Phil Winks

Posted by Peter Miller on 01/11/2015 22:04:34: Sorry. It isn't a Spitfire, It is a SPITEFIRE!!!! This probably accounts for all the wrinkles. Hmmm do I detect a hint of sarcasm Mr Miller

Seriously mate absolutely do not rush back on my account make sure your fit 1st,

Posted by Dylan Reynolds LaserCraft Services on 26/10/2015 18:55:03: Well my winter is looking pretty busy as I have to; Sort Airsail kits - Auster .40, Auster 1/4 scale, Chipmunk, Gas Buggy, Skyroamer, Beaver, Tomahawk II, Evans Volksplane, Voltimer, Skeeta, SEA5a I also have a couple of large laser projects I need to finish, (one in particular) As well as sorting my own stuff - Spad VII 1/3 scale, Alby DVa 1/3 scale, Shackleton build, 200% Dawn Flyer, He111, another part build I aquired (I can never remember the name of it), another new aquisition which needs a refurb a Rawle Aviation Partner, sort the Goshawk out, plus my foamie glider and me109 need doing, oh and if I get a sec the Mass Build whatever that turns out to be Which winter was we finishing in?   Dylan please note my amendments to your penultimate post Mate  I trust your properly on the mend Edited By Phil Winks on 26/10/2015 19:09:16

Interesting Chris on the issue of increased lift the props on the under-slung variant will be centered just 2" below the wing center and the tip 3 1/2" above it so there will indeed be a goodly area of prop affected air flow above the wing also it occurs to me that with a contra rotating design the upwards traveling portion of the prop vortex will be hitting the underside of the wing out board of the pylon and possibly could have a marked affect on A, lift and B, reducing tip stall, not that B is an issue on this bird in fact quite the reverse the stall is so stable she all but drops straight down in a stall situation

Simon the under slung/pylon mount lowers the motor centre to the original thrust line, ie same shaft height as original and as the new motors spin the same diameter but smaller pitch props, the prop to ground clearance is the same.And with the main wheels positioned as they are even a tip over onto the wing tip leaves the prop still clear, only just but clear all the same. Allen I see your point there but remember the E-Pioneer isn't designed for wing mounted motors so where ever I mount them much the same beefing up will be needed and yes the pylon will add a tad more weight but to be fair it's negligible and after my experience with a mobious mounted on the top of the LE breaking the airflow over just under 2", I suspect that although the wing lifts well it doesn't take much to upset it's efficiency and I do want it at it's best possible, on the point about mounting the motor plate directly to the LE I've done a crude mock up and the motors do need to be forward to achieve the correct COG without the need for to much church roof being added Edited By Phil Winks on 13/10/2015 18:02:43

Hi Tim, both will be fixed to one of the ribs with a diagonal brace running from the fix/spar intersection back to the rear wing bolt with an extra cross brace in the fuselage to help spread the load along the wing root and prevent the wings trying to bend forward, on the thrust line you have confirmed what I though about the 1st option and the reason I came up with a lower thrustline alternative, thanks. On the question of adding weight, because I know someone will make this point, I've already tried her with a 6oz lead payload and apart from needing a slightly higher landing/take of speed she behaved very well, so hope fully I can make all the mods without going over that limit, at present it looks like it'll be about a 4oz increase including the FPV gear and extra motor/esc and both pods.

Thanks Colin it certainly will be interesting if only to find out if the conversion improves her, Even though the motors are smaller, they still swing the same diameter prop though they do have a finer pitch, though not by much and the power output combined is a little better but the predicted thrust is about 25% up so she could be a nifty mover if required, on the pod design thanks for confirming my thoughts it's all help full stuff

One of my projects for the winter is to convert my Seagull E-Pioneer to a twin allowing me to fit some FPV gear into her with the camera where the old single motor lives. my quandary is between the following 2 prototype designs for the wing motor pods, As you can see it's a choice between conventional nacelles and a pod slung under the wing. the 1st is self explanatory, the advantages I see with the 2nd is the thrust line matches the original and the pod is, I believe, less likely to affect the lift characteristics of the wing. All opinions and advice welcome

