Piers Bowlan

An earlier post said that the DX7 was made by JR, I don't know how true this is Ron, but do you think the build quality was better than the later Spektrum DX8? I used a JR9303 for a while, which was DSM2 with no problems whatsoever but I only used it for slope soaring away from other flyers. I now use an XG11 on DMSS.

MPX Easystar, or Hobby King Bixler? MPX Easy Glider Pro if you fancy something a little larger. As long as you avoid flying near vessels, vehicles, persons or structures and fly in a responsible fashion there is no reason why you can't find a secluded beach which might be suitable for model flying. It rather depends on where you live. Be sure to check that there are not any local authority by-laws which prohibit powered model flying on the beach, in which case you should still be able to fly a HLG/DLG:- Dreamflight Alula or Libelle? As Ernie said, if you land out in the sea the salt water will 'fry' the electrics in your model. If you get sand in your motor it can be washed out with fresh water believe it or not, then immediately dried out with paper toweling and put on a radiator or in an airing cupboard to dry. I used to fly model flying boats and that is what I used to do at any rate, without problems.

I have flown slope soarers from Mill Hill, Shoreham, since 1985. What a pity one avoidable incident could lose an excellent flying site. I thought the CAA report was well balanced if a little generous on behalf of the (French) DR400 pilot but then I would say that! The Robin pilot stated that he was at 600-800 feet amsl when he collided with the model glider but the CAA considered 400-500 feet was nearer the mark. (450 feet would have put him on the RW20 4.5 degree PAPI at a range of one mile from touch down) He was also twenty five degrees displaced left of the extended RW centreline at one mile from touchdown, therefore clearing the brow of the hill and the car park by appx. 100 to150 feet? Aircraft landing on RW 20 are usually further north when they cross the ridge affording them better terrain clearance and putting them further away and higher than the slope soarers. The pilot might have displayed better airmanship by doing so even if he wasn't a regular visitor to Shoreham Airport and unaware of the model gliders presence. When I first started flying from Mill Hill I was told by other flyers that you were not allowed to fly higher than fifty feet above the brow of the hill. This seemed very sensible advice considering the proximity of the approach to RW20 at Shoreham and it wasn't an issue in any event as most of the flying was done out in front of the hill rather than above it. I did think it odd that there weren't any signs in the nature reserve car park referring to the height restriction but I think it was because it was an agreement with a local model flying club rather than a by-law. I was unaware of the 4kg weight restriction until reading this thread but none of my gliders get anywhere near that and most of those flying at Mill hill are light weight Wild Things or Zagi types. There was a note prohibiting powered flying buried amongst the many bylaws along with not starting camp fires and taking your dog litter away with you. In any event the model restriction was probably due to the fact that the site is a nature reserve rather than powered model aircraft presenting an increased risk to low flying full sized aircraft! As the model glider was less than 7kg (.615Kg apparently) there was no requirement to obtain permission from ATC for operating in the Shoreham ATZ but the CAA did mention CAP 658 'Model Aircraft : A guide to safe flying' which recommends a call to ATC. In the past I have phoned ATC Shoreham to get a surface wind check and advise them of my intention to slope soar from Mill Hill but they seemed ambivalent or disinterested so it is not something I have done in recent years. How many people have heard of CAP 658 least of all read it? Mill Hill is in the South Downs National Park and part of their remit is to promote leisure activities within the park. They might prove to be a useful ally, however, if the airfield operator and the Adur District Council have set against model gliding from Mill Hill, sadly I think it's days are numbered.           Edited By Piers Bowlan on 17/01/2016 05:23:04 Edited By Piers Bowlan on 17/01/2016 05:27:11

