RICHARD WILLS
-
Posts
1,660 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
24
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Posts posted by RICHARD WILLS
-
-
Ive got most of the forms and instructions from people back now .Planning for kits to start leaving the Norfolk workshop on Tuesday .
I'd like to get the majority out next week as Ive got two weeks off after that and communication will be difficult .
So if anyone has the form still sitting on their desk then , pm me so we can short circuit the system .
-
Blimey John , that is so like mine I could take it home by mistake!
Have you considered counterfeit notes ?
The only way I'd know which one to take home is that mine is the right way up 😁
Joking aside , I think this proves beyond doubt that if you follow a simple process in bite size chunks, you will end up with an outstanding result , easily able to challenge the best ARTFs plus have the satisfaction of saying that you properly built that (as apposed to an assembly ) .
John , if you are wondering what your plane looks like the other way up , it a lot like this .
Thanks for your comments , makes it all worthwhile .
-
2
-
2
-
-
Yes , I agree on both counts . Why music ? At least its not their usual heavy rock .
Secondly , the speakers are actually transducers . I have tried both by the way . TT25 trans is easier and lighter .
-
I coudnt find my 109 clip , but here is an American Chappie with the same set up . I enjoy the sound system the most when nobody else is flying . It is actually nicer and deeper at mid throttle settings so when you fly slower at scale speeds it sounds much more realistic . Towards the end of this clip you can see and hear the potential better .
Why he dubbed music over it is beyond me .
I'm not sure what is going on with Mr Rc at the moment though . You dont seem to be able to buy it even though Motion RC is his agent .
You can move the PCB easily from one model to another , but the speaker (£25) mush be built in to the model . So you could buy three speakers for three models and just un clip the PCB board and move it around .
-
Good question Martin . The sound system comprises of a speaker with weighs about 5oz and a small PCB board which is only 1oz .
I will have to have a chat with Eric V on Drake AKA the Professor about the weight .
My gut feeling is that the weight of the airframe could be aloud to gain another 6oz or more without any noticeable impact on the flight performance .
It is very friendly at the moment and I wouldnt want to lose that , but I would like to know how much an "all wood " version would weigh in comparison .
Foam board as you know , can have stability problems if left in the garage all winter .
Not much chance of a video at the moment as spotting another club member is like hunting DoDo's !
I do have an old clip of one of my 109s with the same set up doing a pass . I will attempt to post it .
-
a few more test flights on the foam board Mossie today .
Its been laid up since last year when the Fw190 /Tempest project started .
Still some cosmetic work to do . The underside of the nacelles are functional rather then pretty , so need sorting .
But flying goes really well . AUW is less than 6lb with sound system .
At 64" that makes the wing loading 24oz/ft .
Putting that in perspective , if you scaled up a typical 6lb 55" fighter to 64" but kept the same weight , imagine how easy to fly and land it would be ?
That's how it feels .
It flies on a 4s 3300mah battery for 5mins of spirited performance . Could stretch to 6.5 mins at scale speeds.
-
10
-
-
Very Nice Andy .
The Mediterranean colours show of its clean lines . I thought that about the captured 109 "black 6" when I first saw it .
That colour is really easy to see in all weathers too .
great job 😁
-
11 minutes ago, John Britton 1 said:
I must do my form tonight, it's sat on the desk waiting for me.
I know how it feels John 😬
-
Lots of the forms coming in now and the kits getting close to completing .
Nice to get the old fashioned post really . Especially those that put a little note on saying about what they liked in my kits and what they were up to generally .
I think Ive spoken to pretty much everyone over the years , so its nice to get a bit of an update .
Everyone is pretty much peed off with the weather. Lots are dealing with various health issues , either for themselves or their loved ones .
Makes me realise how important the escapism of modelling is . Its something we can actually do and achieve results, in contrast to all the things we can't change .
I hope you all like the Tempest . I really do , as its so colourful and aggressive to look at but such a softie to fly .
Thanks for your kind words chaps .
-
9
-
-
Maurice wishes he hadn't asked the question .
He's left the building 😕
I apologise in advance , I just can't help myself.
-
1
-
4
-
-
It is a bit of a digression to our thread Maurice , but perhaps we can clear it up then get back to our flapless aeroplanes 😁
Two comments above are significant . Piers asked , does the tip stall happen both sides or just one ? I would qualify that with low power setting to take torque out of the picture . So just go to height and stooge into wind .
If C of G is well forward, I would suspect a problem in the wing shape or angle . Paul made the next significant comment . Try cuffs .
Lets guess that the left wing drops . It has lost lift and the suction on the upper skin lets go .
To get the wing to hang in a bit longer , we need to make the airflow go over the top longer , rather than taking the quick route underneath .
Quick bodge is to glue some balsa under the leading edge , in order to lower the most forward point of the wing section where the airflow decides to separate and take two different paths . This will move the "decisive separation point " lower making more air flow up and over and creating more suction . Moving A to B .
