Colin Anderson
-
Posts
344 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Posts posted by Colin Anderson
-
-
It's only ribs one and two that are cut into sections. I set the angle on the first wing half to the centre line of the dihedral brace; I didn't add the root rib to the second half until I'd lined it up with the first half and the dihedral brace. Not the normal method, but it works for me.
-
Progress so far. Motor, U/C and all internals donated from a Wot4
-
What is this answer in relation to David?
-
Posted by David perry 1 on 25/06/2016 12:09:53:
Not really. You still need primary roll or yaw control on the right stick (mode two). You can't "reserve" controls and hands.
You could of course build ailerons and fix them, but I'm guessing the aileron wing has less dihedral.
DavidHi David,
Sorry, I don't understand your reply in relation to my post above. Could you explain? 😊
-
At last I've begun to build Chapter One with the aileron wings. The first thing I noticed, using the plan from the magazine, is that the fuselage is actually 1/4" bigger than a sheet of 36" balsa! Of course 1/4" isn't going to make that much difference, but once I'd cut out the sides I added it anyway.
F1 is drawn on the plan as being 2 3/4"; measuring on the side elevation, it should be 2 3/8". I bored a hole in this to take the motor leads and a small cutout below where the motor will be to allow cooling of the esq. as I'm using the motor out of my ill fated Wot4 I had to modify its mount to fit (in its original form it's too long and too wide). I'm also using the Wot4's U/C, which is a bit taller and wider; I don't think wider will be a problem and being taller will simply increase the angle of attack at take off. The Wot4 will also be donating it's servos and snakes. I was hoping to use the tail wheel too, but haven't figured out a way to make it fit
I cut and shaped the dihedral braces as per the plan and glued them in; however, matching up the second half of the wing I found the dihedral to be way over the 1/2" specified, so I had to carefully cut them out and start again. Incidentally, the root ribs are shown cut into three sections; for the position shown on the plan for the dihedral braces, the cut positions for these ribs is drawn wrong. As I couldn't find any 4 mm spruce, I used 1/8" sq for the rear one and 5/32" X 1/8" for the two central ones. I also slightly increased the width of the trailing edge by 1/16" and recessed the rear of the ribs into it. I figure that this ought to strengthen the wing in lue of the slightly undersized spruce spars.
Other than the above, the build is progressing well. I've yet to cut the modified wing seat into the fuselage. I had thought to use a rib template and do this in advance, but the instructions say it'll be more accurate if I do it when the wing is finished. I've never done it this way before, so I hope I can get it right. I don't have one of those tools for checking wing incidence and don't know what it ought to be anyway. Presumably 0 degrees for wing and tailplane?
-
Cheers Daniel. 👍
-
Thanks Daniel,
I'm still learning to fly at present, so I need my wings to be as tough as possible. I used hard balsa in the Jocasta that I built, but the wing broke in a hard landing (read crash). The second wing with spruce spars has fared better. As the there is only 0.8 mm difference between 4 mm and 1/8 I'm wondering if it will be sufficient. If you think hard balsa would be more than adequate then I'm reasoning that 3.175 mm (1/8) spruce ought to be too.
I tried sending a PM to Nigel, but for some reason this site isn't working properly (at least not on my iPad) and many of the links are not responding.
-
The aileron wing states to use 4 mm spruce spars. I see on this thread that another builder was having trouble sourcing 4 mm spruce, but there was no update or reply to this. I'm about to commence this build and I find the same problem. What have others used? My local model shop had 1/8 spruce; would this be sufficient?
-
I still haven't managed to get around to building this model, as my suffering Wot4, which will be the donor for the power train still lives. When I do get around to it I'll be using the aileron wing. What was the answer regarding a woodpack for the aileron wing version?
-
I hope everything goes well for your maiden Glyn; as soon as we get some better weather - it's atrocious here at present (Langley). I flew mine last week for the first time in ages (I've been practicing on a Wot4); it was a lovely calm day and I really enjoyed flying the Jocasta.
This is a really tough plane. I've crashed it twice now. The first time it broke the wing in half, which I repaired; the second time I totally destroyed the wing - in both cases the fuselage remained unscathed. I've since made a new wing, with slightly less dihedral and it flies beautifully. Do remember though what Jim wrote, the Jocasta needs to be flown in on landing.
-
That looks brilliant to me, Glyn. Great colour scheme. 😊
Good luck with the maiden (or have you already done that?).
-
Surely it makes sense to just build the aileron wing and inhibit them on the TX when you want to fly on just rudder and elevator. To be honest, though, I'd agree with Nigel; flying is so much nicer with ailerons. 😊
-
Surely it makes sense to just build the aileron wing and inhibit them on the TX when you want to fly on just rudder and elevator. To be honest, though, I'd agree with Nigel; flying is so much nicer with ailerons. 😊
-
The wing is the same span an same cord, with less dihedral. The ribs are semi elliptical so, if you've already built the fuselage you'll need to modify the wing seating. It uses two servos to drive strip ailerons; the servos are set inboard, just outside of the fuselage. Hope this helps.
