Evan Pimm

Caution required, simply seeing the track of the prop tips does not prove spiral air flow. Yes, you can see the spiral path of the tip as it moves foward through the air, but you cannot see the slipstream behind the prop. It's just the same as tip vortices off a wing tip, which is exactly what this is illustrating. Evan. 

No, as far as the aeroplane and pilot are concerned the airplane is flying normally, there is no rudder input, no 'crossed control' aileron application. The 'Track made good' over the ground is straight too. You are confusing the apparent attitude of the model to you, the ground based observer, and the bit of ground you are standing on. Without the rudder and aileron application, there is no 'sideslip', so the model cannot be 'slipping'. That the model is not going in the direction it is pointing, 'relative to the ground'  is because the model is flying in  a bit of air that is also moving, relative to the ground. Confusing, I know, but to land any aeroplane with a cross wind component on the strip there is no need to apply any sort of deliberate slip with rudder and aileron. Read the previous bit again, point the model into the wind a bit, and the combination of the models foward motion and the air's movement is the direction you want to fly.

Cross wind landings do not required the use of 'sideslip' to centre the runway. Simply put, the model must be pointing a bit into the cross wind, and flown as normal, the x wind component will make the model appear to slip all the way down to the runway. What you will need to learn is how much rudder you need to straighten the model so it points straight down the centre line just before the mains touch, and how much 'aim off' into the wind you need on finals. Again this is real easy sitting in the cockpit, but takes a fair bit of practise standing on the side of the strip. Evan. 

In most of the aircraft i've flown the brakes were under me feet on the rudder pedals...they didn't work when the things were flying either, something to do with the lack of contiguity twixt wheel and ground...All of the above wheezes will work, you just have to go out and practise, two mistakes high. Evan. 

I must be getting old...sideslip is/was nearly always done with wings more or less level, a bootful of rudder and cross aileron to maintain wings level. (My ppl training, you understand) Yes, it can be done standing on the side of the strip, but for a beginner it's a bit like trying to land in knife edge flight, a bit difficult and fraught with possibilities. We should stick with the simple stuff, then introduce  these other bits once competence is assured. Evan. 

One last thing, the slower you fly, the more you must use rudder to maintain direction. The use of aileron at a smidgeon above stall speed/angle will result in further model/pilot embarrasment. Evan. 

To slow down one must use UP elevator with LOW throttle (thrust). the only 'speed' control you have is drag, putting the nose down lowers the drag, which is why the model goes faster when you do so. UP elevator increases drag, and the model will slow down. Learn how to fly this thing at the minimum airspeed, practise flying it around rhe circuit as slow as the model will safely fly, use throttle to control height, and varying degrees of UP elevator to maintain this slow speed. Practise the circuit and landing/go-around a lot, and it will get much easier, and save  your model from further embarrasment . Evan. 

If you can build, `Tauri' would be relaxing, 'Headmaster' would be fun. Both are real quick to build. Evan 

Do not attempt to 'Beef up' the STOL. It is as strong as it will ever be 'as per'. All you will do is make it heavier and more rigid, so when it hits it will hit harder, and instead of flexing and bouncing it will shatter. The thing makes a very fair trainer if you reduce the control movements a bit and refrain from trying the fancy stuff until later. My bet is it will be a much better trainer than your 'leccy thing as it is likely to handle the weather much better, and respond in a much more predictable fashion. Do yourself a favour, get someone to  instruct with a buddy lead  and enjoy the thing as it is supposed to be. Evan. 

You will ned to use the normal prop that the engine uses, anything much bigger will not fly the model as the engine's power output is very much RPM dependant. As for the size of the spinner and what's left of the prop sticking out, well to be honest it doesn't seem to make a lot of of difference to the thrust available. As this is a slow model you can get away with the old 'more diameter, less pitch' thing, but keep the engine in the rev range where it will deliver the power needed. Evan. 

Airsailmodels .co.nz are purveyors of fine modelling material and offer a web based 'online shop' where such things as Modelspan and Jap tissue of various grades/colours may be purchased. And not so far from you either. Evan. 

