RICHARD WILLS

What's that thing above the cockpit ? A refuelling probe ? And those glowing blue cylinders all over the place . Parked light sabres ? Its an assault on our national heritage . I need to go and have a lie down . 😧

A hanging offence in my book 😧 Lets play spot the cock up. Twin fins . Radial engines Both wheels have starboard oleos ! Its main wheels are so far back it should have a nose wheel . Where do the wheels retract to ? No wheel doors ? The "De " has been stolen from the title. Anything else chaps ? What is that anyway ? TU2 crossed with a B25?

As Paul says , "its in hand " Geoff . I cant really say when it will be ready . I can tell you what we have done though . The detachable back end has been recreated in balsa and seems to be attainable by those that wish to follow with a kit build version . The nacelles are also remodelled and will soon be complete . The wings and flaps are pretty much done , so it leaves the battery box (which forms a central frame for the whole model) to be fine tuned for access and a bay for the optional speaker . Once the completed balsa model is together , the whole lot must be re drawn onto a plan and a manual created . Too much time has gone into this model to be just aimed at our usual close gang on here , so it has to be able to be built by people who have never made a Warbirds kit . Paul and I have probably spent a thousand un paid hours on this one already . It is a long grind and I struggle to stay motivated on it at times ! The problem with the Mossie, as you know only too well , there is a lot of you tube footage of them falling out of the sky . Its the model many aspire too but the reason I have avoided it for so long is that its as complicated as a Rubic Cube and it can ruin a modellers enthusiasm on a test flight . Nett result of that is that it would ruin my reputation as a designer that makes practical flying warbirds that you can fly everyday . Ive done that successfully for 35 years so not about to risk it . The basic remit of this kit is to buck the trend and make it flyable by an average club flyer from and average grass strip . Big issue it weight , both All up Weight and tail weight . The 72" Mossie that you flew, I believe weighed more than 15lb , which if you scour You tube is not unusual (so dont feel too bad about it !) . The proposed Warbirds Mossie is only 10% smaller , but weighs half the weight at 7lb, IF I get it right . To get to that weight requires every component to be considered . Each part , if possible should perform two functions , thereby simplifying construction and eliminating duplication . I like the fact that people are keen to get started so feel free to ask for progress reports and quiz us on why we are doing things a certain way . Equally , we will continue to show the areas we are working on and explain the particular problems to overcome at each stage . I am thinking that a batch of "first run " Mossies may go out to our gang , once I have made a complete wooden kit . This would not have the proper plan and would rely on me walking you through a build on line . Some may prefer to wait for the glossy kit version later . Thanks for asking Geoff . I admire your enthusiasm . Hopefully , with more full size Mossies appearing it might be contagious !

Interesting stuff . It seems that we are all much closer on the 190 than the Tempest . I guess the Tempest has , like the Spitfire , much more potential to add a tiny bit of weight at the rear . Perhaps they both have longer moment arms compared with the 190 . I remember that almost all of the 190s had aluminium spinners too , which must have put a little more weight at the front . Both models will shrug off the extra weight . A good example of that is comparing my 190 in hand launch form to the now fully equipped retract version . I personally couldnt tell the difference . That has to be another 7 ounces (196 grams ) . I have taken steps to mitigate any tail heaviness on the Mossie . The Stabiliser is built up and skinned in order that variation in wood density from one kit to another will not really effect the overall weight , as the tail feathers will be full of holes (which always seem to be the same weight ) 😉

Watchout Chris ! Sweep calls that mallet "The Nut Cracker "😬

I would say that ,discounting the difference in battery size m your is virtually identical to mine at Fuz 1169 Wing with retracts 708 . There has to be some clues here as to how the weight sneaks on .

Thanks for that Murat . You and Chris seem to have the heaviest Tempests so far . So it is you two that may probably provide the answers in a roundabout way . (The Tempest doesnt mind BTW , so we are really searching to protect other designs) But we all have to be careful here . Its easy to say "how on earth did our good friends add half a kilo ?!" But they didnt . They probably only added a couple of ounces . The problem is , because of the 4:1 ratio of moment arms (the distance from the nose to the C of G ) and the distance from the C of G to the rudder , very little weight at the back will require very much more ballast at the front . Although savage rounding of the fuselage by carving and sanding looks nicer and you feel you have made progress , I doubt if you can save much more than say 30g . Mind you 30g at the back may reduce the nose ballast by 90g , so still pretty essential . What about the 5mm sheet tail plane ? The Elevators and Rudder could be tapered rather than rounded and the surface sanded as smooth as possible in order that the glue for covering doesnt "infill " a craggy surface finish . I dont use a varnish on my models , so that could be a factor . I did spray a light coat of clear lacquer from a can on the 190 because it was belly landing . Dont thin the glue on covering , youll end up adding more in the end in repairs.