Beb, we know that you are passionate about MRs but aren't you being a tad over sensitive by saying people are making 'sweeping derogatory statements' just because they express the opinion that they find MR's boring? Personally I am interested in anything that flies, a sort of jack of all trades and master of none! I have enough components to attempt a MR (hex) build, just as soon as I can find the time. My passion is gliders and e-gliders however but I don't mind if people say they are rubbish - each to his/her own. For those that don't like the spike in 'drone' coverage in RCM&E don't worry, it will pass. The magazine has to follow trends and fashion to survive, as the advertising revenue that springs from it is it's life blood. Remember those foam hydrofoil toy thingies which were a fad for a short while, several manufacturers made them. Or indeed the plethora of helicopter articles. Now they have their own specialist publications and so it will be with MRs. I am not saying for a minute that MRs will fade away, although the CAA/FAA might secretly wish they would! Commercial UAVs may become as important in the fullness of time as PCs and the Internet, or is that going too far? RCM&E can rely on my subscription, I just wish they would go easy on the 'big stuff' coverage - and the indoor scene doesn't thrill me either...... Keep up the good work with the GLIDER COVERAGE David! As I say, each to their own, it's a broad church.   Edited By Piers Bowlan on 11/01/2016 05:47:59

The MkII plan on Outerzone shows the top and side elevations so if it were me, I would just project the fuz formers from those two elevations. From the photos, the top turtle deck is just a curve and from the scrap view on the left of the plan the underside is the same. It may not be 100% correct but pretty close, but then I am not a purist! Nice looking model though. Would you be doing a lecky conversion or fitting a diesel to be authentic.   Edited By Piers Bowlan on 03/01/2016 13:46:30 Edited By Piers Bowlan on 03/01/2016 13:47:27

Shouldhavegotamac ! Retreat to the bunker Piers. Retreat to the bunker.....

Nigel at Maginnis has a wide printer that prints off a roll and I have checked and there is no distortion of the images. If you you email him the PDF file and tell him exactly what you want he will print it for you. I downloaded some three views of aircraft from the internet and he manipulated the images I wanted to fit on the paper (enlarged plan of wing, side elevation and front view). He did this while I waited and, as I say, it was just a few pounds. I sometimes go sailing from Chichester marina so if you were not in a hurry (weather terrible at present) I could pick up your printed plan and drop it off to your home. Just PM me if that suited.

I don't know where you are David but I live in West Sussex and use a local printers in Portslade called, James P Maginnis Ltd. Always very helpful when enlarging plans to any size and not expensive either. Hopefully you can find someone similar in your area. I am about to get PM's Ballerina plan printed (same size) so that I can cut it up and produce a set of parts. I will also get the wing printed in reverse as only the right wing is shown on the free plan, as you know.

The early Spitfires (Mk 1A I think) had 60 degrees of flap but this was soon increased to 89 degrees as this produced a more nose down attitude on the approach to land, improving the pilots view. It also enabled a steeper approach, good for getting into small airfields. Be aware there there will probably be a large pitch change with flap so you will need to re-trim, best done in the circuit rather than on the approach. Likewise if you go-around (overshoot) be careful of retracting the flaps too near the ground because of the trim change. Also check to see that you have enough elevator authority in the flair with the flaps down as you may run out of up elevator because of the trim change (you may need to increase the amount of travel). As previously stated in an earlier post, ensure the flap travel is full and free, don't just fit a more powerful servo. If the flap is binding it will drain your Rx battery quickly. Eighty or ninety degrees of flap produce a lot of drag (that is what they are for essentially) so use power on the approach as you can lose speed very quickly if you try a glide approach;- with potentially disastrous consequences! Good luck. Just my 2p worth

Looks excellent Tim, very light. Were there any issues with the kit, wood quality or parts fit etc.? What e-powerset are you planning to use? Looks like Southport beach Geoff.

The razor saw and razor plane are essential not optional extras in my book. But, as you say, we are all different in what we consider essential.

Jon, you said in your post on page one that;- 'the new petrol glow plugs are interesting but as we don't make them it would be hard to sell an engine for them.' Presumably you don't make glow plugs for any of your engines, so what is the difference, or is that a silly question? If they could work in a four stroke and there is not a significant down side to their use then they could potentially save the weight of the ignition system/batteries, not to mention cost?

