Jon H

I think its around 1 in 20 seats will be used eventually but would need to check. Anyone care to guess which aircraft has the most number of ejections?

My 80 inch seagull spacewalker is great fun with an ASP160 twin.

sadly, following the manual or not this is the likely answer you will get from most model engine importers/distributors. Many moons ago i had a warranty claim on a nitro car engine denied as the engine was dirty on the outside, thus causing the conrod to seize. As the engine was clean as a whistle inside, i fail to see how that makes any sense at all. Contest 10 contains castor. The oil is klotx super techniplate at 18% and 20% of that 18% is castor This is not totally unreasonable, but you can easily go harder want without causing yourself or the engine any harm. Unlike the old days modern engines are not shedding tons of metallic particles when they run in so if not like you need to flush them out with a rich mix. And as before, a rich mix offers worse lubrication anyway. Then he is doing it wrong. A new engine should be no less reliable than an old one. In fact, its new so should be more reliable as its got a new plug and hasnt been parked in the weeds yet so isnt full of grass and a dirt. It will only give up the ghost if its not been set up correctly in the first place. This is why i tune the engine for peak performance more or less right away.

In all cases where a company is providing a product to review there is a conflict of interest, particularly when said company is a source of revenue through ad sales. This is not an exclusive issue to the modelling press and as Andy points out, its the reviews we dont read that are more important than the ones we do. You cant bite the hand that feeds. When was the last time you ever read a bad review of a car? It wouldnt do a publication any favours to upset VW or toyota with a bad review as its their ads that keep the lights on. Youtube reviewers can be more independent, and some simply buy the product themselves, but then you are reliant on a person with unknown qualifications evaluating a product. Then you are into the weeds of who is qualified to review product X or Y. I am pretty sure i am sufficiently qualified to review a glow engine, but i know i would run into the same problem i did at laser where a percentage of the populous would be up in arms when my review and recommendations dont tell them what they want to hear. I also imagine i would be deemed impartial and complained about if i said something negative about an engine that is a competitor to laser, even though i dont work there any more and laser no longer exist. People would just assume i have this loyalty to the brand and anything else isnt as good. Admittedly, there is some truth to the concept that a laser is better than other engines and i do think they were in many respects, but equally i think very highly of other brands of engine so its nonsense really to just dismiss anything i say as biased against this or that. A clear example would be if i was to ever review a saito engine i would be critical of its unbushed ali conrod. Its not the best design choice and that is easy to back up with a bunch of data on PB vs ali as a bearing material. But, to the saito fanbase that would be grounds to complain even with the data to back it up. Its also likely the importer would step in with their 2 cents. its loose loose all round. anyway, we should probably kick this to another thread before the mods are after us.

My ASP36 was a belter of an engine and, by pure fluke, it came back to me probably 15 years after i sold it. Its had new bearings and is in a box awaiting aviation once again.

Engine instructions are written with 'that guy' in mind. 'that guy' has mixed his own fuel to his own special recipe using 12 different oils and most of the periodic table. He might even have added metal polish to the fuel as he read on facebook that it would help run the engine in faster. He then used either a prop twice the size he should, or half the size, depending on what he was told by a 'club expert' that weekend. He then drilled out the carb a bit for 'better airflow' and ran the engine flat out from the minute it fired.... As a result of the actions of people like 'that guy', the supplied instructions are slightly conservative to guard against complete stupidity. This goes for the oil content of the fuel as well. I think OS still recommend 18% and saito 20% but 15% will be completely fine in both cases. some laser customers also tipped the 7% oil laser fuel into their OS 4 strokes and had no problems. I did warn them that it was on their heads as i couldnt guarantee it would work but truthfully i didnt expect too many issues with OS. I would grab 5/15 fuel, start it with the needle a bit rich using 10 or 11x6 prop (use a hair dryer or heat gun to warm it up before starting if its mega stiff like the old ASP's used to be) and get it up to about 5000rpm right away once its going. Leave it there for a minute or two to warm up. Then up to full power, and quickly (less than 5 seconds) tune it for about 90% of peak power. Throttle back, give the slow run a tweak to get it in the ballpark and then you are done. Just play with the engine for 10 minutes or so, up and down the rev range and pinch the fuel off to stop it. Cool it, refuel it, fly. It will cool better in the air, be under less load, and you arent deafening the local population for an hour. There is also a lower risk of debris ingestion in the air (unless you park it in the weeds on landing) so its generally better to just get on with it and fly using full power sparingly while running at very close to peak tune. Running engines in causes so much hysteria and i really dont know why. Its a very simple procedure with modern engines. Older engines with ferrous piston liner setups did need a little more care, but even with those the stone cold and slobbering rich approach was always wrong. Very rich running dilutes the lubricant in the fuel to the point where it is useless and this will damage the engine. EDIT When i sent an engine for review by a magazine their reviewer ignored the laser instructions as well and went to the default rich/slow run in rather than just getting on with it as instructed. This did rather irritate me as the ease of running in was a selling point i wished to promote, but it also annoyed me as it implied the guy writing the article knew more about it than the manufacturer. I did protest and the article included my email as a bit of a footnote, but it has always annoyed me. I appreciate that it is therefore hypocritical to a degree that i then suggest you ignore the OS instructions and that, on balance, i think the reviewer you quote was more or less on the money. He was still too conservative in my view, but generally i would agree with his approach. I only raise this to point out just how hard it is to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to finding information on a given subject. Having been on both sides of the fence i have seen both sides of it as explained above. so tldr, just do as i say 😛 PS, no castor!

