Nigel R

Carbon is excellent in tension, generally not so excellent in compression, I do not know enough to engineer a sensible structure, composites are complex. For our needs, perhaps we just need "a big enough lump" of carbon. I will state my preference is quite old school, just using hard bits of balsa, it is sufficient if sized right, and if I'm cutting up lots of wood for other parts then I will have it to hand, wood glues to wood rather easily; I've not broken any wings from flight loads (the odd ground load is another matter). Agree on foam for making internal shapes, ribs, deck formers, internal fuselage structure - quick, cheap, easy.

Yes, no, maybe. Without being all "it were better back in the days" balsa does have excellent strength to weight, is reasonable weight for us in workable thicknesses, is possible to form by sanding and whatnot. Although its pigging expensive now. Sure foam is lighter. But not even slightly as strong, without covering in something that turns it into a composite. Maybe you don't need the strength. Maybe you do. Clearly, foamie airframes are viable, with the right type of foam and some carbon sticks. I think the real problem is that the amount of fliers who want to build was always quite small, and nowadays they don't have to, because ARTF.

Reports of the ease of navigation of the Disney channel have been greatly exaggerated.

Ariel, this may be useful reference? https://outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=4644

3m display mount works very well for paper templates. Bear in mind paper is affected by humidity differently to balsa so remove the template ASAP, unless you want parts like pringles.

Digital scans also don't grow with humidity... End of day, if the finished masterpiece all fits together and is rigged straight, then a few mm here and there will make no difference to anything.

Some bedtime reading https://rclibrary.co.uk/title_details.asp?ID=2672

Low tech, keep it simple: knife, steel rule, sanding block. Transferring shapes to wood, accurate cuts, accurate sanding, all learned skills. As john says you get better the more you build. You are way overthinking this.

Engines run faster in light. In many cases, this actually means producing/developing more bhp than when static. I never understood when the phrase was "unload". Anyway. Nomenclature aside. I always understood the mechanism to be, increased speed = more vacuum = pulling more fuel. Is that right?

With amazon you are wire likely to be buying from a third party using amazon as their sales and stocktaking service. Good luck finding genuine rc stuff in there. Lots of pointers already given to decent model shops, I can't add to the list

Don't knock us film cover-ers. I have neither facilities (space for booth, even temporary) nor a family environment (time, etc) to spray. Whereas, film i can do a panel an evening over many evenings. It might not be the most durable but it works well enough for long enough when a bit of care is taken around the oily bits. Seems a fraction of the cost of klasskote too. Not sure how it compare to Jon's approach of guild enamel plus 2k clear. Maybe more comparable, especially now the cheap film has vanished.

Pe Reivers? Thanks to wayback machine it is still here... http://web.archive.org/web/20061002002137/http://home.wanadoo.nl/pereivers/home.html http://web.archive.org/web/20070925161406/http://mvvs.nl/

Superb

Trim just about done

It should only be the pin block in the rx and the tracks between the relevant servo connections that need any checking. Rest of it will not be affected. Not sure I'd care to speculate what may have happened inside the esc though. Sometimes with electrical damage things may initially appear to still work ok, but the damage may reduce component life to the extent that a complete failure may be just around the corner.

You've fried the regulator part of your esc, my guess. At a minimum. Probably a new esc is needed. C8 is right about checking the rx internals. They're probably OK - but probably isn't definitely. Lesson is, don't connect a battery to the output of a regulator...

Anyway. Back to the OP. This engine, it has 4 pistons, who cares if 2 or 4 stroke. I see nothing but convention going on with the business end of the piston. Whilst they're squashed into a tiny volume, they are regular pistons. Air cooling might be problematic with the low volume? Liquid cooled, I guess no real difference to a conventional layout. The conrods have a 'device' to get linear motion translated into rotary motion. That part looks like a disaster waiting to happen... I'm guessing tolerance and wear will make operational lifespan of this unit really very low. I just can't see the genuine advantage over (say) a regular radial or flat layout. Maybe I'm missing something. Or maybe not. After all, Mazda have been making Wankel rotaries for years and they haven't really caught on. Also, I call shenanigans on their power output vs displacement claims. Their claim of "1 stroke" isn't precisely confidence inspiring when it comes to veracity of their media output.

Deltic was supercharged; inlet went straight to combustion chamber. I expect it is probably outclassed in terms of emissions by modern 4 stroke diesels of course, but the Deltic was from a time long before direct cylinder injection and the fine control that current ECUs provide, but there was no oil in the chambers.

in each pair of pistons, one was slightly "ahead" of the other; one of the pistons controlled the exhaust valves, the other controlled the inlet. (I think). at 4:21 in this video

I nominate Napier Deltic for having done the compact opposed piston thing, very successfully, a fair long time ago. Although that did not weigh 35kg.

Rumours of my demise have been greatly exaggerated. Although life has got in the way of this project... I have yet to complete the trim colours, but the covering film is close to being finished. Some last details are left to do on the throttle cable and gear legs.

It's taken me over a year to not quite finish one model, I don't think you're suffering a lack of pace.

No experience of air retracts, but, I have read that air tool oil is ideal (which makes a lot of sense). Such as: https://www.halfords.com/tools/power-tools-and-accessories/power-tool-accessories/sip-advanced-air-tool-oil-1-litre-117945.html

get well soon Peter

Based on prior experience of 40 size electric, I'd have gone even lighter on the motor, a 3648 with a 4S 4000.