Garry G

Thanks for your reply, I wasn't aware of Replikit but went onto their web site and they do make a full kit for around £50:00. I'm not looking for much so will try the for sale site and possible BMFA. There's a pencil price on the box 23/6, how things have changed! Regards Garry G

Having a clear out so anyone want to offer the going price whatever that is. As far as I can tell every thing is in the box but a few balsa sheet parts have been cut out. Garry G

Has any one drawn up O/D plans for either the Yak 18 or Yak 50 that they would like to sell a copy of? Garry G

Some time ago there was an advert in the the BMFA mag. ( I think ) which I still have for a Yak 18 kit made by Sky Ways Models who no longer exist. I understand that Mason's Models may be going to re kit this model sometime this year and as I have always wanted to build this I'm keeping my fingers crossed!! The Yakalov Aerobatic Team used to fly Yak 50 out of Compton Abbas close to Dorchester where I live and it was magic to go there and watch them practice. Garry G

Many thanks for your replies, hadn't spotted this thread, will keep you posted if I run into any problems.

I am building a small vintage style plan and due to space restrictions need to locate the ESC further back from the motor than the existing wires allow, i.e. extending the 3 wires by about a further 6 inches (150mm in new speak) so it sits behind the battery. Is this likely to cause any problems? Garry G

Is there a component list for all the CNC parts so I can work out how much has to be cut out by hand? The wood list on the RCM&E free plan seems to indicate that there's a lot of extra work to do here. What do I need 18 sheets of 75mm x 2.4mm(3/32" balsa for? Garry G

Jim, thanks for the additional photos, the elevator is where I thought it should go. On the rudder the hinge line looks vertical as I would expect, did you have to redesign it as it looks different to the plan which has a distinct forward slope? I will try an mount the servos forward nearer the C.of G. if possible to help the balance. Roger Stanton has a regular column "Nostalgia Notebook" in the BMFA NEWS and in this quarters edition inlcludes a piece about a Slicker 50 built by Martin Rudgley. His model weighs 22 ozs. against yours at 2 lbs. but he has fitted a KBM 31/12 bell motor which may account for the lower weight. Originally used a 7 cell nicad but was under powered but now has Lipo's. He also extendednthe nose by about 1". I will fit a BRC 2212-10T motor in case mine weighs nearer to yours, best to have a bit of power in hand. John, thanks for your reply, the C.of G. on the plan is shown as 50% of the chord, apart from the necessary mods. for the elevator,rudder and motor I will build my Slicker as per plan. Garry G

Jim, your photos are very useful, I intend to install an electric outrunner and will have to extend the nose to get the C.of G. as per the plan. Looking at the front view I think I will fit the bearers as shown but longer and mount the motor on a new firewall that will fit over the bearers and slide up and down to find the right balance point.Do you know the weight of your Slicker?I can see the elevator on your photo, did you make this solid and does it extend up to the "finlets" on the underside as shown on the plan, also is the rudder that solid part on the photo?  John LI will build the wing and tailplane with the incidences as per plan, +4 deg.on the wing and +2.5 deg. on the tail and see what happens. Altering these is a bit out of my comfort zone.  Reducing the dihedral slightly on my Playboy was suggested that with the introduction of Rudder and Elevator control the addition stability given by the original dihedral was not needed and could induce Dutch Roll. Not that I would known what that was if I saw it !!  Any further thoughts?  John G Some of those C.of G. positions seem very far back, one of our club members has just finished a Falcon so I will see where he has his.What does iirc mean ? is that text speak Garry G

Sorry for the delay in responding to all your replies, have been rather busy but many thanks.Lot of information here to digest but will reply a.s.a.p.  I have a Playboy Junior which I fly in our club's Vintage competitions and this is where it all starts, it is a club model and has been the subject of the mods. I mentioned in my posting.  The Slicker will need full R/C to take part so elevator and rudder servos minimum.   RegardsGarry G   