This winter I've promised myself I'll finish the luscombe silvaire, the Blohm and Voss P170 and convert my E-Pioneer to a twin so I can fit an FPV system into her with the camera in the nose where the original motor lived quite a challenge when work rears it's ugly head as things are manic there for the foreseeable future so probably no mass build for me this year

Not so crude though I agree simple and very effective indeed, a very nice touch Dylan Edited By Phil Winks on 16/09/2015 21:23:46

Posted by Simon P on 30/08/2015 21:15:12: Someone's been watching too much antique's roadshow ... **LINK** Edited By Simon P on 30/08/2015 21:15:44 I had one of these the year I left school, 1972 I think it was a reasonably recent kit then, not that I'd pay more than £20 for that kit nostalgia or not, especially as the plan is on outerzone **LINK** (new tab/window)

Here's a bit of an update as its over a year since I posted in this thread. She has flown superbly on 3s and got me comfortably through my A test last august, a long over due event, since then I've tried, with disappointing results, a 4s set up, performance was not up at all, mostly due, I feel to to big a battery, so a lighter bty will be tried soon. As soon as I put the E-Pioneer II together, yes I hit the deck to hard when I screwed a roll up while coming out of a stall turn way to close to terra firma for comfort. To be honest the only real damage was the main fuselage, the nose section and tail feathers un damaged, and only one tiny hole in one wing and a bent wing tube, no damage whatsoever to the hardware Rx etc (even the prop seems good), thats all tested and performs fine. So a new kit purchased and delivered 3 days after the mishap from George at 4-Max with a 1250 kv motor as a possible upgrade from the 100kv one fitted once I've done my usual power and thrust tests on it. Edited By Phil Winks on 20/08/2015 19:08:35

Posted by Stevo on 18/08/2015 08:43:41: Flair BrisFit alert! Looks like a restoration project, but looks as though he is open to offers! to start with the cowl is upside down bless

Posted by ted hughes on 17/08/2015 22:04:43: This is not a criticism of this item, I am just curious about it.Is this a receiver and ESC combined?:**LINK**_ It is indeed a very old school 27mhz rx esc combo and given it requires 7.2v and all we had back then were Nicd and Nimh it's hardly surprising successful flying was a struggle

I totally agree Joliffee and it just may be a first in the history of the mass build, At the very least it'll be interesting to see how they've faired after 2yrs

Posted by jolliffee on 09/08/2015 20:09:24: Good to see this thread resurrected, my Barnstormer hasn't flown but now I think its time to dust it down and get it ready - maybe we should have a get together at Greeenacres next year -? I took mine this year Joliffee though it didn't fly this time the gusty turbulent cross wind put me of though I did fly my trusty old e-pioneer, but a re-union next year sounds a great idea

You didn't have to ask twice Cymas just because you've got twice as many wings there's no need to rub it in Absolutley you can join in in fact a few Bistormers were built as a part of last years mass build I even saw one back at Greenacres this year

That is just lovely Bernard you will find you need to use the rudder quite a lot in turns and with out differential (more up than down) the ailerons can be quite counter productive but then it wasn't originally designed to have them

Posted by MikeS on 02/08/2015 19:43:20: You know I was with you guys on this but now you tell me he ships worldwide. Must buy it...... cant stop myself..... reaches for card. You must be in desperate need of a dirty engine shaped paper weight Mike

Posted by Daithi O Buitigh on 02/08/2015 16:11:29: He changed the description to 'The condition is as shown in the pictures' Mainly, I think, because of the following conversation I had with him. My 1st message "Hi I'd be interested to see a video of this engine working, as described, as it's missing its carburetor Regards Phil" his reply "Sorry I have no facilities to do that " Regards Craig to which I replied "That's fine but can you explain how it is being sold as working when without a carburetor it obviously won't" Regards Phil at this point he changed the description and replied "I didn't think it was listed as Sold as working " then he had the temerity to add "Okay £50 it is then Regards Craig" I, needless to say, won't be answering that last message lol

I'd say he's no idea what he's selling or worse he's deliberately being misleading. A message suggesting a video of it working, as described, would be interesting to see as the carb is missing got this response. " I'm sorry but I have no facilities to do that" go figure gents.

I have to agree Peter it looks like an old engine caused a new ish trainer to crash even the nose leg is still shiny

My best wishes to your Dad too Richard, sounds like a true tough luck story, looking forward to flying with you at the weekend