Rob Ashley
-
Posts
355 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Everything posted by Rob Ashley
-
Posted by Phil B on 15/11/2019 08:13:34: I know a guy who uses metal guitar strings about 3 foot long, probably the top E string! He gets the right tension by tuning it! He can play status quo songs while it's warming up! 😜 - Phil that made me laugh for ages.....
-
Pete, The Vanessa rig does work well but can be a bit fiddly with heavy models plus you need a strong hook to suspend the model from. It can also damage trailing edges if you are not careful with your positioning of the ropes. For heavier models that you can't use your fingers for you could use some kitchen scales, a tape measure and a calculator (or an excel spreadsheet) - this is the most accurate way (to the nearest mm) and indeed the same method used on full size. It is very easy to do - if you are interested please PM me I can send you a document explaining how to. Best Rob
-
You have made a very nice job of your Eagle there Anders!
-
Certainly could be Martin... I still lead into a banked turn with rudder/yaw pedal due my flying career starting in gliders... Best Rob
-
However, the seeming majority of pilots trained on lightweight foam models and taught to use glide approaches may disagree - at least until they move on to a higher wing loaded warbird and wonder why all the runway is behind them! Edited By Martin Harris on 19/07/2019 16:19:3 Well said Martin - I guess the argument is then do you try to use the same techniques for all models or do you use 1 method for one (e.g. foamy sport) and a different technique for another (e.g. heavier warbird). For me in the interests of primacy (when things go wrong and panic sets in you revert to the first thing you are taught) I teach the one method.. There are many documents around that have arguements for both methods, although it is the accident rate that drove the recommendations to the method we now teach. Sadly most things in aviation take an accident to change things especially documents or techniques. I often quote to my compatriots/pupils that "the day you stop learning about flying is the day you should stop". Techniques, ideas and understanding evolve all the time especially in the flight test world, howeever it is your students who often 'teach' you a great deal about flying, especially when they get something wrong.... I also agree with you that models react to power changes quicker than full-size due to inertia and as you say with foamies this isnt a realy problem but with higher wing loadings it really is...
-
Hi Peter - that's very interesting and a good indicator of how we viewed engine reliability 50 years ago to the way we do now..... I think you are right and probably does explain the difference. It might also be where the cut and glide method transposed to model flying too. I guess it's like most things - if it works is it wrong?
-
Hello Martin, not really, it is applicable for all. Although I have seen both methods taught, in my experience the power for height method leads to a porpoising style approach and more heavy landings and is therefore not the preferred method. Interestingly, the use of power to adjust height has been a factor in a number of approach accidents and is not recommended. This is because that using power to adjust height takes much longer to see the height change than it will when using the elevator - given that the elevator is there to adjust pitch attitude the response is almost immediate - but as the speed slows then more power is required. From my own experience flying full-sze for 30 odd years from light prop, through jets to helicopters, they all use the same technique. During my own flying instructional experience of 15 years ranging from ab-initio pupils to experimental test pilots we use the elevator (pitch) to control approach angle technique is used as it is a safer method. For interest, if we consider an aircraft in its approach configuration (i.e. stable approach angle to the runway touchdown point and lined up on the centreline) maintaining the angle with elevator means that the pilot only has to alter the approach attitude into the landing attitude by a gentle flare then close the throttle to get touchdown - much less to do on the elevator. Invariably the two controls (pitch and power) are intrinsically linked on the final approach. Rob
-
Posted by Peter Christy on 18/07/2019 12:28:41: I was always taught to control speed with the elevator and height with the throttle. There may be exceptions during aerobatics, but it works very well in circuit flying! -- Pete Interesting Pete, In the full size word we teach that elevator controls the glidepath angle and throttle the speed. So on final approach we point the nose at the touchdown point from a given distance and height (thus giving the correct angle) and maintain that sight picture position with elevator and then keep your approach speed with throttle/thrust levers. I fly my model approaches like that too, although it is more difficult to judge airspeed of a model when it is flying toward you. Rob
-
Thanks for the links Andrew - most useful. Up till now I have carved wooden plugs and hadn't thought about using pink foam, but i think pink foam it is for my next project canopy. I was also considering making plaster of paris molds for some of my in-service canopies so if any damage occurs I can replicate another using the methods in the articles. Rob
-
Big Boy lightweight filler is great too. It is a two part filler that sands really easily like p38 to a glass like finish - it's used for car body work and it is more durable than the one strike stuff. Great for filling edges on removable parts like canopy hatches etc .
-
Peter, A little chilly but the only thing flying at my club today was my 13 year old Tequila Sunrise. She handled to snow really well, just brushing it aside on take-off until she sat on top the crust then lifted off effortlessly. She stopped quite quickly when 3 point landing as soon as she broke the crust layer..I had thought I would need skis but again this fabulous design proved me wrong. The OS 32 purred like a kitten all morning and after 6 flights I gave in a went home... Cracking day.
-
-
-
Blimey, fair play to you mate with your condition. Sounds like proxxon is the right choice for you Richard.
-
Agreed Pat. Axminster do great tools. My bandsaw is an Axminster - very sturdy and accurate and cuts everything but they do cost.
-
100% a bandsaw. It will do most things: curves, cross cut, mitre cut and rip to name a few. As the other chaps have said use a narrowish blade for tight curves. It doesn't need to be a big saw either, but think about the throat depth as this will generally determine your max width of cut. For inside cuts a hand held fretsaw is hard to beat. Best of luck.Edited By Rob Ashley on 31/01/2019 21:10:09
-
Clearly a well designed model Peter. Well done..
-
Very sad news to hear of BEB's final flight. My sincere condolences to the family.
-
Nice looking finish Paul. Well done you. Hope you get the weather.
-
Nice finish Jim..
-
Photo credit to Steve L. Onto the 1st of 2 Lancs we go. Edited By Rob Ashley on 19/10/2018 12:54:01
-
-
After some more test flying I have settled on a CG of 100mm from the inboard LE which is 5mm aft of the position on the scaled up plan (mine is an enlarged version and is 68" span which, if memory correctly serves, is a 25% scale increase). I think it can come further aft a little but she copes well with the balance in the current position. For those who are considering building one - I would and you won't regret it. Others have been built and modified to look more like a Tigercat and have been fitted with retracts. For me it was my first electric build following a blown IC cylinder liner so I kept it as per the plan. For those interested my setup is: 2 x Turnigy D3536/8 1450kv motors. 2 x Hobbyking 60A ESCs - these are a little OTT as the motors run at 31A full chat. 2 x 3S battery 3000 and 3300 mAh Lipo (1 in each nacelle) which give between 8-9mins duration. 1 x Rx battery in the nose to help CG and provide power to servos. AUW was 2.9kg and with 2 blade 10x5E props the static thrust is 3.54kg. She will keep going vertically. I generally fly at 40% throttle and can loop from level flight and do all sport aeros from that power setting. The build was straight forward, although I needed to re-shape the nacelles after switching from IC to elec. Probably the only item that I remember from the build was bending the nose of the fus at the front but a SLEC jig helped here. I also built a plug for my own canopy but it was pretty easy really. Rob
-
-
Well done Peter, very glad to hear your efforts have paid off with a great flying model..