About to start building, BB plans are not revised for R/C - any suggestions before I start. Think I need to reduce the diehedral and increase the fin and rudder size.  Garry G

Hi Tony, I'm in the middle of building my Mk 3, so have measured the indent which scales at 1-5/8" from the sides and also from the bottom of the fire wall, former 4 I think. I have also added another 1/8" lightply backing to beef it up a bit.Let me know how you get on.  Regards Garry G          

Is it safe to use a 6volt battery in conjunction with a normal Futaba 35 mhz  RX as well as connecting it to 6 volt servos ? Garry G

Thanks for your replies. Garry G

I have been looking for a traditional build up kit for the above but so far no luck. Have tried the  DBscale and warbirds , any suggestions please.  Garry G

Hi Richard, did check earlier on eBay to see if anyone was selling a Wot 4 Mk.3 kit and noticed that Mk. 1 plans were available. A club member has them and templates as well  so can go down that route if necessary: also another member has bought the ARTF Mk.2 and taken scale dimensions and produced an 80% version on JPEG files so could get that printed off at 100%. Don't know what difference there may be between the Mk.2 and Mk.3 fuselage though. I may be a bit obsessive about the tapered wing but just like the shape and also simply believe the sales pitch about it on the Chris Foss web site.  Guess he wouldn't be too happy about pinching his designs as he has done the work so should get the reward.  RegardsGarry G  

Looking on Chris Foss web site the tapered 56" on the Mk.3 has a revised wing section and updated fuselage. I have read somewhere else that the tail has been raised, presumeably still at 0deg. incidence, has the motor thrust line been raised to the same datum also? I think that my only hope of getting plans would be from someone that has traced the pre-cut parts from a kit prior to building it.  As one of my club pals says, answers in pencil on a £20 note.  Garry G

I am looking for plans for the 56" tapered wing version of this, can anyone help? Garry G

Would it be possible to connect a UBEC to the balancing plug on a Lipo using a suitable socket and link all the red +ve leads together and solder to the single red lead on the UBEC ?

Now why didn't I think of that, had a heck of a job trying to solder the thin leads to the lipo leads at the same time as trying to get them into the banana plugs. We live and learn.

I have been looking for that article that Nigel wrote but it does't seem to be in the Oct 2008 issue,anyone know which month it was in?

Hi Martyn, hope you are feelig better. The PC 9 C of G saga continues hopefully to a conclusion.Having projected the suggested position in the manual of 55 - 65 mm from l.e. at tip to the root it came out at about 97 - 107mm back from l.e. which is very close to the figure that I got with the calculator mention in my last posting. This is about as far back  that is recommended before the plane gets really twitchy. I am going to start at 90mm back which is about the maximum 15% recommended Static Margin which needs about 4.5 ounces of lead at the front to balance the plane, can always take some out after test flying. The back of the spar is about 70mm from l.e. so I guess if you were to put enough weight at the front end of the plane to balance it at this point it would be too nose heavy. Plane weighs 2lbs. 9ozs all up so without the lead would be close to the figure in the manual. Perhaps I should invest in a larger battery, at the momment using 2170 3s pack.  Garry G

3

HI Martyn, Found a good site htttp://adamone.rchomepage.com/index5.htm which has a C of G calculator and this puts  it at between 88mm -99mm-110mm from root  L.E. depending on the  STATIC MARGIN ( safety factor ) of between 5 - 15%.Sounds all very technical doesn't it!! Won't need to borrow your 2.4 gh set up as I wrote of the plane on Sunday using Mike Cowley's gear, didn't get a chance to see if it solved the problem.  Regards Garry G

Can anyone confirm the C of G as the manual says 5.5 - 6.5 cm  back from the L.E. measured at the tips. This seems to work out at about 10.5 cm at the root which is about 40% back from the L.E. which can't be right or have I got my sums wrong. Garry G