Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator

I think the last couple of posters have really hit the nail on the head. HK have their good points. For lower value and bulk stuff they often offer a good deal, the sort of stuff Nigel lists. Even for the the odd fun foamie at a rock bottom price - just a knock about - again they can do this well. But a Tx is big investment. Remember, if you don't like a cheap model you don't have to fly it - a tranny is with you all the time. Personally I wouldn't be interested in saving a couple of bob on such a major piece of kit. I want to buy it from someone I can talk to, preferably face-to-face, but at least over the phone. Someone who knows the kit,, can answer questions and has the time and interest to do so. In short, my advice for an item like this is go to a major model shop. Why not enjoy the process, take a day off and go in paerson! That way you can hold the object of your desires and be sure it is actually for you! BEB

Grrrrrrrr! Spool chucker. OK chaps, fun over. Let's bring this back on topic please. The topic is that the OP would like advice on sound systems, so if you have first hand knowledge of such please feel free to contribute. If not then allow the thread to run without spurious and irrelevant comment. Thank you BEB

I very much doubt he's "on to something", you see the thread this stems out of concerns a foam model that Simon is thinking of buying! Besides which, whatever makes you guys think a twin cylinder Harvey look-a-like sounds more like V12 than a digital recording of a V12 eludes me! BEB

Yaaaaawwwwwwnnnnnn!

Patient: Doctor, people think I'm mad because I like sausages. Doctor: Well, that's ridiculous, I mean, I'm quite fond of a sausage myself. Patient: Really? You should see my collection, I have thousands! BEB PS Seemed appropriate.

If you buy a conventional cheap system based around loudspeakers it will not work well in a foam aeroplane, you would be wasting your money in my view. The MrRC system works fundementally differently from a loudspeaker based system. I have explained this here in my post on 21/09/18 at 11:13:15. And works quite well in foam models in my experience. BEB

Thomas, this is far from being the most effective or efficient way of doing this! Simply enter the word "glue" in the search box above and you will have everythng you need to know - over 120 threads dedicated exclusively to glue! Evertype, every use. BEB

I find this whole business very confusing! You see I can identify wih the hoarding thing - we all do that. Yes I have my box of balsa and lite-ply bits - some of which are just about big enough to protect delecate surfaces on models from clamp pressure etc., many of which couldn't even do that! But here's the bit I don't get. We'll go out and spend £400+ on a model, either ARTF or a kit. We'll buy a radio for £400, we'll buy a engine for £200, we'll buy batterries at £50+ a throw. But,...put the club fees up by a £1 (with detailled justification as to why) and we have a 3 hour heated debated! Very odd! BEB

Welcome back to the hobby Shaun, and to the forum! BEB

Oh, sorry I missed you too Stephen - still I'm sure there will be other chances to meet up!! BEB

Thanks Ron, yes you're probably right, but I have decided to retest the balance with the battery I'll actually fly it with and see where that takes us - always a wise move! So, the battery that came with it is a slightly puffed Dynamic, 6s 4500mAh. The ones I will use are Zippy and Turnigy, both 6s and 5000mAh - and so should be slightly heavier, which will of course be an advantage. Weighing them the "scores on the doors" are: Dynamic - 573g Zippy - 750g Turnigy - 815g I am rather surprised that the Zippy/Turnigy combination are so much heavier - I had expected a weight gain in line with their capacity advantage - so 10% or so, say 60g. In any event it's much more. I took the Zippy and tried a balance. I found that it will balance - mid recommended range - with a little lead to assist it. Her she is on the stands: And full view: The balance position is very slightly tail down, but I'm not worried about that; the position is mid range and we have already said that the recommendations tend to be a bit conservative. So I fly her in that state. Just how much lead is that? 60g (just over 2oz)!! So we took out 1.3pounds (22oz or so) and put back 2oz. Not at all bad, happy with that. I reweighed her and she comes out at 4.35Kg, so missed the 4Kg target, but again a good result compared with the 4.8Kg we started with. I haven't managed to measure the max power yet - its raining on and off here which is how I got permission to check the balance in the house! But I can't run her up there! Hopefully tomorrow. The power is of course unchanged from how it was before (same cell count, same prop etc.) and we know it flew like that so it should not be problem - but I am curious to know the power to weight ratio we have at the reduced weight. I'll try tomorrow. BEB

Mr RC is good BEB

Sticky back vinyl trim stuff would be much easier Eric. Search ebay or Amazon for "Black sticky vinyl sheet" and you find loads - for example: HERE BEB

