Martin McIntosh

I use Bekra 10 on my small four strokes up to 52s, the extra nitro smoothes out the needle settings to make them less critical.

My Ohmen has an OS 26FS which fitted easily and the model flies much better than on electric; I believe that the 30 has the same dimensions. Plenty of info on the build blog.

Cheers .

MG, what sort of weight is your slope version please? I am now well ahead with the covering and will post more pics soon.

I use the mix switch to toggle between coupled ail and rud or normal independent on some models. Works out well. Don't remember the B25 I had being a problem.

You now have a choice of the Rutan canard or the Eppler 374 which must be the same or very similar, also either could have the thickness increased if you wish by downloading even the basic version of Profili. It makes everything very simple.

Hi Rich, No need to publish a plan, the centre ribs are 45mm apart and the rest 1-8 are spaced at 40mm which works out quite well. Braces are about 3/6 deep and then the outer sections epoxied on. LE is 1/8 plus another 1/8 after sheeting is done. Ailerons simply cut out and faced with 1/8 but if I had had enough suitable wood I would have made them solid. Not worth a 50 mile round trip to the LMS.

Rich, yep. The ribs are from 3/32nd and the skin 1/16th with a 3/16th spruce top spar and a partial bottom spar from 3/16th balsa. MG, thanks for that. Am I correct in assuming that an electric version was not actually produced since the only reference to one is the suggested motors? There will be when I get it done and my eyes sorted out. I have flown a TN 132", my own design 81" and the small HK version, all of which refused to turn with ailerons alone so this one is getting rudders using an external linkage: more complication. Due to me making a model like this in such a small size I have found that there is much more work than first anticipated but it will give me something to do in the shed for a fair time thankfully. I was going to cover it in HK polyester which I started to do the tail with then found two new sheets of Litespan in black which will be much better since it will go round the tight curves and readily take paint. I checked the motors on 3s and 5x3 three bladers. They produce 80W each which will probably be far too much but I do not have any 2s left which are still any good. I have 2x TGY 500 HV packs which will make up a 3s2p 1000 and will fit OK. The other inner nacelle is the next to be treated but I am rapidly running out of soft 1/2 and 1/4 balsa.

So am I!

Being a bit of a Lancaster fan I could not help looking at this although I already have far to many models, lots of which are yet to be flown because I now have great problems walking, carrying and seeing properly and need help to get my stuff across the field. The laser eye treatment I had 10 or so years ago has now failed and I face a 4 month wait to get small cataracts removed, so here we go again. With the now silly cost and availability of many model building materials I wondered if I could build it purely from my scrap box. I have stripped down my small quads because our landlord decided to ban them so have plenty of motors and props, forward and reverse. Now, being me, I rarely build as per plan and did not like the idea of a hand launched model with no u/c. luckily I have a spare pair of tiny retracts. One came with a broken micro switch but I was able to replace it. With all the associated extra wiring this was what you may term a tight squeeze and called for a built up wing. The section on the plan is as near as dammit the canard on Rutan aircraft so I drew up the ribs with Profili.

I fully appreciate the need to check controls on the runway but sometimes things can slip through when least expected, especially with a well flown and tested model. I have been flying r/c for some 63(!) years and rarely get any trouble, especially with the advent of glitch free 2.4. When I said that I may not have power cycled the LD it could have been after I transferred the model to another TX. Amongst others which I no longer have a need for I have two DSX9 Txs and a modular PCM9Xii in which I can use a FrSky module. I have a very large number of JR 921 Rxs plus some Spektrum 7 and 9 ch ones, so a long time ago the cost had built up to a point where I would need to remortgage to change systems. The forum I got the memory change trick from invariably referred to Spektrum DX6 and DX9 sets. I believe that at least the DX9 uses a different protocol so I cannot blame DSM2. On the subject of DSM2, it certainly does not like the Tx to be too close to the model when powering up or binding. A delay can be expected while the Tx grabs and hogs two frequencies from the band.

Thanks all for reading my warning; it would seem that I am not alone. A bit fuller version of events just to clarify: When we were given the go ahead to fly electric in the evening at the Nats, I bit the bullet first and attempted a flight with my trusty Cap. 21. Aileron reversal on take off and said Cap. spread over the hallowed tarmac. Radio was a 6ch Spektrum DSM1, previously with no problems. Next time at my local field it happened with my ancient Limbo Dancer. I mainly use JR DSX9 but the memories were getting full so I bought an identical Tx and transferred some models across using a buddy lead in the usual way. I had done a lot of flying with the newer set by the time I put the LD on it. Obviously checked out OK in the shed but I may not have power cycled it after the transfer. Again reversed ailerons and splat! Same Tx used on Sun. Other than replacing what proved to be lousy TGY Nanotech LiFe packs with Zippies the model had not been touched for over 2 years, in fact the twin packs had not even had their first charge. Back to the attempt at flight and I have already told you the rest. I was completely stumped until I googled the problem.

