths , about £1.90) . You can see that I've also added some rivets which I do free hand , but you can use a ruler if it helps . The trick with the rivets is to draw a little black "C" about 3mm high. They represents the rivet . The other side of the circle can be completed with the white gel pen as if it catches the light . You do need to be consistent though ,as you are telling people the light is on one side or the other, so all of your black "C"s should point the same way . You don't need to do all the rivets as some would catch your eye and others not . Its very quick to do but to get confident , why not practice on the underside ? If you really cock it up , just paint over it . I'd like at least some of you to have a go at this kind of finish , so please feel free to ask as many questions as you like . You can see that Ive also added the rather neat little cannon blisters which cover the breeches of the 20mm Hispano cannons . Mine are 3d printed (thanks Paul ) , but yours will be vac formed as its quicker for us and gives you a smoother finish . I gorilla glued them on , but painted them first . In the next post I'm going to go into a little more detail about the weathering . You can also see that Ive corrected the red part of my roundel . Your decals will be the as shown with the correct larger red portion .

Today, Brian was doing the second wing tube. The ply fillets that Cliff H made are absolutely perfect, well done that man!

Let’s all take a step back. There is no place on this forum for personal insults.

Finished covering the fuselage and have painted the horizontal stabilisers. now to adding the white base for the invasion stripes… I’ve not decided which particular aircraft I want to replicate yet other than it will be a coastal command aircraft, but the invasion stripes will help with seeing what is basically a blue and grey aircraft against a blue/grey sky! I’ve been researching it and the invasion stripes in one form or another stayed on surviving aircraft from June well into October/November 1944 so I’ve lots to choose from.. 🤔

If I were looking for advice on WW2 warbirds of about 5-6 feet in the wingspan, Jonathan Harper would be the first person I would approach. He is a very experienced builder and flyer of this type of aircraft and until he started his new job he was the development engineer for Laser Engines, a British four-stroke which you may have heard of.

Thanks all, I've utilised (stolen, plagerised, ripped off or whatever you want to call it) lots of ideas from the many that have shared thier build, not least of all Ron for his videos but LM and many others have been a great help.

Like mine,, 😇

I’ve removed some of the more inflammatory and provocative posts. Sorry if any good information has been lost but I’m not prepared to waste time editing posts selectively.

Hi Toto I understand the issues you've had with glow engines. I have run diesels, glows petrol snd electric. Without doubt, with one recent disastrous exception (my fault btw), electrics have been simply a matter.of plug in and go. Next up, diesels, were the easiest on field equipment, then glow and petrol given the need for glow starts (or on board glows) and ignition systems plus a starter motor. That having been said, I start my OS91FX with a reverse rotation tap with a chicken stick unless it's a cold day when I resort to sn electric starter. Dead sticks have been few and far between but I did get a petrol dead stick on one occssion - again my fault. What you describe leads me to thjnk that your helpers were not well taught as regards setting up and tuning glow engines. It does happen. I relate a situation where a fellow club member had a clutch of helpers who could not get his Irvine 46 started and running. I had spent the morning flying my Irvine 53 powered Wot 4 so at lunch I noticed he was fed up snd depressed. I offered to have a go at sorting ot out since my Irvkne ran very well. After 5 mins, the engine was running and after a further 5 mins we had a perfectly set idle and main jet. He flew the aircraft and was delighted. I suspect having a "committee" trying to stsrt and adjust the engine was not the right approach but as my engines run perfectly it may be that I knew what I was doing. A surprising number of glow engine operators appear not to know about idle jets which control the engine up to half throttle. Once these are correctly adjusted they merely need a tweak e.g. if set on a cold winter's day and then being used kn a hot summer's day - those conditions affect the air/fuel ratio as air density varies. My Wot 4 has a side mounted engine and when I fitted a throttle pipe, that lived underneath between the u/c legs, there was hardly any mess on the aircraft after a day's flying. Just my experience.

I think there is not going to be a meeting of minds on the subject. In Aidans last post he tries to close the subject down in a reasonable manner but you are simply coming back baiting him Jon. Especially suggesting that he knows nothing after 40 years experience. The remarks are becoming a bit harsh and I think it may be better just left as Aidan has suggested. I can't add anything to the matter in hand but don't like to see things getting out of hand. I think Aidan is prepared to let matters lie. Maybe it's time to back out. Apologies to both if my comments are unappreciated. Toto

Despite the awful look (imo) I would be more concerned about landing and the wheels being pushed back through the wing as at those angles there will be very little, or no, give in the legs. Regarding the CG, it’s correct when the model flies well and you’re not fighting it, irrespective of the actual measurement back from the LE.

