Mike Healy

Now almost 2 years down the line due to illness getting in the way of building, I am now on the final stages of the construction of the Stearman - thank you for all your comments incidentally. I decided to go for the Powerbox Mercury SRS with my Spektrum DX9 transmitter - now all set up with dual batteries and 4 Spektrum DSMX satellites - very nice bit of kit but I believe in 'you get what you pay for'. Only problem is - the tranny (despite being 'bound' and confirmed on both Tx and the four satellites) will not speak to each other. I have obviously missed something so terribly obvious that I am almost too embarrassed to ask the question - 'what do I have to do with the Tx to prepare it, apart from binding it, i.e. do I have to assign anything or allocate switches etc, in order for the servos to operate?' And Yes, I have read the very good manual (photo enlarged by a factor of three!) over and over, and plugged servos into all 15 of the servo sockets, but the servos stay stubbornly at rest. Any ideas before my mentor comes to do the test flight and thinks I am a total plonker ?

This is a pretty simple query - the satellite r/x's with the product reference 9645 seems to be the only one for the product (I have some that are a few years old when I first had DSM, and newer ones since I have also had DSMX) - question is, should they all work with the full range of Spektrum primary receivers?

You can probably all stop panicking, so I understand - things are in hand that a highly respected BRITISH retailer will soon be appointed sole Horizon service and repair agent. From the horses mouth by the way. And his missus.

Hi Steve - the Twin Star was the original model that started the twin-engine mass popularity back when I used to go to model trade fairs in this country (Sandown etc) and bought one because I was struggling with a semi-scale Mosquito - the Twinstar was a revelation - it actually flew hands off from the first launch. It was really good fun and totally forgiveable. About a dozen club mates bought them as well, and we even had a 'Twinstar Mass Slot'at one of our very early Woodspring Airshows. OK, so you're not going to do multi-aerobatics with aTwinny, but at the price we had a great deal of fun with them, all daft and outrageously silly, but we had FUN. I still have my original one with the Speed 400 can motors (well, not actually the originals - they are a bit like Trigger's broom - I burned out a couple over the last twenty years) - wet grass gives perfect touch and goes, take-offs as well and so easy to hand launch. Never tried the newer ones with brushless motors and Li-Po's, but have seen them and they are exactly the same as the originals - only much better! Get one, but please don't put an undercarriage on it and pretend it's an Islander!!

Several interesting points raised - some clarification obviously needed - (1) I registered with LMA as soon as I contemplated building the Stearman (2) I registered the build when I considered it likely that with a 7 cylinder radial engine it would be very near or over the 20kg limit (3) I have been building and designing model aircraft since a Fox 35 was considered a HUGE engine (4) My current squadron includes 7 quarter scale aircraft (warbirds, biplanes, golden era, light aircraft etc) both muti I/c and electric - so with respect, I am not exactly a twit when it comes to structural and stress issues. Balsa USA also know a thing or two about large model design. Despite my background, I am completely new to dual-redundancy systems, and as such, need information and some guidance to avoid wasting money on unnecessary or unsuitable equipment. Strangely enough, information is amazingly hard to get from all of the obvious sources - like books, forums, web etc. - so I need to ask people who Already use the stuff, hence my original posting. I have obviously researched Powerbox Systems - their website and forum are really good, I presume - if you speak German, which I don't - neither did the guy on the Horizon stand at Modellbau Dortmund speak English, so I got really mixed information - not good when I am considering a spend of several hundred more pounds. Nexus, however, were very helpful, and I now have a plan put forward by them which will do all I want - hopefully - utilising their new Mercury unit, which appears to do everything I want all in one box, plus a few satellite r/x's - result!! I will post again when I get further on - thanks for all the comments, and apologies for my inadequate information. Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 25/04/2016 18:37:39

Having now gone 'Large', I am finding it difficult to get accurate guidance on the 'dual-redundancy' stipulation as required by the CAA for models over 20kg. I am building a 1/3 Balsa USA Stearman - nice simple 4 channel plus smoke, single hi-power Savox servos on all control surfaces, Spectrum DX9 Black, and a AR9110 9 channel r/x. I thought (wrongly - it appears) that I needed two battery supplies only, but overlooked the fact that 'dual-redundancy' means just that, and I need two receivers as well - whoops! Having just returned from Modellbau in Dortmund, I was able to see the Powerbox Evolution Spectrum, which seemed to be ideal for my purpose - it already has a built-in Spectrum 9 channel r/x - also twin battery ports. Unfortunately, I have very poor German, and there was a slight problem with my ability to totally be sure of what their rep was telling me (!) - it appears that this reasonably priced Powerbox will do everything I need when connected in line with my AR9110 r/x. Is there anyone who can support this assumption for me - if so, how goes the set-up and wiring - I also want to include the Powerbox 3e Gyro - any advice or guidance on this little gizmo? All help most welcome.

