John Rickett 102

Martin, There are two points here - the model being close to the stall at the point of engine failure and the model being well above the stall and suffering the same mishap. If near the stall then attempting to pick up with aileron may provoke the stall anyway, so you are correct that there may be nothing to gain.  However lets hope that most people are not generally mushing along asking for trouble but rather an engine cuts and the model immediately rolls. In those first couple of seconds while you're trying to figure out what has happened, and more importantly which way its rolled, because it can often be confusing, stabilising the wings may save the day. Yes the model is going to slow down and it will yaw to some degree (depending upon fin/rudder authority, speed and asymetric thrust) which will only increase the speed decay, but in my experience the roll rate is more dramatic and disorientating than the yaw, so attempting to reduce that roll rate until the brain and fingers are working in harmony again could make the difference between getiing down in one piece and rekitting!           

 If the purpose is to try to maintain straight and level flight, a gyro operating on ailerons will probably be more effective than on the rudder(s). My experience is that with one engine dying (on high power) the model will roll very quickly. A gyro may still not be the complete answer because if the rolling force is greater with one engine out than the ailerons can counteract, the model is going to roll anyway. The solution is to chop or at least reduce the power of the running engine(s) and try to maintain flying speed. This of course can be at odds with the instincts when trying to make it back to the patch! The most problematical time is when at low speed and high power - takeoff or low circuits for instance, but at least you may be able to quickly recognise which engine has cut and take corrective actions. What seem to contribute to the desmise of a lot of twins and multis is being some distance away when the engine cuts and not being able to ascertain if the unexpected roll is to the left or right. Still the best course of action is to reduce the power, its better to descend into the groung upright and flat than in a spiral dive! As regards engine settings - set-up each motor as if it were in a single engined model ie, make sure each engine is running happily just as you would with a single, it doesn't matter if there are a few hundred revs difference at full throttle, but a sudden difference of 7000 revs is another story! Do not be tempted to tune one engine to match the other, this action is bound to lead to one of them not running at optimum. A slight difference in revs may want to pull the aircraft off line during the start of the take off run but if the engines are opened slowly the effect will be minimal and once rudder authority is gained the power can be advanced to full and a straight takeoff achieved. Twins and multis are great fun, you just need to be self disciplined in ensuring the engine, plumbing, fuel, plugs etc are spot on. All of this gets away from the original question as to the effectiveness of a gyro in twins but perhaps shows that a gyro can't remedy another cause. A gyro will help to stabilise twitchiness about an axis but the heart of the problem is in making sure the engines are preforming satisfactorily in the first place. Hope this helps                

Perhaps the Chinese thought it a mere detail to impersonate a Chilton, here's what G-AESZ actually looks like.

Gregg, You're possibly thinking of Derek Martin's Heston Pheonix, flown at many of the shows. There's a picture of it on the LMA website under 'Gallery' 'Commercial'. It's scratch built and to a particularly high standard, I believe it was completed about 4 years ago. Derek is a member (Chairman) of the Rolls Royce Hucknall club., try contacting him through that club for more information on how he did it  Regards

Mick Henderson's DH9 is a tremendous achievement and I congratulate Mick for his skill and RCM&E for securing the rights to the article production. It is a stunning model incorporating many novel features and techniques. Models like this only come along once in a blue moon, so I'm surprised, and a bit dismayed, that it warranted no more editorial space (just 4 pages) than the Ultrafly ARTF foamie on page 116.  The article could have covered, with photographs, how the novel featured alluded to, were produced. The beautifully crafted DH9, in its accurate and surprisingly colourful finish, would also have made a stunning cover shot instead of the moulded P-38 which took pride of place (and 5 pages of editorial space) There was no contest as far as I'm concerned.......................I just don't understand. 

