Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GONZO

  1. Can anyone tell me what's happened to the mag due to be published on the 17th February 2023. I still haven't received mine yet. Is there a publication problem or has mine gone missing?
  2. Build 1/ Another, slightly larger fuselage. 2/Another, slightly smaller wing. Result, two KK Outlaws of slightly different size. Your not alone with these problems, even the commercial producers of parts have problems. I purchased a short kit of laser cut parts and a plan for a large vintage model from *********. It was a few years before I started work, only to find the parts and plan were two different scales. After contacting the supplier the correct parts IIRC were supplied, they'd known about this for a while and I was probably the last to turn up with the problem. Credit where due they replaced the parts with no problem.
  3. That's all well and good, but I didn't notice anything. But there has been little back up/info/advice from the BMFA concerning the consequences of this scam. What were the scammers after, have they downloaded some malware/key logger/etc? I have three separate malware programs and have done full scans with them all, nothing found. But that doesn't mean there is nothing. Just nothing that match's their data base. I checked two of my accounts via a cash point last Friday and they were OK. Since then it's not been possible to get to it, bit of snow and ice about and I live on a hill.
  4. My scam email was slightly different. It looked the same but claimed to originate from the Delyn club treasurer. Nothing looked untoward when I passed my cursor over the email so I opened it. It wanted me to sign in to my Microsoft acct, WHICH I DONT HAVE. Last Friday I went to the club meeting and others had had one or the other of these emails. The club denied any responsibility and that the treasurers email address book had been hacked. This Monday I contacted the BMFA and was told that it was Helen Feaver who had had her email address book hacked. I further enquired if there was any knowledge concerning the consequences from this scam email. There was not. I was given Andy Symons telephone number as he was dealing with the IT people. I have tried repeatedly to get more info and contact Andy with no success. I have three current accounts with a rather large total of money held. I am loath to engage in any on line banking, although it's becoming urgent that I do, until I have some reassurance. My concern it heightened due to the fact that my wife has had her identity stolen three times causing considerable problems. All occasions were caused by large organisations having their data base hacked, like the current situation I find myself in. I have received no explanatory email from the BMFA, I can get no explanation from them. IMO they should have protected the data better (data protection act?) and at least provide full and detailed information to those affected. A most unsatisfactory state of affairs.
  5. "Apparently the median age at death for the average British male is 80.9 years." I hear what you say DD but according to the ONS there is a very large increase in deaths per 1000 of the population between 76 and 78 ie it's when most people die. The figure you quote is 'pulled up' by a minority, a growing minority, living very much longer lives. Your genetic make up may well indicate long life but many events/ill health can de rate this. My relatives live/have lived to mid 80's to mid 90's. I met my great grandmother when I was 4 and she was 93, which meant she was born in 1858. But I doubt my life will be as long due to a near fatal accident that has left me with a non functioning pancreas and therefore insulin dependant. Over recent years I've lost people suddenly. My best friend of 56 years died in 2019 at 72, another good friend died some years back at 70, and another in 2021 at 76. Same club as Alex and he died at 71 and two other members of the club have died the second half of this year. Personally, once your in the back end of life anything could happen at any time. In the past year I've had two bad bouts of illness that have left me significantly physically less capable. I'm 75. Still interested in aero modelling but standing in a cold wet field in North Wales holds no attraction for me.
  6. Only 2 metres high? I have a 10ft long wall to head hight of old mags and books in my 5th bedroom. RCM&E from issue No1 with a gap of a couple of years in the mid 2000 teens.
  7. My local council, Conwy North Wales, told me to just cut off the leads and then put it with the rest of the dead batteries for the recycling crew to tip in their 'dead battery bin'. Must be OK as I've not heard of any recycling lorry's catching fire.
  8. The exhaust timing is so long as indicated by the piston crown going lower than the bottom edge of the exhaust port by 1.5mm to 2mm by eyeball guesstemate (not measured it yet). I agree with your comments on the inlet timing and you seem to be agreeing with my conclusion that the conrod is short, possibly by 1mm to 2mm. The possible reason for the short rod would be to lower the overall height of the engine. Installing a longer rod would mean part of the contra piston being out of the top of the cylinder at running settings. Not best practice but have seen this on other engines. The knock on issue would be the need to install a spacer ring of say 2mm between the top face of the cylinder clamping flange and the screw on head/cooling jacket to make space for the contra piston. I have discussed these points with the vendor but he favours reducing the height of the crankcase(it would be cheaper) by the available 0.5mm to go some way towards addressing the problem(spacer ring, thinner, still required). The issue with this, as I see it, is that it would cause a misalignment between the cylinder and crankcase exhaust ports, more aesthetic than a performance issue, and may not be enough. As you say, once the port timings are addressed by what ever process, the piston skirt modification may further enhance the performance of the engine. An additional difference I noticed between the 125 and the Indian and Irvine Mills 1.3 is the intake port in the cylinder wall. Indian and Irvine use a slot, 125 uses two drilled holes. It may be that the two holes could be joined to form a slot with further benefits. Thanks for all the input. It's been a useful exercise discussing the engine issues which seems to have confirmed my suspicions and not thrown up any viable alternatives. I'm torn between solving(possibly) an intriguing problem(at my expense on a new engine) or just sending it back.