Hi Cymaz - Mike Healy here! I have built two of these in the (distant) past - both excellent flyers, and can be built to whatever scale degree you fancy. First one was at least twenty years ago, ASP 108 two-stroke powered, best model I ever had and flew it for years and years, then gave it to my lad with another new ASP as the other one was knackered. Then missed it terribly, and bought another one - finished in the Rothmans colour scheme, this one was more detailed, with decent rigging and an ASP 120 four stroke this time - it was OK, but I never really 'bonded' with this one, and sold it to a club-mate who flew it in the Wessex Scale league quite successfully - I think he still does on occasions. I have another one - still in the box, unstarted for when I get all nostalgic again, and my mate in Provence (Al LeRhone, AKA Taffy Davies) is currently building on as well - as he has been for the last 5 years - he is very fussy, but easily distracted; We have a pair of NIB OS 120e's for these, and I know Taffy has had to virtually re-design the front end to accommodate the tank and engine on his. If and when I can figure out how to post pictures on this blog, I will try to send a couple of to the forum. Have Fun! PS - I have posted a message on the Gipsy Moth thread for you.

Hi Cymaz - Is it only us two who have persevered with this 'challenging' (aka 'orrible) product? I can understand it if we are as it is without doubt the worst model I have ever built/assembled - poor old Boddo would be turning in his cloud if he knew what Ripmax and their far eastern associates had made of his design! Anyway, enough griping - is yours performing well? I hope so and am interested in your blog. Mine is continuing to be a real pain, and is now a labour of hate/love and determination to get it in the air. I have , hopefully, solved the problem of the fuel system with help from the W.O.O. and a Cline hopper tank and Quickfire regulator - it works on the test stand with the tank 6" below the engine, so it should be OK in the Gipsy; I have installed AGS2 x 2 glow ignition system, although the Diastar seems to run pretty well by itself. All rigging and ancillaries now deposited safely in the trash can and replaced at no small expense with proper M3 clevises and cable ends, with Sakuma 7 strand nylon coated fishing trace - really good quality and a £3.99 pack has done all the rigging, plus half another reel for the control cables which are a larger gauge. Now, tell me Cymaz, what dihedral did you use, and how did you do it? With the model assembled on a flat surface, the wings had virtually no dihedral without the flying and landing wires - so, as the wing fixings are very firm, quite a lot of tension has to be made on the landing wires to lift the wings to what I have deduced to be a sort of reasonable amount of dihedral - I have used 4 degrees, which is approx. 4 and a tad mm at the tips. Ripmax, bless 'em, only tell you to ensure dihedral is the same on both wings, but completely omit to tell you how much! And another thing (which I note you also appear to have missed from your photos) - the steel brackets for the forward wing mountings are in the wrong place - I thought that it was a poor design to have them held by the wing mounting bolts anyway, as it all falls apart when you de-rig - but hey, there are threaded inserts just outboard of the forward root lugs on the wing which are specifically for the mounting brackets to be fixed - you just have to find the (covered) holes, which are on the top surface of the lower wings and (obviously) on the bottom surface of the top wings - I now have to shorten the flying wires of course! I'd had enough last night, so I am about to go and look at the rear wing fixings to make sure there are no more hidden holes for wayward brackets. I have also made up a couple of jury-struts from 12 x 3 mm dural to keep the rigging and wings safe when folded back, the two 3mm holes set apart the same distance as the threaded inserts on the fwd cabane and fuselage. I am still worried about the weight, and might have to stick the 5 cell Rx battery down aft. Apologies for this rather wordy missive, but it seems we are alone in this quest! Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 18/11/2015 13:00:02

