David Ovenden

Been doing a bit more thinking about the project, partly inspired by finding the photos of the model I saw fly at OW in 1983. The model was also featured on the cover of RCM&E the same year. I found that too. Given the balsa shortage situation I dug about and found I had more wood in stock than I thought, and have all I need for the project except some lite ply that I will use to replace birch ply for lightly stressed components. The plan shows one piece wings which are bolted on to the fuselage. But my current thinking is to build separate centre sections with plug on panels each side. Like this it would be much quicker to assemble. It also led me to contemplate making interchangeable electric and glow lower wing centre sections. Best of both worlds? The idea would be to make 2 identical basic lower wing centre sections at the building stage . I would finish the electric version and test fly. If the model is a success I could build the nacelles and fit glow motors to the second centre section. Or more wild still. Make interchangeable bolt on "cassettes" to fit either the electric motor and mount module or the i/c engine plus tank & throttle servo unit into the nacelle? I've done it once before on a Hawker Tomtit and it all worked fine. Model is still flying after 20 years. The advantage of this is that I only one centre section to make and one undercarriage unit to build. But how to make the engine nacelles suitable flexible to accomodate everything? I'm working on ideas for this. Yes,  there would be issues of balance (without the 2 lipo packs) and trim (different power types and output characteristics) to factor in. But the ailerons are in the top wing only and one cold have a different model memory for each set up? And then  I could chose between the sweet sound of two four strokes in synch and the plug and fly convenience of electric. At least at the moment we have time to work on new projects/ideas when we can't go flying. Edited By David Ovenden on 08/11/2020 08:20:42 Edited By David Ovenden on 08/11/2020 08:22:08

Martin Thanks for the link. You are right, all the info is in the other thread so no need to go over it all again.

I need a lot of 1/8 x 3/8 balsa strip for stringers on the next model. I don't have that size in stock but I do have some hard 1/8" balsa sheet. I am tempted to use this to cut my own stripwood. What is the best balsa stripping tool you have used? I am tempted to make one; but if there is a good one easily available that might be easier. What is your experience of the various commercial cutters?

Chris, I am in no doubt about the quality of Laser engines, nor the huge advantage of having a matched pair. I am currently just investigating my options. I have not entirely ruled out using electric motors.Though I do love the sound of four strokes! Jon's comments re the Enya have been read and taken on board.

Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 03/11/2020 08:21:59: Ah ok Eric, the pun didnt make it through the internet. As for the enya 53 they are really good engines. I have one in an airsail tomahawk and despite being completely clapped out it runs well. Finding a TN version might be tricky as most, including mine, were air bleed. True Jon, But new TN carbs are available as a "spare part" so I could possible upgrade an older model to a TN carb.

Whilst a pair on "matched" Laser 70s would be amazingly good. A cheaper option for me would be another of these. Enya 53-4C . A good one with the TN twin needle carb and black rocker cover would be great! Anyone got one?

Hi Jon Looking to do the fixed version to save weight. There is not much room in the nacelles (once a fuel tank is fitted) either! 2 x 70 lasers would be nice. Are they in stock? Edited By David Ovenden on 02/11/2020 08:37:47

Looking to build a smaller version than this though! Curtiss Condor Edited By David Ovenden on 02/11/2020 08:32:42 Edited By David Ovenden on 02/11/2020 08:39:00

Back in the late 80s I bought a Curtiss Condor plan from the USA. I had seen a model flown at Old Warden scale day and really liked the look if it. I have been meaning to built it all this time. it has been a long-standing project. Now with lock-down looming it seems time to actually do it. The model is an 82" span twin engine biplane model of the 30s airliner. Originally designed by R Schweizer in 1970 there is room for some design improvement and lightening, but basically it is a good plan. Originally designed for two .40  2-stroke engines. The version I saw fly in the 80s was "just about" powered by two 1st version OS 40 4 strokes. But how to power my version in 2020? All up weight should be around 5kg I have 2x Saito 45 four strokes I could use. However, one is fitted in a model I regularly fly (Hawker Tomtit) I do have an Enya 53 4 stroke that would be great to use. It is powerful and has a better profile to fit in the cowls - with rear mounted cams and pushrods. But I only have one, and they are no longer available. I could go electric and have several 4S 3700 lipo packs that might be suitable. However what motor to use. I imagine a 42mm can with about 700kv would be about right with an 11" prop? My usual SK3 motor brand seems to have very limited availability at the moment. Choices choices! So glow or sparks and which engine to use? Edited By David Ovenden on 02/11/2020 08:24:35 Edited By David Ovenden on 02/11/2020 08:40:06

Yes, looking at the recent posts I would say its time to start a new thread about "alternatives to balsa" or "building with foam board"

Peter Thanks for the info. My preliminary settings for rudder and elevator throws were pretty close to yours, so that's good news. I've still not sorted the ailerons but will see what they are like in due course. Currently, I've just been setting up the computer mixing to be ready. Rich, I have taken over someone else's build of the Hutson Tiger Moth.. They had done a great job building from plans and laser cut parts, but decided to leave the hobby. I was fortunate to pick up the project. So I can't claim much credit for the build. However, as requested, here are a couple of photos of the plane. As you can see its, a work in progress. Still need to complete the wings. Regards David

Hi Peter, Have you changed the throws at all on your model in the light of 3 years of flying the model? Or are they unchanged from the original values you quoted? I am building a Duncan Hutson/Traplet 1/4 scale model and have set up scale(ish) aileron movement with the upward movement of the down-going aileron at full stick travel. However I have used a computer mix to achieve this, rather than copying the full-size mechanical method. Regards David

Still some OS F plugs available from eBay sellers in Hong Kong etc. Prices vary but some seem not too bad if you buy a card of 12. Share amongst clubmates?

