Geoff S

OH, goodie. I have a tame reviewer I was wondering if I should make the 80 mile round trip to Gliders in Newark so I could see before buying but if your report is good I may not bother. IIRC their price is similar to Inwoods, also posted. I have planning permission from the management so that's a plus On the small Riot I replaced the soft axles with high tensile 3mm cap head bolts because, despite my thistle down light landing technique, they were bending. No trouble since. Perhaps might be worth a look, especially if you're thinking of fitting bigger wheels. Don't keep us in the dark. Geoff

I know, Peter I am just pulling your leg a little. Those pilots, like the rest look fine. In fact a lot more than fine. I went into Staples in Derby just now and got the plan copied onto 2 A1 sheets. The guy was very helpful and the copies are really good and on much heavier paper than the original. He said I was the second one today to get a plan copied and he thought it was the same one, so I guess there's someone else in the Derby area building a Ballerina. The cost was a very reasonable £2.50/sheet ie £5 for both sides. I was half expecting to be challenged about copyright but there was no suggestion of that. Onwards and (hopefully) upwards. Geoff

.. but it is undoubtedly a gorgeous model, Peter. That dummy engine really sets it off and distracts attention from the diminutive pilots Geoff

Posted by Peter Miller on 29/12/2015 08:35:36: Posted by i12fly on 29/12/2015 00:17:43: I see you have an Assagai pilot Peter, I've got one exactly the same and he's sitting waiting to go in Ballerina. Pity that Assagai isn't still making them, they were excellent, I've got 4 including a special pair of WWII Germans who he adapted specially for me so they did not look like twins. A very helpful fellow I have several. They were costing me a fortune but worth every penny. The best pilots that I have ever seen and beautifully painted. They must be OK if they get your planes up and down successfully I tend to rely on Pete but his pilots occasionally crash my models so obviously they're not as good as the ones you employ. If I have one minor criticism about the appearance of the Ballerina it is that the very handsome occupant of the cockpit seems to have a lot in common with Tom Cruise ie he's a bit small. I think I'll fit a beefier guy to crash mine. Geoff

Posted by john stones 1 on 28/12/2015 21:35:12: Last fella that tried to hold back the tide did quite well for himself John Actually Canute wasn't trying to hold back the tide at all. He was demonstrating to his sycophants that he wasn't all powerful. I suppose that's poor Peter in the face of drawing tracers wishing to be designers Geoff

Not really silly. If you used the plans when they were cut into their separate parts the first time you can do it for the second. When I stuffed my original Limbo Dancer kit built model I scratch built another from the plans and I could build a third if I need to. All the kit plans I have are single-sided anyway. It's only free plans that are printed on both sides that I've ever used. Are the plans that are bought separately the same? I would hope they're printed on heavier grade paper and preferably on one side only. Geoff

Posted by Delta Foxtrot on 28/12/2015 16:21:52: Posted by Geoff Sleath on 28/12/2015 14:16:45: Looks pretty violent! Incidentally, is that Ratcliffe on Soar power station in the background? Geoff Yes indeed, well spotted. Are you a member at LEMAC or just keen on power stations! No, but my wife was the station superintendent's secretary back in 1967 when it first opened and we could see it from our bedroom window in Sawley. I could also see it from my desk at work in Sin Fin and used to gauge the progress of spring by noting where the sun rose each morning against the cooling towers. I've cycled past LEMAC many times as well on Long Lane and one of my cycling buddies (Ian Horne) used to be a member there long ago. We now live in Belper and I fly at Ashbourne. I wasn't interested in model aeroplanes back in '67 it was all motor bikes. Geoff