-
I'm a little confused here. In this thread it's stated that there is 1/2 (12.7 mm) dihedral under each wingtip of the aileron wing, which would be 1 inch (25.4 mm) total. However, in the magazine article it states 20 mm (0.8 inches) at the wingtips or 40 mm (1.57 inches) total. Which is correct?
-
Thanks Alistair. 'Course I'm feeling pretty daft now! It is indeed on the inside of the Cruiser plan; it wasn't possible to ascertain this in the shop. It would have been pretty embarrassing if I'd rung them! 😂
Cheers,
Colin.
-
I've had the plan for this model for some time and have been waiting for the aileron wing plan to appear. I've just picked up the latest issue of RCM&E in which said plan was to appear. Well, the article is in the magazine, but the wing plan isn't! I checked every copy in Smiths and Tesco's and it isn't in any of them. This is very disappointing after waiting so long. As I've managed to destroy my Wot 4 and the power train is similar I was really looking forward to building this plane. 😕
-
Hi Monty,
I believe Jim originally recommended PPPO-3548-1100 from 4Max with the PP-TESC60A esq. 4Max recommends PO-3748-900. Apparently, the original recommendation is no longer available and if you want its equivalent, it'll be PO-3748-1000.
-
Hi Glyn,
It made sense to me to cover the ailerons before fitting, so that's what I did. I glued the aileron horn plate in position prior to covering. Push some short lengths of cocktail stick or similar into the screw holes, with the points facing out. That way you can push the points through the covering as you apply it and be able to find the screw holes afterwards! I put the hinges into the ailerons after I'd covered them. It's not too difficult to find the slots by feeling for them through the covering, which you then slit, in order to insert them.
-
Glyn,
It's 1/4 inch, but it isn't square. It's more like 1/4 x 5/8 if I remember correctly.
-
Tom,
It's the new Wot4 that I bought. If the U/C mounting has been improved you could have fooled me!
I've come across the modification of the U/C that you mention, but it does seem a bit drastic.
I too have a love hate relationship with foam, coming as I do from an era when we associated anything made of plastic as cheap and nasty - and definitely in the toy category.
Dave,
Personally I don't hold with ARTFs either, although I wished I could built that accurately and neatly. If people like them and it brings them into the hobby, then who am I to complain. However, I do feel it brings in an element of chequebook mentality to the hobby. I guess it kind of depends on whether you just enjoy flying or whether you are an aeromodeller.
-
So what mods would you suggest fir the Wot4 U/C, that won't destroy the fuselage in a hard landing?
-
Not only that, Earnie, but some people must have large disposable incomes, if this is how they think! I've recently bought a Wot4 (reluctantly) to learn with. I consider over £100 a lot for a piece of mass produced foam, but at my present stage I guess it's cheaper than breaking my own built models. The first day I flew it I was most disappointed to find it virtually unflyable until our club instructor trimmed it for me and the U/C tore out on only its second landing.
My own models, although still needing trimming, were at least flyable from the start. In addition, it was only necessary to replace the saddle clamps if my landings were less than perfect; whereas on the Wot4 it takes a chunk of the fuselage when the U/C gets thumped. Sure, once trimmed they're great to fly, but they are also horrible to look at. I don't get that sense of pride I have with my own models. And, as a beginner I find them very difficult in gusty conditions. I lost all control of my Wot4 last week in 15 knot winds (forecast said 9 knots) and nearly lost the model completely.
-
I have recently bought a Wot4 to practice on, 'cause I keep damaging my own built planes (I'm still learning). I've got to admit, I'm not a fan of foam, but I do see their merits. However, these planes are not perfect. My Wot4 was horribly out of trim, making it practically unflyable; a problem I've not had with my home built models (which require trim, but at least are flyable). I tore the U/C from my Wot4 on only its second landing - hard, but not that hard. This seems to be a weak point of the Wot4 and quite disappointing. My own planes take hard landings in their stride, but on the few occasions when the U/C really takes a beating, the saddle clamps simply break; unlike the Wot4, where the U/C takes a chunk of fuselage with it! 😕
I much prefer balsa models, built from plans or kits. Flying is fun (no matter what the plane is made of or who built it), but to me, the hobby is aero modelling and that means building your own plane. If we are to keep this hobby alive and keep our model shops thriving, we need to get building! 😊
Chapter One - RCM&E's build-a-plane series
in RCM&E Plan Builders
Posted
For some reason these images don't show up in my previous post Hopefully this time they will. This is Chapter One with the aileron wing Progress so far. Motor, U/C and all internals donated from a Wot4
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:31:12
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:37:16
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:38:38
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:39:44
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:42:51
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:43:45
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:44:54
Edited By Colin Anderson on 16/07/2016 22:45:56