Martin has covered it well and while a 1/4 scale IL-38 with turboprops would be a spectacular model its the sort of thing that people with several decades of experience would raise an eyebrow at. I have been flying over 30 years now, worked within the model industry for 20 years, and now in the full size aerospace industry. The prospect of a project that size is daunting to say the least.

My experience with the OS FF240, 320 and FT300 shows that the difference in quality between OS and ASP shows most when dealing with these complex multi cylinder engines. the FF series in particular are just brilliant, although they do make a mess. I run mine on the 5/15 mix, but my asp ft160 has been on 10% oil for ages now.

My engine eats master rod bearings for breakfast. Its done 5 of them? something like that. I suspect the crank pin is slightly undersize and the rattle kills the needle roller bearings prematurely. The valves are all made of cheese, and it takes mere moments for them to be scored by the not at all chamfered valve seats and then they leak like crazy. Piston rings are rubbish, slave rod link pin E clips have been known to fail....the carb is pants, rocker E clips fail, pushrod tubes leak oil.....etc. My engine is also very poor on bearing fits so both the main and front bearings spin. Mine is a 1996 vintage (if i read the serial no correctly) so theres that to consider. For fuel i ran 5% nitro 15% oil to begin with but abandoned this early as it made such an awful mess with 5 exhausts arranged in a circle. i have run it on oil content as low as 5 and it didnt seem to protest. I would say 10% is totally safe, and the laser low oil would likely be fine as well but ultimately i didnt design this one. I did revise the lubrication nipples and make it the same as the OS300 with a drain plug in the bottom of the case (capped off when running) and another nipple nearer the top left open when running.

I have my eye on a new model from bigplanes and am weighing up engine options. I also have a fleet of models in stock waiting their turn on the bench and i find myself in the same boat as you. In the case of the new model i have my eye on, i would rather spend money on machinery to make the engine i want rather than buy the cheaper engine i kinda dont.

Another 2 successful ejections the other day. The total is now 7771. Theres a big score board of sorts as you drive in the factory and i check it every morning so noticed the update. I dont think i have ever known a laser throw a prop so a standard nut will be fine. I have an all 4 stroke fleet of OS, Saito, ASP, Laser, Enya, Magnum, RCV powered models and now i think about it none of them have a lock nut on them. I do keep an eye on the prop nuts from time to time, but none have ever escaped and i have never really understood what all the fuss was about.

I have all the plans i drew and i am considering buying a mill.... I am also on the lookout for cheap saito's as you can do things with a cylinder, crankshaft and cam chest. At least, you can once you have thrown the boring old crankcase away.

Do you remember the chap at the club who had that big bearcat? It had an gf60 in it with a 20x10 prop and he flew it with (and into but thats another story) my similarly sized P39 with a laser 300v and 20x10 prop. Admittedly his bearcat was draggier than the P39, but even with 10cc more displacement the 300v thrashed the saito. On some of the passes we did he was flat out while i was back well under half throttle. Its been a while since i spoke with Geoff but there are still more engines to come. I know for sure that...5? maybe, FT310's are still awaiting test and there is more besides. No idea how many engines vs how many back orders exist but its not all over yet, that is for sure. beyond that, feedback i had from customers buying replacements for the FG60 was that its power and reliability were not to their satisfaction. One customer had entire cylinders ejected off the engine on more than one occasion and broken conrods are common place. Now, in fairness to saito i have seen a video online of a rod failure in flight and user error cannot be ruled out. As much fun as a flat out dive might be, there are just too many parts flailing around inside an engine like this and even a short period of over revving might be enough to grenade the whole job. Thats why i fly my OS FF240 in the acrowot with some reserve....although it might not look like it! Still, the conrod is the weak link of the engine and its not done the way i would have done it. Not sure if that means much, but there it is. Also nick a from the club might have a 300v he could be talked into parting with. Its a late 90's model but i fully serviced it long before i left. Its in good condition generally and ran well. I think he bought another through some deal he did with a guy so he might let it go. Its worth an enquiry anyway.