Posted by McG 6969 on 28/12/2015 17:24:05: Posted by Geoff Sleath on 28/12/2015 13:43:28: I'll probably adjust the dimensions of F10 slightly to fit the tailplane. Geoff Could you please clarify this, Geoff. Thanks Chris Brussels, Belgium Well, I'll assemble the fuselage sides (after fitting the ply doublers) with formers at the front right up to F6. It looks like F1 to F6 is parallel and tapers for the cowl but we're interested in the back right now and in any case my front will be different from the drawing because I'm going with an electric motor. OK, I will now draw the two sides together and clamp them together at the back without bothering to fit formers F7 F8 F9 or F10 at this stage. I then slide F7 through F9 into the fuselage where they are a snug fit but don't distort the shape. Hopefully they'll be very near the positions shown on Peter's plan. Now F10 needs to be exactly where it's shown on the plan so I'll adjust its width to fit snugly in that position, probably using my pre-cut tailplane as an indicator to make sure it's right. All this is because F7, F8 and F9 are only there to stiffen the fuselage and don't determine the position of anything else like F6 (wing trailing edge) and F10 (tailplane and fin) do. Bear in mind this only works if you, like me, are using a building jig which shows up if you're inadvertently building a banana. This won't work if you build in the conventional way by glueing the formers in place on one fuselage side and then mating it to the other. Though I suppose it would work if you build over the plan but that's difficult because the top view is split in two. I'm a great fan of SLEC's fuselage jig and I've used it a lot. I even built a boat hull with it last spring. I hope that's clear and I haven't committed any sin that will bring Peter down on my back like a raging lion on a gazelle Geoff

Looks pretty violent! Incidentally, is that Ratcliffe on Soar power station in the background? Geoff

I'll be building the fuselage in my SLEC jig. The actual position of the intermediate formers isn't that critical if you position F6 accurately (it sets the wing position and then join the sides at the tail you can fit the formers to make the curve of the back part smooth. F10 needs to be positioned accurately as it fixes the position of the tailplane now that Peter has clarified that but the others (F7, F8, F9) aren't particularly critical to a few mm. It's the smooth curve (or straight line) that is. I'll probably adjust the dimensions of F10 slightly to fit the tailplane. Geoff

I certainly cut up plans to make the build easier but take care that no detail is lost and I save the plan anyway rolled up in its separate parts. I don't see it as anything but sensible because it avoids damaging it by continual folding etc. Difficult to do with plans printed on both sides of the paper like the free ones in the magazine. Geoff

For many years we used to spend Christmas in Patterdale YHA which is just a mile or so away from Glenridding which has been badly affected by flooding. I'm glad we didn't go there this year. We've had some very wet Christmases there and once, in desperation for some outdoor activity, cycled round Ullswater and back via Pooley Bridge in torrential rain but, even then, despite a few very large puddles it was nothing like this. Floods are much more common in February in any case. Could the worst be yet to come? As Pat suggests, if this was happening in the Thames valley or London (perish the thought) it would attract a little more attention, money and action. We've had a lot of rain round here in Derbyshire in the last couple of months but not as bad as further north. Never the less I'm glad we live on top of big hill well above the Derwent valley. If we get flooded everyone else would need scuba gear or house boats. I'm just fed up that I haven't been able to play with my toy aeroplanes since October (until today, briefly) but I can't imagine how awful it must be if your house gets flooded for the third time in a few weeks. Geoff

Posted by Ben Holt 1 on 27/12/2015 22:39:04: Hi Craig, skinning resin does brush nicely if you have some, but it's expensive and I usually have plenty of 30min lying about... Geoff, fiberglass is made of polyester resin not epoxy, so acetone is often used but usually for cleaning and prepping purposes Ah yes, that makes sense. However, as Pat says, fibreglass can be used to reinforce both polyester and epoxy resins. Apparently the canoes were pretty classy ones used for competition so they could have been either polyester (cheap) or epoxy (expensive). Geoff

That's really interesting and, as you obviously have experience using West epoxy which I first came across when building dinghies, you're probably right. However, when I needed something to thin epoxy a few years ago I got a 5 litre can of acetone through a friend of mine who knew the owner of a firm making glass fibre canoes in Stanley near Ilkeston in Derbyshire. Presumably they used the acetone for something but what? Would there be another use for it in glass fibre moulding? Geoff

Your bit's in the last view, just about where the G-ACDC lettering is. There's one coat of B&Q Valspar acrylic brush painted on the fuselage. I got it mixed to match the cowl which was already sprayed when I got it. It looks better in the photos than in actuality. It looks OK but it won't survive a critical close inspection. I have no idea what the fuselage is covered with. The colour matches exactly the Solartex piece you so generously sent me but yours is almost transparent compared to the original. That's one reason I opted to give it a coat of Valspar. It's not finished yet. I have a bit more rib stitching to do on the top wing before I fit the numbers and the cowl has a hole in it which needs patching. I'll spray the cowl and the battery lid hinge then. I've also got to fit the struts to the tail plane which the full size has but not the model kit. Geoff