Well Ron , Ive just made the whole back end of the Mossie in Balsa and it weighs only one ounce more than the foam board back end . On production models we want to stick with wood if possible . It is more "acceptable " in general and ages much better . As we all know , it is the usual story of 1oz on the tail needs 4 oz up front to balance . So when people say that they had to add 10oz in the cowl and we all reel back in horror , it may have been caused by just 2-3oz at the tail . (Sorry that I went imperial there ) So lets start from the back . On my designs , there is always a central crutch. This is just an alignment tool is not actually needed to fly and maintain the model . Feel free to hack as much away as you like from the cockpit to the tail post . I purposely didnt do that on the prototype 190 and Tempest so that you could all emulate my model straight from the box. The next thing to look at is the amount of wood sanded or carved away at the rear . The Tempest and Spitfire kits have large triangular sections in the lower fuselage so that they can be radically sanded to an oval shape . The more wood you remove , the lighter the back end . However , I would guess the worst culprit is paint and covering .

You'd look angry if somebody had stuck a pin in your wrist ........

Chris , its not rubbish building . But it is an opportunity to find out how the extra weight appeared . Its not voodoo and Im not Albus Dumbledore , so it must be easy to follow the same format that I set out and make a light model . But to make progress, in order that everyone can improve, then the deviations from the "path of righteousness" need to be identified (Amen ), says the Reverend Sweep .

Hello Chaps . Its been fun watching the Fw190s and Tempests come to life . Please keep posting the pictures as you finish a build as I really enjoy seeing the variations and the smiling faces . Makes it all worth it . Now , I like to look after our gang , as you know . So I have a worrying niggle that we can all help with . I have been labouring over the new Mosquito kit which is quite a challenge . The prototype was made mostly from foam board but the kit will be all wood . So as you can imagine , making a wooden kit weigh the same as a foam board kit requires some pretty fine scrutiny . In fact I have been counting every gram. The big issue here is not in fact a magazine sold on the high street , but an entirely different problem for us as WW2 fans . WW2 aircraft had whopping great power plants up the front and Coca Cola can, thin skins at the rear to make the thing balance . We have something the size of cotton reel at the front and if we replicated the full size, our rear end would have all of the structural integrity of an empty crisp packet to make it balance . In some models there is plenty of leeway and they will carry the extra ballast if we get it wrong . The Tempest is a fine example . However , the Mosquito is not . Check out you tube for anyone flying an overweight Mossie and you will need a stiff drink . So assuming that my carefully monitored prototype wooden kit balances without lead , it is pretty much vital that you can all follow me to with in a few ounces . Now this is where we can all help . Between us we have all made some 190s and Tempests . We all had the same kits (I dont get a special "race prepared hand picked version " ) . I will give you the weights of mine . Fw190 Fuz 1169g Wing 708g Battery 3300 @ 360g Total AUW with retracts 2237g Tempest Fuz 1252 Wing 953g Battery 3300@360g Total AUW with retracts 2565g (incudes 3oz lead) say 75g We are not sending people to the naughty step or trying to show them up , we are hopefully looking for the little differences that will save adding ballast and increasing the stalling speed . Lets face it , this is a very good controlled experiment because we all used the same finish technique and paint . Note that both of mine are "full house " with retracts . I'm pretty certain that any difference there is in the models is occurring rear of the trailing edge . Simply because of the long moment arm on WW2 aircraft . So lets zoom in on the tail , the rear fuz , paint application , amount of fuselage rounding (loses wood , but what does that weigh ?) etc . Tail wheels ? Push rods ? We cant rule out the fact that some balsa tail planes may be heavier than others as that is a factor of wood . If we can all learn something and close the "weight spread range " , we will all benefit in the future . Generally the back end of our models are over engineered . Ive never seen one back into a crash ......... All comments welcome chaps . Lets keep it constructive and helpful so that those that tend to build heavy can be pulled up the ladder a bit . Tricks and tips from the front runners very helpful too.

Well done Murat . You made a great job of it . Your photographer would be the envy of many clubs! Thats quite a few Tempests up and flying now . Not getting near the number of 190s though , even though there are more than 40 of each type out there somewhere .

Ive seen golf trolleys that fold up like that . Just need to find one for a pixie .

The wings look like constant chord (not tapered ) . In that case , you wont need washout . Problem solved 😉 Nice drawing BTW.

I left my canopy slid back and locked it there, so it didnt notice anyway . I think the slightly accentuated gap on the model is because when I made the prototype, I enlarged the tail plane by about 10% . That made the scale canopy look too small when viewed from above . So I made a second canopy a little bigger . The model then looked in proportion , but I think that means that the bottom rail of the canopy is then dropping lower and riding on the outward "step " that is in the correctly shaped "dog kennel" behind the cockpit . Lock the canopy back would be my advice .