I have 5 1/5 spitfires in various states of completion.....its a problem

the others are right and its probably 5/16x24 unf. This changed around 2000 to m8 so you have lost half a decade somewhere im afraid.

Even at the 400 size the bore stroke ratio is the same as a 70 or 80 so they want to rev. This is a video of mine after repairs back during covid times. Its since died again, not sure i can be bothered to repair it this time but we will see. Agreed. When i hoped to do a laser radial it was going to be 3 cylinder as it was better to have 3 large cylinders than 5 smaller ones. It was also much lighter and cheaper

pitch and yaw are the requirements for spin entry so that makes sense.

No problem Gordon. I really like my little Hurricane and its classic construction as it can take a far greater beating than the more modern laser cut spider web type construction. Yes its a little heavier, but a while back the poor Hurricane caught a nasty bit of turbulence as i was landing and it was body slammed into the runway from about 10ft up. It was wings level and mostly horizontal, but there was nothing i could do to arrest the rate of descent. Im pretty sure they recorded an small earthquake in potters bar that day. In any event, the oleos were mangled and retract pins snapped but the retracts were still in place, and other than a broken needle on the engine the model was completely undamaged. The assembled throng of ARTF enthusiasts were stunned that anything more than dust remained after such an impact let alone that the damage was fixed in a few evenings.

i need to get my spitfires back on the go...

Looking at the models/wings you are working with they should be almost unstallable by many standards and certainly the model in the cad drawing should not need anything. Its very similar to a hand launch model i have with a 15 2 stroke in it. Its a bit broken at the moment as its not flown in years but i might dust it off and fix it for this year. I hear this sort of thing a lot with scale stuff. 'My spitfire way tail heavy so it was too sensitive/tip stalled' etc. Again, most of the time this is nonsense and the cg was fine, they just yanked on it too hard. This situation is made worse with said spitfire as they set it up with the sort of rates they use on their acrowot or other sport model. These rates are excessive for the poor spitfire and so it behaves in an over sensitive tail heavy way, even though the balance is fine. The trend for warbirds to have over size tails makes this worse as the elevator area also increases making it more effective. The correct solution to the lively spitfire is lower rates, but most just hang church roof on the front and then complain the model noses over all the time. The point to this long winded explanation is that if the model is balanced, its balanced, so leave it alone. If its too lively, change the rates first before you worry about everything else. I helped a club mate who was struggling to land a wot 4 foame and it was the same story. We took the rates down, the nose weight off, and boom. It floated in easy as you like. While the effects are more obvious in a model like a spitfire the principals apply to all model types and its well worth taking the time to dial in the model based on its performance in the air.

Having finally read and caught up the thread (should have done that first) i didnt have too many issues with my canopy fit, and i also reduced the size of the tail down to scale size because...i could. I used to have one of these hurricanes with the larger tail and while there was a big gap between them the current small tail version has no nasty traits the other didnt have and the elevators are still ludicrously effective and i have barely any movement on them. The only thing i recommend you check is the wing incidence as mine was out and the model flew like a dog. I fixed as best i could without building a new model, and it is much improved but i need to take a little more care here and there than i would if it was spot on. A few photos of mine. Currently in the queue awaiting service after about 2 years dormant. hmmm i forgot how nice it looked. Might have to bump it up the list for servicing!

Very sharp knife and a steel rule for the straight bits, hole saw or compass cutter to get the round bits started and then...i dont remember exactly for this model, but i have just whizzed the foam out with a dremel sanding drum in the past...made a god awful mess as i recall but got the job done. Im sure i did it that way now i think about it as i havent built any other foam/veneer warbirds in the last 10 years. EDIT Nope, knew i forgot one. Spitfire 3 (as its known as i have 5 and need to tell them apart) is halfway through its repair/build. Its 5th scale but the principals are the same. I did make a mess of one of the wheel wells following an accident with some white spirit so some work will be needed to make good.

another vote for 2 degrees, however.... I also recommend you look into why you are getting into a stall situation in the first place. Are your elevator rates too aggressive (probably), do you have loads of expo (not uncommon), are you flying into a situation where a stall is likely? Remember that speed is completely irrelevant and any wing will stall at any speed but only one critical angle of attack. All the washout is doing is reducing the angle of attack at the tip relative to the root and its a fairly small adjustment which can be overcome with aileron deflection or a steep enough turn. Washout might make a stall more manageable and less likely to flip the model on its back but it wont prevent any sort of stall, or accelerated stall from returning your model to earth in a heap if you yank the elevator too hard. In my experience probably 99% of tip stalls are pilot error rather than a design issue with the model.

I mounted mine with the scale angle. Means you can fit bigger wheels and still have the legs at the front of the wing when down. The only downside is the wheels are not flat in the wells but thats not important.

call perkins and ask them. Most shops do not carry spares and they will be ordered in as needed from perkins.