Jump to content
Please be aware of scammers when using the Sale/Wanted forum areas

brokenenglish

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    726

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by brokenenglish

  1. brokenenglish
    From memory, there were two CAP Tiger Moth kits. One 57" span and one 70" span. I have the 57" kit, which I picked up in person from their shop at Earlston, in 1976. Founder Jim Scott was no longer alive but the business was being very well run by his two sons. 44 years later, I'm still wondering about starting the build! In my defence, I was unable to fly RC properly and confidently until about 7 or 8 years ago.  Edited By brokenenglish on 20/04/2020 18:14:57
  2. brokenenglish
    When I go out to fly with my 4 eneloops in the Tx. The meter generally reads around 5.7 to 5.8V. At the end of a long session (a couple of hours of continuous flying), the meter reading is generally round 5.2V, and I've never seen it below 5V. "Upgrading" (why?) is just an opportunity to make a mistake, and you simply end up demonstrating that you didn't really know how to do it... Why mess with a system that works perfectly? Edited By brokenenglish on 16/04/2020 10:53:20
  3. brokenenglish
    I've been using a DX6i and and DX6 for the last 5 or 6 years, with a lot of flying hours. I've always used 4 eneloops in the Tx, charged in a wall charger just before each session. I change the eneloops, by precaution, every couple of years, and I've never had the slightest problem. For me, unnecessary, theory-based, "upgrading" is just something else to go wrong, and it looks like you may have proved it. Edited By brokenenglish on 16/04/2020 08:31:56
  4. brokenenglish
    A few comments, the record plane was indeed a Smog Hog, but with the wingspan extended by 12" (from 96" to 108" ). No electric starters needed for a Taplin, they normally really do start first flick (no engine starts easier than a Taplin Twin!). I guess the record attempt stress must have made them all a bit nervous... One final point, I've always considered that Peter Cock had a helluva cheek to claim that he redesigned the Radio Queen. Looking at Col. Taplin's original plan and the ED plan, the differences are very minor indeed and, in my view, could in no way be "termed" redesign. I suspect that there may have been some question of payable royalties involved. I apologise unreservedly for writing "only a Ford Consul". My dad had a Ford Consul estate in the late fifties, and it was a super car for the period. Edited By brokenenglish on 14/04/2020 09:16:59
  5. brokenenglish
    OK, this is the video I mentioned. It was an earlier failed attempt, before the successful attempt, which used a Morgan!!! This flight only used a Ford Consul... Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:51:28 Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:52:52 Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:54:26 Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:57:04
  6. brokenenglish
    The above is only half the answer! The OP is mixing details of the cross-channel flight, mentioned above, with those of the Charles Dance & Wally Skeels world distance record, on 8th May 1960, using a Taplin Twin and driving along the A20, in Kent, controlling the plane from an open-top Morgan. There is a good video on YT showing a preparation flight for this world record. I think it may actually have been a failed attempt, prior to the successful one. I'll post it if I can find it... Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:26:21 Edited By brokenenglish on 13/04/2020 21:29:06
  7. brokenenglish
    Steve, if it's still liquid you'll be able to use it OK. Dopes and similar nitro-cellulose liquids don't "go off", they solidify. Anecdote: When film coverings became the norm, in the early seventies, I was a bit afraid of no longer being able to obtain dope, so I purchased quite a large quantity (around 20 litres of Humbrol). I used this perfectly normally over the years. It stays "as is" as long as it's left unopened, even up to 20 years or more. When you start opening the can and using it regularly, it will gradually thicken, but it just needs a bit more thinners than normal, and preferably a few drops of castor oil, and it will be perfect. Sanding sealer will be the same, except that it will probably need stirring well to distribute all the sediment. The only obvious advice is to properly close the tin each time. I use a small hammer to lightly tap the cover into the tin. Proof. The plane below was doped in 2012, using dope purchased between 1972 and 1975.
  8. brokenenglish
    Being a long-time ED fan and collector, I'd like to point out that all these "iffy" plastic bits are nothing to do with the original ED company! The company changed hands, for the first time, in the mid-sixties, and after that, the quality was never up to the superb level of the late forties and the fifties.
  9. brokenenglish
    If you want flat wings and ailerons, you've picked the wrong plane. Have you considered a Wot 4? To put it another way, imagine someone who wants a Wot 4, but he wants it vintage, so he scraps the ailerons and builds in generous polyhedral (ridiculous). IMO, the choice of model should be related to the way you want to fly... The Hepcat built and flown as intended is a super old plane.
  10. brokenenglish
    Posted by Martin McIntosh on 11/04/2020 13:30:22: I once read that you can decipher the serial numbers to pinpoint the date of manufacture. Somebody on here must have the key to this. Yes Martin, I've read that as well. I think it falls into the category of "unsupported conjecture" and, personally, I don't believe it. Many times I've tried to fathom some kind of logic in the Mills numbers, over nearly 70 years, and I've never found a coding system that remained plausible over a significant number of engines. My personal opinion is that the numbers only mean something to Mills production staff (sequential batch numbering plus sequential engine numbering or something similar), with numbers that don't have any significance other than being a unique identifier for the engine concerned. Then again, I could be wrong of course! Maybe there's something I'm missing. Edited By brokenenglish on 11/04/2020 14:40:07 Edited By brokenenglish on 11/04/2020 15:02:19
  11. brokenenglish
    Another point is that, during this discussion last evening, I examined 3 original Mills 75 compression screws, and they just have a plain blunt end (as normal), with no sign of any concave recess. ED's remark about the contra-piston fit is obviously valid. Just about all model diesels have a plain blunt end on the compression screw... If compression "unscrews" during running, it's due to the c/p fit, not to the fact that a normal comp screw is being used!
  12. brokenenglish
    Posted by bert baker on 10/04/2020 23:31:00: The black coating is a bit mottled comaired to the Irvine that looks more like a anodised coating Yes Bert, I think that's probably due to the fact that the original cases are magnesium, with a chemical coating, whereas the Irvines are a coated normal light alloy (I think, I don't possess an Irvine).
  13. brokenenglish
    Posted by Martin McIntosh on 10/04/2020 21:32:55: Not so. I have a grey case 1.3, 1949 Mk2 series 2, the same as a 1946 one I got from the same source as the original 0.75. The black certainly does not wear off. Sorry Martin, either you're a bit confused or you've been given wrong information. Here's my first model Mills 75, released in 1948. It's in perfect condition but, as you can see, the black is starting to get a bit grey. The only Mills that existed in 1946 was like this one below, except with a parallel fin profile. This photo is a 1947 engine, I haven't got a photo handy of the 1946 Series 1, but they're identical except for the fin profile. Finally, here's a 0.75 Mk II, made from 1948 to 1963 (I think!), which really does have the black coating intact, but it was purchased new by me and it's still in the box! Anyway, the bottom line is that there is no such thing as a 1946 Mills 75. If you still disagree, I'll dig out the original release adverts! (Sorry!).
  14. brokenenglish