  9. Spoken to the relevant person and existing stock is as mine, so is as intended unless all remaining are wrong. Pointing out the uncovering of the inlet ports by the piston crown came as new information to the vendor. Original tester Maris Disler (performance data supplied by vendor) stated that he was expecting more from the engine and has commented elsewhere that this engine does not benefit from modification of the piston skirt. This I find strange as from the diagrams the transfer ports appear to be totally covered by the piston skirt at BDC. Perhaps this suggests incomplete/restricted charge getting into the crankcase. I'm aware of the port timing changes but as it's a diesel the compression is variable. I've obtained copies of the Aero Modeller tests of the SAM 125 and the Redfin 061 and the 061 performance is better on smaller props and only approx 200 rpm worse on 8 inch props(061 gave 0.1bhp @ 12500rpm; 125 gave 0.078bhp @ 9000rpm and flat further up the revs. An original Mills gives 0.105bhp @ 9000rpm). From the Utube vide by fiery 1962 the engine appears to start well and run on an 8 inch prop but no rpm figures are provided. I've sought to understand, with the assistance of others, why such a well made engine should be such an under performer(the testers figures not mine). Not just for my own enlightenment and satisfaction but for the vendor who could thus possibly rectify any identified shortcomings. The last communication I had with the vendor before he went on holiday was that he was going to contact Maris for more information.
  10. Do people not read my previous posts stating that the test performance(carried out by another person) of this engine is below that of my 'Indian' Mills 1.3. So, what purpose would be served by me running it? This engine is supposed to be a modern version, 'in the mode of', the Mills 1.3. It's a puzzle why such a well made engine should be below par on performance. My original post was to obtain information for possible reasons for it's lack of performance. Unfortunately I seem to have drawn a blank.
  11. I've still got the engine, unrun, for now. I had some feedback on another forum stating that stepping the front lower edge of the piston skirt had been found to be ineffective on certain engines like the one you mention. This suggests to me there is some other power robbing factor at work like induction or port timing. There is a tendency to use pre existing parts to cut production costs. Maybe, the con rod is from some other design or was made to the wrong dimensions. I say this because I'm beginning to suspect that the con rod is too short. I've yet to draw out a timing diagram, with different con rod lengths, to confirm my suspicions but with the addition of 2mm in length it looks like port openings fall into place. Of course I could be totally wrong.
  12. I've had a response on the Barton forum that explains the inlet ports opening above the piston crown (in 67 years of modelling I've only ever seen the inlet ports in the liner side wall being opened and closed by the rear lower edge of the piston skirt). Although the comment urged caution as this could be taken too far and be detrimental. It appears that in high performance side port engines this has been used to a very limited degree for improved performance. As I've said, I'm not too old to think I can't learn something new. I think the Aero Modeller comments re comparison with others may have been generous. Especially if you compare the 70 year old test performance curve with the published Aero Modeller data( which I believe is the same as I received on the separate data sheet). http://sceptreflight.com/Model Engine Tests/Mills 1.3 Mk II Throttled.html
  13. brokenenglish The distance selling regs in the UK allow you to return any item purchased 'at distance', online by phone etc for a full refund as long as it is within a certain time limit, is as received and unused. Plus you need no other reason than you have just changed your mind and no longer want it. As to whether it runs being the deciding factor this is false. Engines have been made and sold in the past that have been less than acceptable, the DC Bantam was one - looked OK easy to start and ran OK but had trouble pulling the skin off a rice pudding. As I stated the data sheet(not the aero modeller) sent to me detailing Maris Dislers findings were "less than expected" his words. Compare with the 70 year old test of a Mills 1.3 MkII Mills MkII test. As I have stated one of my Indian Mills exceeds the prop/rpm figures across the board, on some props by almost as much as 1000rpm. This is a new engine with ball race crankshaft that does not perform as well as a 'curry' Mills an engine generally accepted as agricultural. I see no point in running a series of prop/rpm tests on one of my four Irvine Mills 1.3 for comparison if it cant match or outperform a 'curry' Mills.
  14. It's not an old engine, it's brand new. If I run it returns would be complicated, thus the theorising. Easier to return an unrun engine under the distance selling regulations. The same model of engine has been test run(prop rpm figures) by Maris Dislers and has shown a low level of performance as detailed on a sheet supplied by the vendor. Maris commented on the test sheet that he was going to modify the front lower edge of the piston skirt to give improved gas flow to the transfer ports and then report back, nothing so far. I can carry out this if there was nothing else and I was confident it would fixed the low performance. But inspection has shown there are other issues and modifying the piston skirt may only be a partial cure at best. It would also negate my option to return the engine. I've compared the Maris Dislers prop/rpm figures with one of my Indian Mills 1.3 and the Indian shows up better across the range, some props 1000rpm faster. To me there is something not right with the engine design/production. I'm not too old(74) or have operated too many engines(100's) to believe that there is not the possibility that I don't know everything, that's why this little chat to explore possibilities. Although, I'm definitely falling on the side of regrettably returning it.