The Eternal vigilance of GCHQ has saved this country the pain of numerous attacks, we will never know the full story. Vigilance by the general public is essential particularly within communities where radicalisation may fester. It is sadly true that there is not any total defence against this kind of attack, particularly by Jihadi lone wolfs if not by organised gangs. So Dave, what is the alternative to not stepping up the fight even if that does initially make the situation worse? Stop the bombing, pull out the special forces, stop surveillance and drone flights? In short, turn the other cheek and pretend it it is not happening; it is not our civil war? Soon, a million displaced Syrians will have entered Europe seeking a new life, free of persecution and the fighting. IS have expanded their war into Turkey so is it likely to stop there? History has shown that fanatical tyrants and bullies with expansionist ambitions need to be stood up to and taken to account. Whether walking away and doing nothing or getting further embroiled in this conflict, sadly, I feel the situation will get worse before it gets better.

Jim, I was only looking at the original RM article and plan (Nov 1990) the other day, with a view to building one as my 'winter build'. What e-power train are you planning to use? Do you have any thoughts of selling some kits of the SLEC laser cut parts of the Tiger 72? That could be the decider for me!

I tend to agree with Levanter3, if you want it to be a 'mass build' more than one design would would attract people to participate. As far as catering for beginners is concerned I am surprised one of Peter's 'vintage designs' is not in there, like Watts Dog, The Big Ship or Sandow for instance. For some people only a 'scale model' will do (using the term loosely here) which is perhaps why the Tucano was so popular a couple of years ago? Both PM's Whitman Tailwind and his RF-4 appeal to me. I bought the canopy to build a Werewolf some time ago but a house move meant that I never got around to starting the project. I was intending to give it a civilian 1930's style scheme though as the pseudo military scheme wasn't to my taste. A pity Miss Lizzy wasn't nominated by Peter as it is definitely on my 'must build' list and the MB would have been a good excuse. Perhaps it was left out as there isn't a CNC parts pack available?

1) Dragon Dancer 2) Werewolf 3) Ballerina

I tend to disagree Cuban 8, the mags that are the most vulnerable are the ones that become too specialised as the readership pool diminishes. Advertisers will go with titles that have a large circulations to make it worth their while. I subscribed to Q&EFI for years but after a while I thought it became rather bland and repetitive so stopped my subscription, - so it is my fault! I wanted a broader content, after all, I am a jack of all trades and master of none! Some people have criticised RCM&E's increased coverage of 'drones' and multicopters. This is the growth area whether you think it is part of 'our hobby' or not, so the mag must embrace it to attract new readership. Personally I have been following Shahid Banglawala's development of his Angleview Black multicopter with great interest during the past few months as it puts the 'E' back into RCM&E. Alternatively I am not personally interested in the Quad reviews or indeed the latest Chinese ARTF imports although a lot of people are, so they need to be in the magazine. It is analogous to all the 'rubbish' they put on prime time TV. I am not interested in soaps or game shows (I would rather be sanding little bits of balsa) but the TV channels have to cater for the masses for the viewing figures, which are akin to the mag's circulation figures. The hobby is diverse, so the editorial staff try and include something for everyone but it is probably a case of, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Hi Arron, How about Derek Woodward's, 36in span Very Short Plane? The plan is here. it was published in the March 2010 edition of Q&EFI magazine so if you buy the back number for £4.25 from Traplet, which I believe is still available, you will get the plan for free! It is 4 channel, has banded on wings and has a very low wing loading so can fly slowly if you are flying in a small area. If you google, 'Very Short Plane' you will find a rather nice video of it. It flies very well like all of Derek's designs. Oh, and Traplet do a CNC wood pack too for about £24, although it is a pretty simple build with few parts. Edited By Piers Bowlan on 04/11/2015 09:09:23 Edited By Piers Bowlan on 04/11/2015 09:11:21

Thanks for that link Simon, I will pop out tomorrow and get one as I was looking for a new mask..

