PatMc

The main problem isn't actually "torque roll", in fact its a yaw caused by it the rotating slipstream striking one side of the fin.

Some marks of the full size Bf109 fin & rudder had an asymmetric airfoil with the camber on the right side to counteract torque roll. The characteristic may have had something to do with the higher tailplane position when compared with other fairly similar layout fighters of the time. A number of full size aircraft to have the fin mounted at a slight angle or the rudder permanently offset for the same reason.

Isn't Philip 61 ? And Holly looks different too.

If there's anyone at the field running an ic engine you probably can't hear an EDF anyway, particularly when they're carrying out the mandatory pre-flight "tuning" ritual that they fondly imagine will make their engine run better than it did last flight. 🙄

To be fair to Vic Smeed the model in question isn't a Popsie, it's a Lightwork Pops. There appears to be a number of design changes including some "beefing up", wing repositioning etc that would make a difference to how the model would need to be trimmed.

If you have or can borrow a tachometer & a DVM or wattmeter you can calculate the Kv. Just divide the rpm by applied volts at full throttle.

Somehow I don't think Mike has the 29" span 1948 f/f original model in mind. 😉 Or maybe he has ? 😊

The original Popsie only used the Mills .75 for free flight, it used an ED Bee for rc. Model weights according to the plan (Outerzone) F/F - 15.75oz; RC model 23oz. Engines - Mills .75 1.75oz; ED Bee 2.75oz. Note that the kit you've built from has quite a number of alterations from the original so the plan may show the cg in a different place from Vic Smeed's version.

It could be the Taranis Neck Strap & Bracket listed here.

Chris Gold designed & built quite a number of scale, mainly multi engined & edf, models using foam & brown paper. They weren't small models. A club mate, sadly no longer with us, also specialised in the method of construction on both small & average size scale models. His models included a Sunderland, Junkers 52 among many others. The Junkers had a central Laser engine with 2 freewheeling outers, span was around 6 ft. The corrugations of the full size were replicated using recycled corrugated cardboard boxes courtesy of the staff at a local Morrisons.

I don't know when the 1 engine out training stopped, it could be that sims were well established by then. Also if you consider the rarity of deadstick occurrences with single engine RAF jets I believe the statistics endorse the decision.

After a spate of crashes the RAF curtailed asymmetric training practice with Canberras because there were more accidents in these practices than there were genuine 1 engine out occurrences.

David, if you are only going to change 1 or 2 batteries over to XT60s then you might as well buy both male & female then use the "gender" that's not already fitted to the ESC. You really need a spare unconnected mating connector anyway as it's best to plug the one you are going to use to it into in order to minimise the risk of it's pins moving if the plastic body softens due to the heat. I usually clamp the spare connector by it's plastic body in a workmate in this situation.

If that was the case wouldn't there only be one set of torque & speed figures for the HV version ?

My comments follow on from a point made by toto in one of his posts in this thread. Perhaps you should keep up with the discussion if you intend tit for tat digs. 😉

Well you "virtually" know one now, Matty. 😉 I have an A(SFT) as well as the FW certs. Can't remember when I did it but I think it must have been when i was a member of BARCS sometime last century. A bit off topic but there are so many people flying undercart-less models these days it would make sense to include flying from a hand launch (self or by a helper) & safe landing as an option for the certs. There are perfectly sensible techniques to hand launching and belly landings as well as very poor methods - just takes forethought & common sense (& practice).

Sorry but as a generalisation that's nonsense.

But they were launched from France, I was visiting relatives in London when the first ones were delivered 😟.

Well good for you. Why don't you start a new thread promoting ic over electric flight and leave this thread to folk who are prepared to offer constructive advice to the OP.

Leccy, I don't think MEK is the same as either Prymol or Solarfilm solvent though it may have similar effect to the solvent. Tosh, one thing I've found helps with or without any Prymol or solvent is to keep the iron temp to the lowest as possible that just activates the adhesive.

Neither the Super 60 or later version of Junior 60 need the wing or dihedral braces beefing up, they are as well designed as many other similar size & type of models, nor do the wings need struts. The wing folding problem is due to the overlong distance between the front wing dowel and the wing LE. This length of the wing bands allow the wing LE to rise too easily during some little tighter than normal manoeuvres which causes sudden high stress on the wing. A fairly simple mod to the fuselage to allow either the dowel to be raised to a more conventional position or a front peg with rear screws wing fixing method are complete cures to the problem. My Junior 60 was built circa 1985 from a Flair kit but modified to peg & screw wing fixing. The wings have not been strengthened from the original design but rolls, loops & inverted flight present no problem even when the model has been fitted with floats. Here's a link to the blog of it's refurb & conversion to electric power about 10 years ago.

Nothing, now that Paul has changed it.

The thread title is incorrect, the model's a pulse jet powered scale(ish) interceptor.

That's a nice hat you're wearing, JD. 😁

Looks like a modified Maricardo with home made foam cored wings.