The pot calling the kettle black. I was more than happy to assist and was quite happily posting away until you kicked off with your snarky 'throttle moves both ways' comment. So perhaps you should consider the way you speak you people if you do not want the same in return. If it was in jest and i misunderstood then fair enough, but i do not have much tolerance for snarky nonsense. Especially when the engine you have has a pretty dreadful throttle. Ok fair enough, but from my point of view once you have flown a handful of 60 ish inch warbirds you have flown them all. The basics are the same for all of them and the lessons from one easily apply to another. For example the H9 109f is a bit of a porker. It always has been and i do not know why it should end up so heavy and its not really a great yard stick to measure by. Seen in isolation it might look ok and fly alright, but compared to a broader range of similar models it is more of an outlier. Regarding Galaxy, they were at their peak in the days before the internet and their kits faded from the lime light by the time it came along so information will the sparse. I used to fly a galaxy mustang and it was a good model which flew well on a 150 4 stroke. They are old designs and their age shows in many respects but they do generally fly well once all is said and done.

why does it matter if i ever built one? I have a similar model from another manufacturer and countless other warbirds of varying sizes up to 90 inch. The tldr is that the model you have is a 60 inch and intended for 60 2strokes and 90 4 strokes, and a flying weight of about 9.5lbs. As yours is heavier than that you need to be prepared for it to not be as forgiving as you might hope. That was the point i was trying to make. With that said, i decided to check the spec to see if my memory was not as accurate as i would like. Turns out the model is 66 inch and not 60 as i originally thought, and with that in mind the weight is not quite as much of a concern. Its still very over powered, but at least the prop has a fairly fine pitch. Just keep an eye on the rpm as the limiting speed for master 3 blades is a little low. Not entirely, but after 18 years in the model industry i have had enough of smart alec comments and will be far less diplomatic when responding now i am just a modeller again.

My only reason for bumping this blog from BEB is that following his passing I acquired the model and has sat boxed in the workshop awaiting an opportunity to complete. Now in fairness I was not even aware of this blog and only came across it whilst seeking some information about the model on line. It seems that some bits have gone astray but nothing too serious all the major components are still there and included the RCV four stroke motor that Dave had selected. Now as a friend, colleague and fellow club member I will endeavor to get the model completed and flown in the near future to complete the blog in tribute. Linds

I couldn't turn up at the field with that model but each to their own 🙂 Not wishing to be a prophet of doom, with the wheels that far forward I think that its likely to be hard to keep straight on Take Off. Hope that it goes well,

The 60" ws DB Sopwith Pup is a fairly new offering. I think I had one of the first kits in late 2019. Mine is ready to fly now but remains earthbound so far. As you can see the cowl is very short. The wingspan is pretty well exactly 60" as it says 'on the tin'.

On the MPM, try FrSkyX2 LBT(EU). That will set the RF output to V2 LBT, which is most likely what your new receivers are. See photo which is on my tx (an X12S), it might appear a little different on the normal Taranis tx. If that doesn’t work, try FrSkyX2 D16, that sets it to V2 FCC, but it’s more likely to be the EU one that you want. Just to be sure, this is for binding with your new Archer receivers in ACCST mode. Not your old D8 receivers. Brian.

I really like it . It's funny how other peoples models somehow have more appeal . Perhaps its because without seeing the build up , they sort of enter the stage with a bit more jazz ? Colours look very accurate too. Anyway , excellent result .

Love the spinner in particular. Lovely job!

In the module section of the transmitter setup, one of the variables is the receiver number. This is a number that you set for each receiver so that the transmitter can warn you if you have the wrong model selected. This also clearly means that you cannot use the same number for different receivers - or different Tx modules using the same receiver. That is what the message is trying to tell you. Simply choose another number that is not already in use, and you should be good to go. If you set the number to zero, then this safety feature is turned off. You could try that for experimental purposes, but don't make a habit of using it!

I had stopped adding any more weathering on my FW190, but you’ve inspired me to try doing some rivets. I’ll have a go next week - fingers crossed! As you say, I can always paint over if I mess it up. Come to think of it, the bottom of the wing will need painting anyway once the retracts modification is ready to go, so nothing to lose there!

Yeah! The only way for international customers is to have a few friends in UK.

The Green topped one looks like a Flair kit to me. The puppeteer?

It probably is grumpy All sitting there awaiting their fate ..... shaking in their boxes. Cheers Toto

Thank you Toto. A man with some manners. I'm just back from the flying field after three perfect flights with my Mustang. The new landing gear didn't change a thing, the plane tracked as straight as an arrow down the runway and it flew as stable as a trainer. When I bought this plane 13 years ago I had to add 60 grams of weight to the nose as I almost crashed it on its maiden flight due to the extreme tail heaviness of the plane. 13 years later and my Mustang is flying just as good. I came up the road in the car singing. Happy as Larry as us proud Irishmen say. Kind regards Aidan.

Where do you live Toto? I think I'll open up a model shop at the end of your road.😉

Hopefully when the time comes, hopefully sometime towards the end of the year, I'll have my first successfully set up IC model. I think I will enjoy the whole learning curve from running in and adjustments etc in the hands of someone who is capable. My first experience I feel was too much of a rush to get me in the air, possibly skipped steps and one of the important things is when someone else is busy trying to set me up ....... they bring me along on the journey of understanding to enable me to stand on my own two feet should there be issues. Or at least to a point. Meanwhile ...... back to decorating .... more brownie points to be earned.... Thanks for the comments Toto

Yup, ordered them as well. Thanks for point out though....

Good luck with the locktite, it won't work, I have a couple of old motors with the same problem, one I drilled the exhaust port a little deeper and deepened the thread, now it is ok, another I have used the older technique that Rossi used for their piped 2 strokes, a steel ring with a spring around the cylinder head.

Yikes.....nearly as expensive as playing with toy planes.

IF the gear need that level of rake the model is balanced far too nose heavy. P51's tend to handle well on the ground and have decent size wheels. It should not be necessary to crank them that far forward.

My Tony Nijhuis Lysander both from last Mondays Maiden flights

My Moon Dancer 2