Eric, just because you can charge up at more than 1C (i.e. 2C), because you have a powerful power-supply/charger does not mean that you should, necessarily. As I am sure you are aware, it seems likely that the life of your LiPos may be significantly reduced by charging at a higher rate, especially so if they get hot. Perhaps that does not bother you. I personally would not wish to charge LiPos in my garage if I though it was likely that they would burst into flames because I was charging them at a high rate, even if my garage was empty and had a concrete ceiling (which it doesn't). A 'safety sack' will not necessarily prevent your house burning down if it has 6 X 3300mAh 6s LiPos in it!. Besides, what's your hurry? just my 2p worth.

Chris Golds did a 31in span speed 400 powered Shinden in Dec 2001 EFI magazine (am I allowed to mention it on this site!) with a plan and construction article. Obviously it was a simple model but there may be some snippets of useful info regarding the setup, C of G and trims etc. which might be transferable to a much larger model. I will see if I can dig out the magazine as I may have it somewhere. Here is the plan. A chat with Chris could be productive.

Just found a very authoritative piece about the Spitfire's '2.5 degree washout'. Ops! What do I know? (Not a lot!) Edited By Piers Bowlan on 11/10/2015 14:58:54

  Yes Colin, it is the span-wise flow that causes the vortexes, not only at the tips but also all along the trailing edge of the wing, although it is at the tip where most of the drag is produced. The wing produces lift and the by-product is induced drag. Induced drag can not only be reduced with washout (improving the lift drag ratio) but also with a higher aspect ratio. Wash-out tends to reduce lift at the wing tips to produce the optimised lift distribution (elliptical). This also ensures that the root tends to stall before the tips to produce a benign stall characteristic. The Spitfires classic elliptical wings were very low drag because of their plan form but did not have any washout (contrary to what Wikipedia says!), hence it's vicious stall and departure into a spin for the unwary pilot. Washout however may increase the stalling speed to some degree for any given wing loading, depending on the wing section used. On balance the main downside to washout is just the extra complication and possibly weight of building a twisted wing, whether it be model or full sized. Richard Whitcombe developed winglets in the seventies to reduce the size of the tip vortex and hence induced drag. The winglets on a B747 reduce fuel consumption by 1% per winglet, so on a flight LHR-HKG you are talking about nearly two and a half tonnes of fuel saved. You could probably get the same effect by increasing the wingspan but it would make the aircraft more tricky to park! For future Blended Wing Body designs they are talking about folding wings. I would not have thought that winglets would have any effect on tip stalling but I could be wrong. I think you are spot on Colin with the flat plate wings and their lack of tip stall. The wing section is thicker at the tips relative to the chord so the wing root stalls before the tips.         Edited By Piers Bowlan on 11/10/2015 14:10:44

Totally agree Colin, nothing like a dollop (about 3 degrees) of wash-out to sort out a recalcitrant tapered wing from tip stalling. Modern airliners - don't their wings all have wash out? As for winglets, aren't they just to delay the formation of wing tip vortices and therefore reduce induced drag (so they burn less fuel - ££££££). Flat plate wings - they work, but is it because of the low Wing loading of these models (no landing gear or heavyscale finish etc.) or because of the low Reynolds number ( fleas fly but elefants don't) ? Looking forward to your Seafang being published Colin, looks very nice.   Edited By Piers Bowlan on 11/10/2015 03:03:37 Edited By Piers Bowlan on 11/10/2015 03:09:33

With over 170 of Peters designs to chose from, many of them in available with CNC packs from RCM&E plans service, it would seem that there is something to suit everybody's taste (unless you are a glider guilder, although Peter has modelled several motor gliders). For electric only newbys converting some of his IC designs might be challenging but some of his 'old timer' types like The Big Ship, Wattsdog and Sandow look very straightforward once a suitable e-power set up has been identified. If you were keen to have a vote you could nominate, say, 5 of Peters designs to find the most popular. Alternatively just leave it open to any PM design, as has been suggested. That would get my vote!