David, I would like you to continue with attending and reporting on shows. It doesn't of course have to be only those where the LMA members are presenting and flying their models, though clearly because their models are attractive to the public then these are the most known and attended shows; pictures of the models appear in the magazines from other contributors anyway. I would gladly read reports from the tiniest of shows - provided the models held something of interest to report, unfortunately for me that doesn't include the average ARTF that can be seen at any club field An enthusiastic reporter could write reams on how skillfully the box was opened, unaided, without damaging the contents but I think a modelling magazine should be able to impart more wisdom than that!   I cannot get to all the shows and I suspect neither can most of those flyers who try to display their models at events. Its also probably the case that most of the readership can't visit them all, so at any show there will always be something different on which to report. I am inspired by some of the models that are built, especially those one-offs that started from a blank sheet of paper, so any information that can be gleaned and passed on us subscribers and insatiable modellers, would be welcome. I especially like to see the detail, so crisp close-ups of the model on the ground please, the pictures don't have to always show the model airborne, where of course most of the detail becomes just a speck. Whatever model you home in on, why not conduct a short interview with the builder/flyer asking perhaps what he found attractive about this particular model? what peculiarities did it have during the building stage, or the test flying? Anything special about the construction or finishing? None of this has to be lengthy but it would add a bit more spice and perhaps demonstrate that no matter how many shows are visited there is always something different and new.   Keep up the good work Chessiegolf       

I was heartened to see in the 'Special' that there were three articles on built up models including the free plan of what looks to be a nice model from Tony Nijhuis and a write-up of a mouth watering engine, the OS IL300 - made a worthwhile read instead of yet another cloned .40 2-stroke . Peter Lowe's article on the Bristol Fighter emphasised a number of times the satisfaction to be gained from buildling. Good for you RCM&E for attempting to show that modelling can be much more than opening a box today and flying tomorrow. An excellent magazine with quite a few interesting detailed articles, especially Alex Whittaker's amusing trip down memory lane. My only gripe was the waste, in my opinion, of 4 valuable pages describing a slot together, profile, 18" span SE5 - oh well, from small beginnings...................... as they say. 

Well, it seems as if the problem is resolved. Tony KNOWS he can do better, a lot better, and has the experience on which to base that statement. As there really isn't a closed shop it would be remiss of him not to volunteer for next year's event, along with anyone else who KNOWS they can do better - if those who can do better don't volunteer, they can hardly complain when we are presented with the best of those that do! I look forward to a fresh voice at next years Nats. Oh, and as its bad form to get people's names wrong, the commentator was (is) Colin Hammond. I must admit that his Kentish accent doesn't fall as easily on the ear as the polished voice of Dave Bishop and his knowledge of aeroplanes may not be as comprehensive, but the chap is trying to fill a void when others won't step forward......he shouldn't be castigated for that.

It sounds on the face of it as though Tony Jones would make an excellent commentator and I'm sure the BMFA would welcome his gesture of volunteering, it is certainly not a closed shop. Don't forget though that the commentator has to have some kind of track record and must also supply all the equipment necessary. 'Fees' usually run to nothing more than travel expenses. The reason that LMA members are to the fore on the display line is because they have volunteered, anyone who is competent can volunteer but you have to accept that, on the display line,  people generally want to see something just a little different from everyday 'club' models. The volunteers will get nothing in return except the satisfaction that they have tried to entertain the public.   It would of course be possible to fly trainers and show people that this is the way to get started, not on the slippery jets they are currently admiring and aspiring to, I fear though that the display line wouldn't hold interest for two seconds!

Brian, A short length of plastic tubing, the type used for air retracts is suitable, pushed over the brass tube and lead to a remote schraeder valve will provide the necesary connection for inflating the tyre. These bits are not provided with each set, presumably to keep the costs down but are simple to acquire and make up. My experience is that, having inflated a tyre, the pressure lasts no time at all, so better to make sure that the wheels will support the weight of the model without having to rely on pressure in the tyres.

David, How about in carrying out reviews we support our homegrown industries who themselves have supported us over the years? SM Services is one little British company who produce all manner of essential electronic goodies to get us out of fixes - servo reversers, servo slows, landing light switches, glow switches, retract sequencers, chargers - the list is lengthy. Most of these goodies are excellently priced for made-in-Britain products. They usually get passed over as reviewable subjects, perhaps because they are not as glamorous as engines or gyros. I'm sure lots of modellers, especially those who may be new to the game, think that if they buy a bells and whistle radio all potential problems will be catered for. But what happens when you want to drive each elevator (or flap) with its own servo and having installed them, one goes up and one goes down - yes we've all done it! It may not be quite so easy to connect up the output from the other side of the servo - one of those little servo reversers is the painless answer. Terry Bowden Rourke (who is absolutely no relation or paymaster of mine) has, over the years, steadily listened to the problems and systematically come up with the solutions. I think an article or two on the little gems he produces, and the ways to use them, may be enlightening to quite a few readers.