If the kit manufacturers are still in business they may be prepared to sell you a plan if you explain the reason. Though I guess if the suggested motors are Astroflight brushed then it's an old kit. Geoff

I suppose that will work if they're using 2.4gHz but what's to stop them using 35Mhz or some other frequency? It's only the carrier and the control data could be modulated on to just as it is with 2.4gHz. They could manage without the channel hopping bit. The jamming would play havoc with other 2.4gHz users. Geoff

Thanks Percy. There's a bit of your Solartex on there. Can you see where it is? Geoff

Posted by john stones 1 on 27/12/2015 17:17:02: 3 flyers and 4 visitors, not cold and great to have a few hours out, grass is still growing and no chance of getting mowers on. John Our grass is fairly long but we have tarmac too so it's not so important for us. What I did notice today were clouds of gnats flying. Surely they shouldn't be in such numbers in December? Geoff

Got my DB Tiger Moth maidened today in not ideal conditions but light wind and not actually raining. As someone commented it was the best day for 7 weeks! As you can see it was pretty wet and the visibility was poor. All up weight is 3.14kg with a 4S 4000 mAh LiPo installed. 50% battery left after a total of 6 minutes in the air (I started landing preparations after 5 minutes). EMax GT3526/04 motor with a 13x4 prop. Cruise current about 20 amps and max recorded during the flight about 50. Geoff

It was a very so-so day today but it wasn't actually raining and the wind was light so I wrapped up well and took the new Tiger Moth up to Ashbourne. Not as cold as I thought it might be but visibility was only just OK. I assembled the Moth and did the usual tests - range, taxi, fast taxi etc and it seemed OK but I needed a personal check flight as well so got the Riot assembled. I found a piece of foam on the runway but couldn't think where it came from. I took off and had a 10 minute semi aerobatic flight with a few touch and goes and tried to trim the elevator. It wasn't a big deal but it did seem to want to climb and even maximum trim didn't cure. It wasn't until I landed that I found out where the errant piece of foam came from - the elevator joining wire fixing . I'd done the whole flight with only half an elevator. Didn't seem to make much difference except for being a bit out of trim. It's a great little model! After that little saga it was time to check the Tiggie. Take off was easy and it flew beautifully with just a little aileron trim needed. According to my current telemetry it was drawing only about 20 amps for steady level flight and the highest current draw was 47 amps as I climbed in a loop. After the 5 minute signal I did a circuit and came in for a smooth landing - success! The totally rigid undercarriage didn't seem to be a problem and the fat tyres absorbed the touch down easily. Specification: DB 58" Tiger Moth Power EMax GT3526/04 on 4000 MAh 4S LiPo and 60 amp Black Mantis esc. 13x4 HK propeller. Take off weight 3.14 kg. Rudder wasn't needed for turns. Ailerons set to 20mm up and 10 mm down differential. And here it is before the test flight: Geoff

Posted by ChrisB on 26/12/2015 22:14:30: I started flying in 1992, got my A cert in 2008 and my B in 2010 and I haven't changed my flying style at all I don't really give the A/B a second thought. I do everything in the A virtually every flight anyway. It's all fun! I think you have to do everything in the 'A' every flight anyway or you'd never take off or land I suppose you don't have to do a figure 8 or dead stick landing but really the 'A' dead stick is at a reasonable hight so it's not that difficult IIRC. And, as you say, it's still fun. Geoff

I find they work very well and there's certainly no air gap. I have occasionally reinforced them with Diamond tape but in reality I don't think it's necessary but it's perhaps wise to check them regularly just in case. If they're OK before a flight they aren't going to fail during it. Geoff

Ah, if storage and workspace is an issue then you have a point. I have a dedicated workshop with storage above (which is a bit full!) and my bigger models share the garage with our bikes and my wife's gardening stuff so that's not such a problem for me. Which reminds me, I have some selling to do I think the Blizzard first without its Scorpion motor. Geoff

Actually, Graham, bigger models aren't harder to fly. In fact quite the reverse, they're easier and much less twitchy than smaller ones. I find 1.3 to 1.5 metre (55" to 60" ws to be a good compromise between size and ease of flying. I struggle a bit with small models and perhaps the easiest one I have is an 84" trainer I converted to electric but my 84" Maher's Thunderbird with a 26cc Zenoah petrol engine is also a bit of a pussy but a lot heavier and perhaps slightly more intimidating. Geoff