You may be interested in my own Chippie built from this plan when it first came out (was it that long ago, really?) It was not what I would call an easy build, challenging more like, but very satisfying. This was in the days when servos were not throw away items like today, so economies dictated a single aileron servo centrally mounted with Sullivan gold rods to bellcranks to the control surfaces - all Futaba S128's if I recall - the standard 4 cell ni-cad, and (luxury, here!) a brand new Laser 75 up front. I flew it for many years, regularly, broke the cowl frequently because of the bendy undercarriage, and other minor bits of hangar rash. It was epoxy-glass sheathed, with solartex flying surfaces, and in RAF trainer colours. I loved it. Many years on, I sold it to a fellow club member - a very experienced display pilot, who was looking for a scale 'hack' for everyday flying. He replace the virtually knackered laser with a 150, replaced the single aileron servo with outboard mounted S148's and bought a new cowl. That was about six or seven years ago, and he is still flying it as his favourite model, day in, day out - it has had probably had approaching a thousand flights in its near 30 year history, and is still much admired. John flies it beautifully - and it still has the wobbly undercarriage!

Thanks for all that Cymaz - it seems that we have both arrived at very much the same conclusions with the exception of the engine - I really do want to fly it with the Diastar - it seems sacrilege not to - but when I have had enough of the heavyweight, I shall probably drop in the GF40 as I have already made a firewall box for it - less fuss, more economical, same power and probably about 2 kilos lighter - should fly better as well - won't sound as good, though! I took an easier way out with the lower hinge points however - I installed the Elevator servo and large horn sideways in the compartment behind the existing rear hatch, as I knew that I should require tail ballast, so I simply cut away the black solartex and made a suitable hatch cover - I can also put the battery and switchgear in there if needed, giving me lots of options; It also makes the installation of the pivot bolts much easier, either upright or down facing - I have also had cause to grind down a decent allen key from a former project - seems a shame to waste it! I shall be up to the tackle shop in town on Tuesday to get some slightly lighter grade of trace - I think that 90lb is a bit overkill! I have to finish this model soon as I am beginning to tire of it - also, I need the workspace and I need it to keep in practice for next years project whilst I build it - mum's the word, but it's big, got two wings and a radial - keep you posted, Cheers, Mike

I've been 'off-air' for a month or two, but this wretched Gipsy Moth build is really doing my head in - one problem after the other. I believe the reason for this 'ARTF' version being withdrawn was the fact that once you get beyond opening the box and being seduced by all the blingy bits, the actual assembling, design (not Boddo's, I am sure) and quality control/inspection, it is a load of rubbish, and typical of the very early ARTF's - I believe we have all mostly lost sight of just how horrible they could be. Not to be (nearly) put off by this, and believing (hoping?) that the basic Boddo design still lurks somewhere therein, I have, and am still, persevering with the build (which it now is as so much modification has been made) and wonder whether you have any insight into the following queries? Having scrapped the awful closed loop tagging and made more acceptable items from nylon covered trace, I am about to trial fit them to the (hard) points - the minor ones firstly, for the four short cabane wires - can you tell me whether you found any inbuilt support in front of the windshields to attach the brackets? If, as I suspect, not, how did you overcome the problem? Regarding the rear lower wing pivot bolts - did you mount the 3mm screws from inside the fuselage, or through the wing lugs, then the bent bracket and thence into the fruselage secured with the nyloc nut? The little arch shaped cutouts at the lower side edge of the fuselage are quite handy, and as has been already mentioned, can be easily made to look like foot-holds to the non-purists - or covered over if you are! The accuracy of the wing fixing spar and pivot holes leave a lot to be desired - anything between 1 and 3mm out, which as far as I can see means opening out (ovaling) the pre-drilled holes in both components - not ideal, but unless a complete rebuild and re-covering of wings and fuselage is considered, is the only option I think. On a more happy note - the IL300 has been fired up on the test stand and sounds absolutely gorgeous - it already ticks over at 1200 rpm, and opens up to a very sporty growl - I am still working on the fuel delivery system with a Cline regulator pump, and a Quickfire hopper tank to overcome the height variance between the tank and the carburettor - but that's another issue which when (if) solved, I shall make a further post. Finally, is yours flying as well as anticipated, and have you had any more problems?