ntsmith
-
Posts
389 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Everything posted by ntsmith
-
Its an interesting thought but a retro build with a model that had a 10cc engine but fitted with a .46 just doesn't seem to equate. Guess I will stick with the 10cc engine. The Firefly is a model I have completely forgot. Does anyone do the plans? I have plans for the KwiK-Fli II and III which I am tempted but this looks a possible alternative IF I can get plans. Certainly would be nice to have a look at. Posted by jeff2wings on 19/02/2012 20:28:33: It depends on the engine you intend to use , the Enya 60- 11 TV ,ST 60 ,Merco of that era only weighed 12-13 oz without silencer and made only about .9-1.0 bhp so a O.S. 46 AX or 55AX will make a good stand-in but with more poke ! How about this one next !!
-
In view of the Slik-fli turning out very nose heavy I have added an inch to the tail moment of the Bar-Fli. This should help somewhat towards the natural occurrence of these being nose heavy due to light equipment in general.
-
Having almost completed my Slik fly I have now started building the Bar-Fli in earnest. I have cut most of the wing ribs and some fuselage formers. Currently I am getting the doublers (which had to be recut) added to the fuselage sides which are shown here being cut to shape.
-
-
-
Have finally installed the engine and done a rough cg check. Oops. Not very happy about that one. It is VERY nose heavy. Not sure what I can put it down to but the original ended up with the battery behind the wing and I can see no other way than doing the same so its going to be a hatch built behind the wing to accommodate a 6V ni-cad and even then it will be on the slight nose heavy side. The other thing I may have to do then is fit a tail skid. Not necessarily wanted but in cutting the underside out I may be able to put a 20g lead weight in there to help things along. Anyway, here is a picture of the SC61 (Normal carb position) mounted in its pride of place. Since then all the plumbing has been completed and the engine is now in a state of being able to be run. Certainly I have now passed a major milestone in the building of this model. It could now be flown within days if the weather looked as though it was going to be suitable.
-
-
-
-
Cant wait to get my grubby sweating mitts on one of these. Looks great but lets hope there are no issues like we had with the DX8 - not that I would consider uding anything else - have done, got the tea shirt and gone back. Just cant beat it but perhaps this just might
-
On the downhill stretch now, just as well with the Bar-fly Build underway too. Here are a couple of pics just to show.
-
-
-
Fuel contamination by water - is this why your engine won't run?
ntsmith replied to graeme jones's topic in IC Engines
does this mean that if the fuel absorbs water then the actual volume of fuel in the can would be seen to increase. For instance. If I left a gallon of glow fuel out with the top off would the amount in the can appear to increase or is there a similar decrease in something else. Its just that I was promoted to this question after reading the column this month by Brian winch but I cannot find his email address to ask him directly so I thought this thread may provide some sort of answer. -
Struggled today fitting four bolts that hold the nose wheel assembly together. Using socket headed bolts with spring washers as well as nyloc nuts for added security, the problem being that the long hex driver wasnt long enough and I had changed the lower two bolts as there was risk of the aluminium screw head getting destroyed by a worn screwdriver and particuarly more so if there was paint on the screw head. I figured capheads would be able to be removed more easily if ever it came to that. I then covered the bottom part of the nose. I expect now I have just about three pieces of covering to complete that task. My third roll of orange was orderd and received from Gladston's. I guess it wasnt in stock but they were very helpful in getting ot to me quickly as soon as they had it, Thanks Gladstons. I have to fit the rear two pushrods BEFORE covering as I don't want to juggle with the fitting of them and poke it through the covering! Just trying to think ahead.
-
The part I cut wrong was the doubler which on the side view shows it ending at the rear of F1 and on the plan at the front edge. The latter is what I strongly suspect as being the correct place but I went for the first - at the rear so I now have to cut two more doublers Since it is a fairly low aspect ration wing with a partial span Dbox wing perhaps balsa wood be OK (pun inteneded) Posted by Martyn K on 10/02/2012 23:01:37: I am not sure which parts you have cut that may be wrong. Regarding the wings - go for spruce spars... Martyn
-
The next question is . . . The material for the wing spar is not given so by default wood be balsa but I am not so sure if that would be strong enough. Does anyone have any knowledge of what should be used?
-
I had cut the fuz doublers when I was out and thought to myself "Why would they end at the REAR of F1?" When I got home I checked to see if what I thought was actualy correct - and yes it is. On the side view (I had drew in more solidly where I thought the end of the doubler ended) there is a difference between that and the top view where it clearly shows the end at the FRONT of F1 which is where I thought it should end - after I had thought and cut at the wrong place. My dilema is that now I have to recut another pair of side doublers but should they even end there or should they go all the way to the front of the fuselage sides? What do others think. My present thoughts is to take it to the front of F1 which would allow the sides to be pulled in better in front of this point.
-
-
-
Andy, I was just reading your very nice website blog of the super sixty where you mention a "perma-grit spar slotter". What exactly is that?
-
This looks a very ineresting choice. I'm going to follow this with interest.
-
I now need to add some guidese for the cables (strong cord) that will operate the wheel brakes. I have changed the output arm from the output arm on the servos in this shot as even on the outer horn on the surface there appeared to be too much movement. Ofcourse, that will need to be checked by flying but I have no idea what the throws would have been. Different from today's I suspect as there was no ability to soften the centre's so presumably there can be more on today then in the days when thos was first built. I had originaly gone for an arrangement of: 1/setup as though there was no flaps at all. 2/basic addition of flaps with a coupled flap elevator setup which is all that could have been done with a switched in servo as PK used. plus 3/ coupled elevator/flaps and ailerons 4/ The use of the flaps as flaps and spoilerons 5/ailerons the full length. I have decided that only 1 and 2 will be used for initial flights.
-
-
The removable centre hatch will cover the brake servo.