The modification only needs to be on the outer half of the wing . The root is rarely a problem . Ive tamed many a beast with this method .
If its stalling both ways then add to both sides .
If you need more info , PM me .
Regards
Richard
-
Ive been using the Graupner nylon (Super Nylon Propeller 2042) available from Sussex models and other shops for £4.55
Not a weird shape and seems to work well enough .
-
1
-
-
On 19/04/2024 at 17:41, Lipo Man said:
I didnt use an Apc for that reason . I think mines got a Radio Active 12x6 or similar . Conventional shaped props look better and require less enlargement of the spinner prop slots .
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Andy Gates said:
GG
If you build light, then you do not need to fly so fast so the energy taken into any mishap is very much reduced allowing for a less beefy construction.
KE = 1/2 m v2 (2 is squared - I could not find the superscript function)
My Mossie which is now 17 years old and still flies regularly. 74" wingspan and weighed around 5lbs including batteries, (2 x 3S 2800mAH). As Richard would say, more "cartoon scale" but great fun and shows no sign of tip stalling.
Andy and I use to fly together at Rivenhall in Essex . So I got to fly some of his models including the Mossie and his very light Chipmunk .
The designs are by Ivan Pettigrew and are a bit like the old kiel Kraft stringers and tissue style of construction . Probably a bit too semi scale as Andy says , but amazingly easy to fly when you compare it with the more typical 14lb 72" Mossie .
You certainly felt comfortable flying it with every confidence of bringing it home in pristine condition .
Going a little more scale will be the answer . But it shows what can be done . The landing speeds were trainer like , so quite modest retracts would suffice .
Have a look at his plan as his method of undercarriage was unusual but clever .
Thanks Andy .
-
2
-
-
Should have been coded O😉MG
Must be handy having those trays either side of the cockpit ,
I guess for tea and biscuits etc ?
-
As much as I like the presence of the 72" twins ,( and if you look a the videos and still shots of the models above , they are very realistic) , the comments often used are ,
I dont have room for one or it wont go in my car . There is also the extra time taken to charge two batteries rather than one.
The other factor is that even a lightish one of say , 10lb will require beefy retracts especially as the trunions are working for and aft rather than Mustang style .
A 60" inch model on one standard 4s pack would appeal to more people and would be flown as a hack rather than a Sunday special .
I'm not saying twins are the final decision , but in order to broaden the choices we must consider what the barriers are . Wing loading and landing speed must be low to protect the cheap retracts (if fitted ) . The smaller the model , the harder it is to reduce weight .
For me , the design problem is fairly substantial because I would prefer a 60" model to be able to take retracts as well as be a less daunting entry level twin .
We could pretty much guarantee that it would be a Mossie since I must hit the number to justify it .
The Tempest and 190 could have small profit margins because of the numbers sold . I would be surprised if we hit 35 Mossies so my time and expense would be a consideration .
The 60" twin would have to come apart quickly with just one coupling , but split in such a way that gave minimal storage and rigging .
The reason that I chose the Ju88 and Bf110 for my first twin kits , is because they have square section fuselages . So as a twin is more complicated to make than a single engined model , at least the fuselage can be made quickly .
The British stuff never has straight lines !
-
Both the 110 and 88 didnt disappoint and Ady flew his captured 88 in many competitions . He absolutely loved that model and Ron felt the same about his 110 .
Of course, they are both excellent flyers , but you can see that these two have very nice manners .
Having said that , we sold only about 15 Ju88s and maybe 25 Bf110s .
Criminal really, considering the work that went in and how valued they were by those that flew them .
I wont give up on the twin for the masses idea . It may be that a single pack , slightly smaller twin will win the day .
The Mossie is the most awkward one , but it is without doubt the most popular .
-
1
-
-
-
That model is a proper box of frogs Chris . I take my hat off to the pilot . Even the Dutch roll on the way in speaks volumes .
If anyone is worried about all twins being like that , then think again . If you have a look at the original WBR Ju 88 thread , you can watch Ady doing some lovely landings and full aerobatic routine with my 72" version .
TNs Beaufighter also seems to fly very nicely as does my 110 . (ask Ron !) .
-
Hornets , Whirlwinds , I'd like them both but we both know the numbers wont stack up . If its a twin , it will be a Mossie .
My first choice would be the Whirlwind but we would get maybe five hands up .
Even the Mossie may not get as many votes as we hope .
It would depend on what the barriers are with those versions already available on the market .
Even so , I am slightly baffled about the reluctance to try a twin .
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Chris Walby said:
Mr doom and gloom here!
On the EDF front (yes I would like one), but I think its a very emerging area of the hobby. There are some real winners out there mk1 Habu, but here is the catch as on tarmac they are a dream to get off the deck (4S3300/4000), but short grass and you have to peel it off, wet or long grass don't bother it will end in tears. Now these have fixed gear so look pants when flying around. If you had launch with the gear its very marginal, but without the wire gear (not even the weight of retracts) its a piece of cake. So what does that tell you about margins.
