Nigel Heather

I have just acquired a Mick Reeves Gangster 63 Lite kit. I am going to convert it to electric but this raises a question (well two) about the undercarriage. The standard build uses a tricycle undercarriage with the steerable nosewheel fitted in the IC engine mount. But I won't have that IC engine mount so what would I use instead to mount the nosewheel to the firewall. Would saddle clamps be okay or are there specialist fittings for just this purpose. Would it be better to go tail-dragger instead. I'm loathed to mess with the original and quite fancy having a trike undercarriage for a change - but just asking. Cheers, Nigel

Thanks, may have to re-purpose them by the sound of it. They are EMAX ES3054 - I bought them for a fun fly to keep the weight down following advice - but sounds like I should put something bigger in their. Question is what to do with the 'mini' servos because they are very nice - shame to throw them away or stuff them in a cupboard unused. I have three kits on the stash Fusion II Fun Fly Cambria Fun Fighter Gangster 63 Lite I wonder whether to put them in the Fun Fighter - before you say no way - my intent with it is quite different - I'm using electric power, want to make it as light as possible, and I want to fly it much more gently, much more slowly than the mad all-out displays they do at airshows. So maybe I could use them in that.

My experience is only with XT60 but suspect this is even more reverent to XT90. I recently had to solder some pretty thick wires (on a watt meter) to XT60 and I found that the heat needed was sufficient to slightly melt the plastic housing, enough to make pushing into the mating connector very tight or not possible. The solution, which I’m sure you all know but was new to me, is to join the two mating connectors before soldering - that way, when the the plastic melts, the mating connector holds the pins in the proper position.

Hi, Is there a rule of thumb for how much torque is required for a typical 40-size sports plane. When I started out there were standard-sized servos and that was it. Usually, you just bought the basic Futaba or Hitec servos. Now, with the large range of budget brands, there is so much affordable choice, analog/digital, plain/ball bearing, nylon/metal gears, size. Would you still go for a standard analog, nylon-geared, plain bearing, 40g servo with a torque of 3.5kg or would you consider a digital, metal-geared, ball raced bearing, 17g servo with a torque of 3.0kg? The reason I ask is that I have a fun fly kit in my stash and to keep the weight down I have gone for some 17g 3.0kg mini servos - they are very nice, possibly the nicest servos that I have ever owned. I am also about to add a Gangster 63 Lite to my stash and wondering what servos I should use on that - should I go for 40g 3.5kg standard or the the 17g 3.0kg mini. Cheers, Nigel

For starters the total weight of the two aircraft may be different. One has the nose wheel removed, tail wheel and nose weight added. Next there are are things like wing and tailplane incidence - simply, this is the angle of the wing and tailplane as they sit on the fuselage. Yes they should be the same but the components are never precisely identical and even tiny differences can make a difference. Then there is wing and tailplane level - this is the how level they are port to starboard - again even the slightest difference will result in different trim. Then is there is the fin - are they both precisely vertical - even the slightest difference will result in different trims. Then there is aerodynamics - the air resistance of the trike and the tail dragger will be different. The trike will have much more drag on the nose. The there is the motor thrust angle - the direction the motor points relative to the fuselage - often a bit down and a bit right. But if it is not precisely the same on the two aircraft then trim will be different. Basically, pretty impossible to build two identical aircraft that need precisely the same trim. Loads of reasons why two apparently identical plane willbtrim differently.

Where does that go. Do you mean between the undercarriage and the fuselage?

Would you recommend the Basic or Deluxe kit? My instinct was to go for the Deluxe because it must be better because it says 'Deluxe' on the box. But I've just read a very old post saying the the undercarriage mount is a weak point and the best option is the wire undercarriage because it is more forgiving.

Thanks, thought that was the case but wanted to make sure.

I have a Fusion II fun fly in a box which is next to the building board. How much of an overlap would you say that is with a Wot4 Classic - appreciate they are not the same, but how similar? Essentially, I don’t want to have two aircraft that fill the same role.

I’ve been thinking about a traditional kit WOT4 with the intention of converting it to electric power. Then I became confused because the kit description says that there are two versions, 52” parallel wing and 56” tapered wing. The site I was looking at didn’t show two different kits so I wondered whether you get both choices in the kit but I can’t see how that could be possible. Then I found a seller seller both as different kits. So clearly there are two - one is the Mk II Classic (52” straight) and the other is the Mk III (56” tapered). Any views, options, feelings on which is the best to go for? Cheers, Nigel

Everyone expects the buy/sell rates to be favourable to the bank - I don't mind that as I don't expect them to exchange the currency for free. What I don't like is where you get charged twice, you get an exchange rate that favours the bank then on top of that they charge a fee.