John, yes it is for a 1/4 scale Tiger Moth. It's fun to try things out. The advantage of an electronic mix "solution" is that it easy to change the values to evaluate how effective it is.

Saw this on ITV news. Seems NHS would like to use drones to speed up Covid-19 testing. NHS drones

Thanks for your answers chaps. However, what I wanted to achieve is more than simple differential. On the Tiger Moth the "downward" aileron starts to travel back upwards again at full stick deflection. This is to reduce adverse yaw problems. On the real thing it is because the aileron pushrod is driven from a circular disc on the bottom surface of the wing. The offset means that the disc goes past the 12 o clock position and starts to push the down-going aileron back up again at full stick deflection. To achieve this by non-mechanical means I wanted to mix an aileron curve that mimics this "upward flick" at the end of the travel. I have just spent a good hour experimenting and have succeeded in achieving what I wanted. I have added a mix curve "aileron to aileron" that reduces the throw one way and then sends the servo in the opposite direction nearly back to zero at full stick deflection. I added a second mix "Aileron to Ch6" that creates the same effect but in the opposite direction. So the both aileron servos have normal upward travel. The downward direction has differential with the "upward flick" at the end of the throw. Where I went wrong was assuming that one mix would be the opposite of the other. Of course, because one is mixing aileron to aileron it is not the same curve as mixing one channel to another. It also helped to disable the flap switch! Thanks for your interest and quick replies. Edited By David Ovenden on 17/10/2020 15:05:25 Edited By David Ovenden on 17/10/2020 15:08:50

HI, I feel foolish asking this question , but I'm stuck. I want to replicate the extreme aileron differential movement you find on a DH Tiger Moth. I would like to mix aileron to aileron with a curve that gives normal movement in one direction and less throw in the opposite direction with reducing movement (returning towards neutral) as full stick movement is reached. I then want to inverse mix this curve to channel 6 so the opposite aileron servo performs the appropriate movement. Sounds simple but I can't seem to get set it up on my JR XG14 transmitter. Can anyone give a bit more info on setting up the relevant curve mix on an XG14 tx? Thanks Edited By David Ovenden on 17/10/2020 13:25:52

Personally I feel it makes perfect sense to have a screening programme for prostate cancer. I quote from the Prostate Cancer UK website. Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the UK. More than 47,500 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer every year – that's 129 men every day. Every 45 minutes one man dies from prostate cancer – that's more than 11,500 men every year. 1 in 8 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in their lifetime. Around 400,000 men are living with and after prostate cancer. The number of people diagnosed with prostate cancer has been increasing over the last 10 years. This might be because more people are having PSA tests and the population is getting older. The cost of treatment for late diagnosed PC is very high and the suffering it causes to those with the disease and their families is not something that can counted in monetary terms. Early detection would save the NHS money, time, resources and avoid so much unnecessary suffering. Whilst a single PSA test alone may be not give conclusive results. A yearly test would show up any rapid change in level . A DRE examination doesn't take long and gives more information. Adding an MRI scan in cases causing concern and you would pick up so many prostate cancer cases at an early treatable stage. No one questions the efficacy of offering women regular breast screening with a mammograph and interpretation of the results by a trained specialist. Between 6 in 1,000 (for 45-49yrs) and 15 in 1,000 (for 70+yrs) screenings detect a cancer. But that picks up around 18,000 cancers a year. 40% of those detected are small and impossible to detect otherwise. So how many lives are being saved and how much suffering is being avoided and how much long-term, painful and costly treatment is being avoided through that process? So for us men, why on earth is a similar regular screening programme not available. The technology is there, it could save lives. Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer, and can be treated if found in time. I've been on the receiving end, as have many others on this thread, of various treatments to deal with PC that was not diagnosed quickly enough. We need to make our voice heard and push for a proper regular screening programme for PC. It is not a "waste of money" but is essential to avoid unnecessary suffering, costly treatments and preventable early deaths.

Martin Have sent you a PM

Hi Martian For me the TURP procedure has been very positive. I've had no leakage issues or other negative impacts from the op. The op was not painful (general anisthetic) but the 2 days afterwards attached to a cathetar were not all that much fun, Actually the removal of the catheter was the worst part. After that though it was fine. Had some blood in the urine for a while (about 2 weeks IIRC) but it soon cleared. No getting up in the night any more and just about back to normal "peeing" It may not be the same for everyone of course. I can only speak for my experience. Edited By David Ovenden on 07/10/2020 21:16:42

Posted by Basil on 06/10/2020 17:22:16: Martian, the Docs words were its not positive, whenquestioed further he says but its not negative. Yes it can mess with the old brain matter, but I tend to err on the side of Negative , as theDRE was good, if thats the correct term. Just pee'd off with the almost constant urge to and journeys to pee. Bas Bas , might be worth talking to your doctor about whether a T.U.R.P. (Transurethral Resection of the Prostate) procedure might be appropriate in your case. I was offered this and it made a huge positive difference. 3 days after the op all peeing problems were gone! Obviously everyone's situation is different though, so it might not be suitable for everyone. Might be worth asking about though? All the best David