By the time you have doped and painted the Koverall enough to hide the weave I would think that it would be little different in weight to Solartex, possibly heavier. The weight of the couple of rolls of film needed for the job would, by comparison, be negligable. Remember, the film is the finish, not just the start. On a model this size, lightweight tissue (Modelspan) is both likely to be the lightest, and certainly the best representation of the real surface, of all the finishing mediums so far discussed. With modern '2 pack' paints, or even just a final two part clear finish (Satin, of course) it is just as fuel proof as film, posibly better, and almost as easy to repair. You sound like you need to talk to an 'old' modeller and get the good oil on tissue finishes, and a bit of practical help. Evan. 

Sig Koverall is very nice stuff, on anything over 80 odd inch span. Your little Spit would be staggering under the weight just taxiing. You are looking at lightweight modelspan on all sheeted surfaces and lightspan or similar on the open structure areas. Sanding sealed and spray painted in the usual fashion, with the minimum amount of paint buildup possible, and you will be able to fly the thing. Light Spits fly, heavy ones might, but only once. Evan. 

Similar, yes . Same? No.  You can still get both brands.  Made in the same factory? Probably. Evan. 

I've been flying mine in an Orion for well over six years, and it was 2nd hand when I bought it. Just seems to get better all the time. Keep it clean and with a little atf after flying and it should look after you for a long time. Evan. 

Barry, Airsail (New Zealand kit manufacturer) do a Tomahawk kit almost that size, which is available in jolly old England. You should be able to shake a kit plan out of the woodwork somewhere as a bisis for your build. Be aware that with the high AR wing your quoted sizes are close to the kit size, and it is suitable for a .40 glow, so your 120 twin will need to go into a model quite a bit bigger than your suggested sizes... Evan. 

And might explain why it's running a bit hot. All the older engines seem to run a bit hotter than the new ones, I suspect that they always did. I have a couple of early 70's K&B/Veco 61's, a couple of series 73 K&B .40's and a couple of OS .40 R/C's of the same vintage and they all run a bit hotter than the LA's and TT's I use. It seems to be normal, specially with the cross flow types, and they need at least a 20% oil content of whatever sort as much of their excess heat is expelled with the oil out the exhaust. If you can, use a higher oil content fuel with the older engine, it won't hurt your LA, and it might save the old OS... Evan. 

Prolly the one I was thinking of, the yanks on their forum seem to think that this thing needs that sort of size motor just to get off the ground, and that it's underpowered if it won't accelerate vertically. Must be something to do with the air over there, smaller molecules or less of them, or somesutch. Evan. 

S'funny, I thought his was called Striker, didn't know he did the KK one as well. Evan. 

If Pete is still around, wonder if he would stick his head in and say 'hello? Evan. 

I suspect you might be right. Evan. 

Both engines you mention will run with 20% nitro fuel, neither need it. The older Max 35 will probably be happier with a castor based fuel, my La's are happy with a castor/synthertic oil blend. Both will prefer a little nitro in their fuel, 5~10% would be normal. Having said that, because I run a lot of different engines doing different things, from  pattern to scale to sport, I find it silly to have lots of different blends, so I run everything on 15% nitro... Evan. 

Or else you could just use cables from the servo hidden in the wing, these cables exiting the wing in the scale position and operating the aileron in the usual 'pull-pull' fashion...bit like a rudder on its side, if you get the drift... Evan. 

H9 Camel designed for .90 to 1.20 four strokes. Yes you can fit the engine to it , so long as you can keep the prop tips off the ground it will taxi really fast...Best thing for this engine would be something like a 1/4 scale cabin Waco or similar. Evan. 

I think you would be disappointed with the OS redial in an aerobatic model, as you see, a heavy motor with not a lot of power. It will be much happier in an old `Golden Age' biplane needing lots of nose weight and not a lot of power. If you send the engine to me I will fit it to a suitable airframe and make sure it stays happy and clean... Evan.