Thanks, I'll look into that Wise account. Can you use it like a credit card - for example if I am on holiday in Greece, can I load it up with Euros and then just use it as a credit card to use in shops, cafes, restaurants etc. ?

One benefit of PayPal, if the option is presented (it isn't always), is that doing the currency conversion on the PayPal side can be a lot cheaper than doing it on the credit card side. It is also much more transparent. I bought an Elegoo 3D printer a few months ago, the conversion was done by the credit card and I was shocked to discover that it totalled £43 on a £330 purchase. This was a combination of rip-off exchange rates and exorbitant handling and administration fees. There was no transparency, I didn't know I was going to be hit so hard until the credit card statement arrived a few weeks later. By comparison if you let PayPal do the conversion they use a reasonable exchange rate and they display exactly what you are going to be charged in £s before you press PAY. As an example I recently bought some LiPos from Zeee - came to £107, this time I selected PayPal for currency conversion and the final cost was £111. If I'd let the credit card do the currency conversion it would have been £125. But note, you aren't always offered the option. If you are directed through the full PayPal application then you do but some of the B2B applications used by sellers are cut-down and don't have the full range of options.

Looking at the 4-Max setup it uses 4S - in your experience, would you say that is sufficient or underpowered?

Now I look at it and understand how it works I’m inclined to agree with you. I actually think I’d prefer marking and cutting by hand. Cheers, Nigel

At the Wings of Wheels show I picked up a few SLEC tools - none that I had an immediate need for, none that I could not get by without, but they were cheap so I gave in. One is the hinge slitting jig, this one https://www.slecuk.com/hinge-slitting-jig-inc-screws I have exactly what is in the photo, but there are no instructions to speak of so I’m not entirely sure how to assemble it but especially how to use it. Any guidance welcomed.

I’m looking at a Wot4 and considering whether to go Classic (kit with veneered foam wings) or ARTF which I assume has built up wings. Can’t compare the weight because it doesn’t appear to be listed for the ARTF.

Fir the same plane, which us lighter, veneered foam or built-up wings. My gut feel says that the foam wings must be a lot heavier but then thinking about it the foam weighs very little and the veneer is possibly less would it total than the built up wing.

Which would be the best approach WOT ARTF EP/GP with electric power assembly Or WOT4 Classic with home bre electric power solution I appreciate that one is ready built, ready covered and the other is build from a kit. I don't mind doing either. I'm guessing that the ARTF is lighter because it has built up wings rather than veneered foam.

Anyone got a link to the BMFA responses. I got sent an email last week and I planned to go through the response over the weekend but I can't find the email - might have accidentally deleted it. Cheers. Nigel

Lurking in my storeroom I have an old unfinished Spin Doctor kit by Pete Tindall - this is a 62” sports aerobatic model loosely based on a CAP 222. I’ve had this for 20 years or so, it was originally designed for 60-90 two stroke, and I planned to fit an Irvine Q72 (which I still have). I had completed most of the build when I moved away from the hobby and it got mothballed. Thinking of resurrecting it, I could continue with IC power, I still have the Q72 so that would be easiest and cheapest, but I also wonder about electric power but not sure whether it is viable. It has 62” wingspan, the fuselage is quite wide, traditional balsa, ply, veneered-foam wings, not sue of the weight but won’t be light. I assuming it will need 6S at least but not really sure where to start.

Is there a short summary in layman’s terms describing what is being requested/proposed? Appreciate all the documents are available but it is a lot to read and understand.

To be honest, these days, I’d feel more confident of reporting serious crime to the BMFA than to the Police - more likely to get an actual response.

A different scenario. The program is typically where a company owes a person money but won’t pay up. The Sherriff is sent in to get payment or seize goods to the value. The trick they play is to shift the ownership of the company or assets - so they say that the company with the judgment no longer exists or that they don’t own any assets to take. This is a different matter to going into administration and writing off debts. But the real issue is that they could potentially change the ownership and shaft Futaba, there is not much Futaba could do about it but would they continue to do business with them - I wouldn’t.

Must admit, I’ve got lost in all the speculations, but I figure there must be something significantly different about the ownership for the administration buy out leading to writing off the debts. As far as I know, a company can’t simply declare themselves bankrupt, default all the debts and then continue exactly the same. There must be something to define Ripmax 2.0 as a new company.