  15. Jonathan W If we are going to use the SAM 125 as an example then yes the porting is made intentionally this way. Because it is intentional doesn't mean it is correct(many model engines have been produced correctly but are poorly designed). If the stroke is reduced from 14mm to about 12mm it becomes a 1cc engine and porting falls into place. Perhaps an existing con rod was used where a longer version would be more appropriate to keep the porting correct. Although, this may then cause issues with the contra piston and the proportions of the whole top part of the engine. Power curves produced by Maris Dislers indicate a max of just under 0.08 bhp with a very flat bhp curve from 9000rpm to 11500rpm indicating, to me, breathing restrictions. The original, 70 years back, Mills 1.3 peaked at 0.12 bhp (50% higher) with a plain bearing crank. On some props the SAM 125 is 1000rpm down on one of my good Indian Mills 1.3. It is obvious from pictures of the internals, the piston, that the skirt does not have the cutaway in the front face to improve mixture flow into the transfer ports. This is an easily applied mod if all else was well. In fact Maris noted this and was going to do and then report results, but not so far. Perhaps he encountered the other issues. If I owned this engine(?)? I would be loath to carry out a mod then find it only effected a partial cure or no cure at all. One would then be stuck with a nice looking paper weight. To restate, I have no intention or desire to slate off any manufacturer. I was thinking that maybe some new scavenging/porting arrangement had been found to work, that I was unaware of, and was seeking conformation/information if this was so.
  16. You may think that but I couldn't possibly comment. No names no pack drill as I said earlier. I purchased the engine aware of the piston skirt/transfer port issue as I'm capable of rectifying that. But, the other ones are a no go.
  17. You may think that but I couldn't possibly comment. No names no pack drill as I said earlier. I purchased the engine aware of the piston skirt/transfer port issue as I'm capable of rectifying that. But, the other ones are a no go.
  18. It's supposedly test run before sale. No doubt it will run but power will be low( information I have indicates no more than 2/3 the power of the 70 year old original design which had plain bearing crank and new has twin ball race)
  19. It's new not SH or a bitsa. Currently on sale. Modern version based on a 70 year old design. Don't want to cast bad rep when there may be a reason like recent design innovation, although I doubt it.
  20. A question to those who are knowledgeable on design aspects of side port IC model engines, like the venerable Mills 1.3 etc. To the best of my knowledge and experience(I have numerous examples of each type of engine: Irvine Mills 1.3 & 0.75, Indian Mills 1.3 & 0.75, MP Jet 040 & 1.8, CS Deezil, ED Comp special, etc) the induction is controlled by the piston skirt uncovering the induction inlet hole/s in the liner side wall. All my engines bar one, recently acquired (no names no pack drill), do not uncover the liner holes with the piston crown when at BDC. To me this is a serious design/manufacturing flaw as any residual combustion pressure could/would vent into the inlet against the flow of any fresh incoming charge thus adversely affecting the breathing of the engine. There are two other failings with this engine, one fixable the other like the above not really fixable. 1/ the front piston skirt obstructs the gas flow into the transfer ports from the crankcase as the piston nears BDC; fixed by cutting away part of the skirt. 2/ the piston crown goes way lower than the bottom edge of the exhaust ports leaving a significant volume that will not be scavenged of exhaust gas; only fix I can see would be is by lowering the cylinder in the crankcase casting, this would also address the inlet port issue. It's almost as if the wrong liner for the stroke of the engine has been used. Any comments from those who are knowledgeable on engine design welcomed.
  21. I've modified Enya 35's to take an ASP/SC 52 silencer. The ASP/SC 52 silencer holes are closer together(NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE IT FEASABLE TO DRILL THROUGH THE LUGS TO THE OTHER SIDE) than the external dimension over the OUTSIDE of the lugs. So, I milled(you could possibly carefully file) two grooves on the outside of the lugs from exhaust face to the rear step such that there was just clearance for the bolts screwed into the silencer. This has the added benefit of providing rotational support for the now much longer silencer to stop it twisting about the exhaust face. I used the formed Enya thickish metal strap squeezed together to provide a place for the screw heads to pull up against(same as when using a standard Enya silencer). This has worked well and takes the 'bark' out of the 35 with the standard silencer. Do not over restrict the exhaust of these cross flow engines as they will get very hot. HTH
  22. IIRC the FD16 (and FD17) were for early systems with split supplies, +2.4v centre tap -2.4v, and had 4 wires on the plug. If you want slow servos you need to try the even earlier Futaba linear servos supplied for use with the DigiMax systems, they had 5 wires.
  23. Got a BNIB Merco 61 spark(factory model not a conversion) but have never run it. You may find something on YouTube to give you an idea on the running qualities, props, etc. I think I would ditch the two position timing original ignition and investigate the use of a Chinese unit with the auto advance facility.
  24. I believe Shaun Garrity flew a K6 in a Stentor some years back. You may be able to contact him via the single channel forum site https://mode-zero.uk/index.php HTH
  • Create New...