Now roll on the mk2 Habu...why does it have fixed gear, why is it 4S or 6S compatible, IMO because its all still very marginal. 4S off tarmac ok, off grass it has to be yanked off. 6S and grass and it gets off ok, but its hammering the battery in the process (yes I get LVC on the ESC, but with 1/2 to 3/4 the rest of the 5 minute flight is possible),
I have a SU47 (twin 70mm) that can kill a 6S4500 lipo in 2 min 15 sec and its so marginal flight performance its bike clips at all times. I has such aggressive cheat holes that with UC it actually sucks it to the deck on roll out...back the throttle of and it lifts off the ground...but not for long before its aggressive stall catches up! The most successful launch is to remove the retracts (still weighs 2.6kg) and hand launch with stabilisation/safe on. Its that marginal it just misses the ground but then it up to me then get a few circuits before belly landing!
IMO Arrows have cracked it, small and light models powered by 3S2200 and guess what...no retracts, no wire UC, no flaps and not even a rudder, why? because they know its all about power to weight.
I tried a FT kit that could be pusher or EDF and what was surprising was the loss of EDF performance once you add and induction and thrust tube + it wants to implode on full power! So something like an A10 is doable but its been done and expensive.
Not flown one but the HK Vampires are very popular and fly very well, what's the winning formula?
Looks like we are back to single engine WW2 fighters with popular (common) at one end of the spectrum or unpopular/ rarely modelled at the other end....or dolly launched twin... but people will want retracts, then flaps and wonder why the retracts come out of the wings on a rough grass strip!
I have to agree with all of that Chris . You cant have your cake etc .
I have a long grass strip which is nice when dry . Even the little Arrows Marlin /Hawk goes off , but of course we have to consider that its a different story in other clubs .
We like all of our gang to be able to join the projects so there has to be enough flexibility to make that possible .
The Tempests will be flying the nest soon , so it will be interesting to get some feedback on the method of construction and the flying grin factor .
Results could be indicative of the next move .
-
22 minutes ago, Ace said:
I have most of Richards right back to a balsa 109 but a EDF large enough for retracts off grass, would most likely need more than my largest battery limit - 4000 4s. As an avid WR supporter I would probably give a full fat EDF a miss.
That would be my reservation too . I wouldn't want to have to buy three or four large batteries that I couldn't use for my regular fleet .
In fact that is what puts me off buying the rather nice Motion RC F86 . ( also I prefer the satisfaction of making my own ) .
On the experimental side , I have modified the Arrows Marlin to carry light retracts and also turned it into a Red Arrows Hawk !
That has been flown quite a bit last year on my regular 4s 3300 packs . Its a quick bodge with a foam rear deck new canopy and false nose .
It does prove that on a budget 4s power train , you can have quite an exotic model . Duration is only about 3.5mins but it certainly can be an exciting flight !
Its probably something I will experiment with , perhaps going slightly bigger but still light and trade in some speed for endurance .
-
3
-
-
Its a conversation we have had many times . As many have said , its also a numbers game . There has to be enough numbers to justify the enormous amount of development .
The problem with that is , you can get stuck on the same subjects for ever .
However , there are two areas where the background has changed for the better (for us aero modellers ) .
Firstly , electric propulsion has meant that twin and multi engined subjects are now as viable as single engined aircraft .
Secondly , I feel that EDF models have also reached a very practical and impressive stage . Anyone that has flown the Arrows Marlin or similar will know that it offers a lot of performance for not a lot of money and still runs on 4s . I would always try to utilise what we already have in terms of batteries , to save us all a few bob .
The other interesting factor , is what we enjoy the most is not always what we dream of .
What I mean by that, is that the feed back on the simple Fw190 kit has been 110% positive with many using it as their favourite hack . How would that compare in terms of end result with say a full fat laser cut , masterclass kit of something more exotic ? It would definitely take longer to make and probably cost more as it would have balsa and more parts .
The P47 , Mossie and then Sea Fury , had reasonable hands up . But I wonder how that would compare with an F86 Sabre with optional retracts all running on 4s ?
Or at the other end of the spectrum , a classic duelling pair for next winter being the Battle of Britain (steady leccy) 109 and Spit in the format of the Tempest and 190 ?
-
On the order forms going out , there will be an option to choose decals .
Most will chose yellow spinner and "RB "
The other option will be Closterman's JFE . We couldnt get the fancy badge on the tail though .
Still, if you want a red spinner then this is the correct squadron codes .
Warbirds Replicas Hawker Tempest V -Mass Build 2024(part two) .
in Warbird kits
Posted
Just had the post today , so can say tell who havent returned yet ,
Nick Cripps - I know you're away .
Graham Bowers
Alan Hilton
Martin Collins
No panic for anyone , but keep in mind the 2 week break mentioned above .