Yesterday I went to the field with my 1:5 Chipmunk which has only had four flights over two years ago. The YS fired up and ran fine but the flaps and ailerons were all over the place; in fact the ailerons were reversed so no flying. This is the third time that this has happened with those brands but the first two models were not so lucky. I googled it and it turns out that it is not uncommon. One cure was to transfer the model to a spare memory then back to the original. This worked but don`t ask me how.

I recently had an ad on there and got an email to say that it was about to expire. It said `expiration date` and I thought that the site was British! Expiration is actually in the dictionary but surely `expiry` would be more in keeping, or can we not write our own s/w anymore?

LiFe for me every time now, way more reliable than LiPo`s. I have one petrol model with one on ignition but run it through a 5V 5A regulator since I once got caught out using a 6V NiMh. It destroyed the plug and ignition unit (RCXeL) after just 6 flights. You cannot use a checker on LiFe because it will always show 6.6V until the last few seconds of charge. Very few servos these days will not run on 6.6V. I have a Bipe which uses four on ailerons, two are normal and the other two HV because they were the only ones available during a lockdown. No difference in speed so I reckon that HV ones simply have a regulator on the amp.

This whole thing has got out of hand now. Can you just imagine geofencing on, say, an LMA model such as the giant Vulcan? Multi rotors maybe. All most of us want is to be able to take our toy aeroplanes to the local park/ club field.

Thanks for the update re Westcott, I was only repeating what they told the press at the time. The site is en route to Heathrow, Luton etc and there is a lot of very low level military activity over it, not to mention a vast amount of private aircraft and helis, many of which will be way below the quoted 800ft.

OK then, so much for article this that or the other, but nobody seems to have really grasped what I said about the private company which has set themselves up at an airfield (actually Westcott Venture Park) and unilaterally declared that they are exempt from any CAA regulations. We all know who will be blamed for any incidents which are bound to occur.

I don`t know what the range of 2.4 gHz is at height but it is very short on the ground (we are only allowed a meagre 100mW of rf power) so somebody trying to use monitoring equipment would need to be rather close and have line of sight. It is not as if we have control say 10mls away. Another point. Recently the local press said that a drone manufacturing company had set up at a disused airfield about 6mls away, intending to use what is left of the tarmac. The whole site is still under strict security because it is used for the development of rocket motors etc. The company decided to absolve themselves from the current drone legislation, why?!

I don`t think that I have read so much gobbledy gook in my life. Do the CAA honestly think that an average club flyer (sorry, now a `stakeholder` whatever that is) with the usual electric foamie has any interest whatsoever in it? Nothing stopping somebody who has just been given a quad for their birthday from going to a nearby field and flying it, being totally oblivious to any legislation.

Probably about 1m heavy duty cable at 4.8V on a Lanc. I now only run on 6V or 6.6V LiFe.

Having flown in aerobatic competitions for many years it is a test which I have never bothered to try. I set the cg so that the model will just drop into a spin on full up and rudder. Works every time and gives the right sort of feel when inverted, requiring a reasonable fistful of down ele. I hate flying models with the cg so far back that elevator input is not needed because the slightest movement of the stick will make it `jumpy`. Warbirds are, of course, treated rather differently.

PDT, the methanols were set up with tuned pipes which enabled a silencer (alloy can) to be alloy soldered to the rear then either a pepperpot end from several 1/16th holes or a small bore tube fitted. Because the gasses had cooled considerably by that time then the outlet could be very small. Also, changing from an 11x7 wood to a 9 3/8th three blader had a huge effect, albeit with a large reduction in power, but I am talking of 15,000 plus rpm. A figure of <79 dBa or the equivalent of whatever it was could be achieved (79 is half the noise level of 82). Video? We are talking of the mid 1970`s. Nik, the LMA should be able to help.

A temperature controlled soldering station of reasonable quality will do the job even with a small bit size. I am lucky enough to have a professional one and rarely use larger than 3 or 4mm bits.

Difficult question. I think that you would need to be midway between them from the front since they are probably cowled. Next thing is how far away and over what sort of surface? Long ago in my F3A days we soon discovered that at 7 or 10m the wind noise was usually more than the motor produced so somebody calculated what the equivalent at 1m would be, negating the wind. I cannot now remember the figure but it could have been 92 or 94 dBa. This was over grass or the more usual tarmac, with the model on the ground because flight time was at a premium at a competition. Petrols are a real problem because the dBa scale favours the higher frequency of a 10cc glow at 12-14000 rpm.