    brokenenglish posted a gallery image in Member Albums

  15. brokenenglish

    brokenenglish posted a gallery image in Member Albums

  16. brokenenglish

    brokenenglish posted a gallery image in Member Albums

  17. brokenenglish
    Posted by Martin McIntosh on 10/04/2020 20:38:34: By late Mk1, many years ago as a youngster I inherited a grey crankcase one, 1946 at a guess. This is of identical design but the case is black, S/No. 449-35. OK Martin, just FYI, I think the Mk I Mills 75 was released in 1948, and the Mk II in 1949. Only the machined case 1.3 was released in 1946. All original Mills 75s have a black case but, if you think you had a grey one, probably some of the black coating had worn off... I'll have a look in my box of bits. Good luck anyway!
  18. brokenenglish
    Martin, unfortunately, I don't have a spare, but what do you mean by a "late Mk I"... The Mk I Mills 75 was only made for a few weeks and, in any case, I think the Mk I and Mk II compression screws are the same. If you want an exact replica, I think it will have to be specifically turned. You won't find a commercial screw with a round head as deep as the original, and the screw head then has to be drilled and tapped for the screw-in tommy bar... As mentioned above, it would be too difficult to make from scratch, but I don't think you could modify an existing, standard 4BA screw. Edited By brokenenglish on 10/04/2020 20:03:17
  19. brokenenglish
    The alloy backplate should expand more than the steel carburettor tube, so that may be a solution. I've been playing with these old ED engines since the fifties, and I've never seen this problem, maybe someone has "misused" Loctite...
  20. brokenenglish
    Posted by Wilco Wingco on 07/04/2020 19:56:05: Does anybody know how to remove the needle valve assembly from an old ED Hornet ?   Are you joking? The carburettor tube is just a push fit in the backplate. The needle just unscrews normally (obviously). The spray-bar/fuel pickup tube can't normally be separated from the carburettor tube (without breaking it). Assuming your engine is complete, original and properly assembled, just remove the fuel needle, then the tank retaining bolt. Then remove the tank. If the carburettor tube doesn't come out with the tank, it can be pulled out easily. Edited By brokenenglish on 07/04/2020 21:10:26
  21. brokenenglish
    Posted by Ron Gray on 06/04/2020 09:54:46: Posted by brokenenglish on 06/04/2020 09:11:34: If you don't want more than that, then why mess with all this open source programming nonsense? Keep it simple! Oh dear, isn't this what was said when cars came along to replace horse and carts, steam trains replaced by diesel then electric, TVs controls with cabled remote controls then wireless remote controls? Sorry Ron, but I obviously don't find your comment valid. The comparisons you give represent real progress. But flying is flying, can you explain how my Wot 4 and Hawker Hurricane would fly better using complex transmitter programming?
  22. brokenenglish
    David, I sympathise with you! The first decision you need to make is what type of plane do you want to fly? If you're happy with "normal" flying of "normal" planes (my case), you don't need ultra-high tech telemetry and the multiplicity of functions and menus that go with it. You can buy a basic but quality transmitter and a variety of inexpensive receivers, and this will enable you to fly anything from electric gliders and vintage planes up to 20 or 30cc Warbirds. Do you want more than that? Reading these forums, I get the impression that many people simply enjoy the challenge of programming complex transmitters. I've been an aeromodeller since 1948 but I only started serious RC flying 8 years ago. I'm using a Spektrum DX6 and inexpensive Orange receivers, plus a couple of Spektrum receivers that were included with the Tx. This setup is simple to use and will fly anything from my diesel powered Junior 60 up to my Laser 75 powered Hawker Hurricane, including electric and Irvine powered Wot 4s and Acrowots If you don't want more than that, then why mess with all this open source programming nonsense? Keep it simple!
  23. brokenenglish
    For the last few years, I have a partly finished CL Peacemaker that I now intend to finish as an RC version. The wing structure is finished, but not covered and with no bellcrank mount bits. "One day", when I'm feeling brave, I shall finish it with the profile fuselage, and cutouts for he Rx and elevator servo. Mounting aileron servos in the thick wing will be dead easy of course and no rudder will be needed.
  24. brokenenglish
    Excellent plans already exist, at least for the Peacemaker, Phantom and Skystreak. All on Outerzone I think.
  25. brokenenglish
    Rather than ask this kind of question, I would prefer a PAW carb. They work really well.
×
×
  • Create New...