I have the 1600mm one. Excellent quality - goes together no fuss. Flys really well - for a warbird it has a low wing loading - around 25oz/sqft. Not for the totally inexperienced - but fine in the hands of any reasonably competant club pilot. Looks great, good ground handling. The only pinch point is the price - but I'd say it's worth it. BEB

Great photos chaps! Thanks for taking part and posting! Magic, and a dignified tribute I feel. BEB

I only use straps now, anchored to something I put in with hard backstop etc., which in turn is securely attached to the main structure. So unless we get catastrophic structural failure, in which case it's all over anyway, that battery ain't going anywhere. BEB

Well Pat, I thought that was self explanatory. Clearly and rather obviously the UK one is better as always! 😀 BEB

Different warehouses Geoff. The first is EU, the second UK. I suspect the slight price difference reflects differences in the exchange rates between the respective currencies (Euro and Sterling) and the USD when the Euro price is subsequently converted to pounds. BEB

Just a word of thanks to all the team at Don Valley MFC. It was a great fly in, with a well organised, but low key informal approach. The hospitality on offer was first class and everyone felt at home from the start! Despite the fact that the strong and rather gusty crosswind led to me deciding that discretion was the better part of valour where flying what I had brought was concerned I had a great day. A particular highlight was meeting folks who often post on here but whom I have never met; Simon, Gary, Mark et al, as well as well known forum mates such as John and Paul. I also met loads of other new people and chatted with them. A really friendly atmosphere! Well done DVMFC! BEB

Martin is right, getting a broken brace out is not impossible. Howvever in my experience (having done it precissely once and never again) it is the next best thing! As you go in getting a clean face for the new brace to adhere to becomes progressively more and more difficult - as does removing the broken brace without damaging the surrounding good structure. So, can I suggest a possible, if somewaht radical, alternative? Why not glue the existing brace back together again. (I can already sense the collective raising of eyebrows and the muttering of "that's it, he's finally flipped, I've seen it coming" But stop and think about it for a minute. Adhesives such as aliphatics,so called "yellow glue" and PVA's actually penetrate the wood and there is evidence to suggest that, applied and left to set under pressure, they form a joint that is actually stronger than the underlying wood in many cases. So if the joint will go back together with a good tight ftt (the more jagged edges the better, as long as they interlock, because that means a lager wetted area and a stronger joint) and you can strip back a bit of covering so you can securely clamp the joint for 24 hours why not give this a go? Another factor here is that I assuming you built this model to fly it in a scale-like manner, stately and with presence as you say above, wide gentle turns and low passes being the order of the day. All this implies that the G loading will be very small - again supporting the idea that glue joint, even if you do have doubts about its ultimate strength, may well be be fine. I can't say I've personally tried this, but I have certainly resolved that, faced with a broken wing brace again, I would try it! So it's just an invitation to think bout it before you get the drill and the knife out. BEB

Hi, well she's 'finished',.. I had limited time today - just an hour or so in the morning. So it was a quick "weight-in" and check the balance. What's the final weight? It's coming in at 4.19Kg with a battery on board. That compares with 4.8Kg original. We've saved 610g (about 1lb 6oz). The majority of that of course being the lead that has been removed. This new weight rings the wing loading down to 23 oz/sqft, which bodes well for general agility. What about the balance, are we there? Well, no, but we are very close. The recommended CoG position is between 100 and 105mm behind the leading edge of the wing at the root, given the conservative nature of most manufacturer's recommendations in this area I will go for 105mm. We are at around 111mm or approximately 6mm to far back. That's close, TBH I'm almost tempted to fly it there as my experience with the Ripmax WOT4 was that, at the recommended CoG I felt the plane was nose heavy and I actual have my CoG on that model perhaps 5mm back from that recommendation, where i think it feels much better and more responsive. But I'm also a coward! So I'll stick at 105mm for the XL - at least for the first few flights. Before I rush to add some lead to the nose - albeit a modest amount - I do have two tricks up my sleeve here that might make the shortfall even smaller: 1. When I weighed the model I was very keen that, as far as possible, it should a fair like-for-like comparison. So I used the same battery - the one that came with the model. But that is only a 4500mAh job and I have designed the conversion of this model for a 5000mAh - which is slightly, but significantly, heavier. 2. By using a slightly thicker bit of foam on the battery tray back stop I have got room to just move the battery a very little further up the tray which will of course also move it forward, not by much admittedly, but along with the heavier battery, every little bit helps and we only need a relatively little bit! I don't believe that with these two ruses we will get away with no lead, but will minimise it. I'm not expecting to need more than a very few ounces. Now I'm away this weekend, so it will be Monday before I can report back on all this - see you then; unless you happen to be at the Don Valley Fly-in, in which case I'll you there! BEB