Jump to content

Chris Salomon

Members
  • Posts

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Chris Salomon

  1. Facing up to my reluctance to build a foamy I wondered what are everybody's views on the use of light glass cloth and something like Poly-C?   I know it doesn't really need it and, yes, it will add some weight but, on the other hand, it will make it more durable, more attractive (particularly close up) and more efficient.   Alternatively I could build one out of balsa!
  2. Now now chaps, all this 'double entendre', you can clearly see it is his Fokker joystick! (sorry David, they drew me in to their evil ways!)
  3. Not content with painting a bought pilot, Mannfred here was hewn out of a lump of balsa.  He has a seat waiting in my 60" Eindekker. Not too sure about the fake oil splashes, I've since got an airbrush which may have helped.  Need to darken the goggle lenses too.  
  4. Dave,   I have got some of the BRC servos that I am putting into a Nijhuis Mosquito but are, as yet, un-tried.  I suppose I should finish that first before getting tempted to build the Baretta!
  5. With regard to servos, do we really need to lash out £20 each?  How about something like this I know they're not metal geared but they have ample torque and only £14.99 for four!   Oh, and I have NEVER even considered building a foamy and certainly not a ducted fan..............until now!  What a sweet one this is, nice one Dave!
  6. I think you can just about see what I meant about the vignetting from Ken's shot (like you've had a lazy window cleaner that doesn't get into the corners!) but it is more pronounced on views with less variation in colour/shade.  Not really a problem though and, as I said before, you can't really expect any more from such a short focal length (and a cheap price!).
  7. David,   It uses a normal USB to mini USB cable, the same as you use for some digital cameras or Motorola mobile phones.   Manual can be found at http://www.flycamone2.com/download/Manual_fco2_303_defritenes.pdf scroll through till you find the English version.   Chris.
  8. You want to try here in North Wales Ken!  You always know when it stops raining.............it starts snowing!
  9. Ken,   I've been pretty happy with mine, quality wise, the only fault is a pronounced vignetting but I suppose you have to expect that with such a small lens and focal length.   Simon,   Agree about the cold weather performance of the battery, I notice BRC are selling a larger capacity battery pack, I wonder if that will suffer with similar cold weather performance?
  10. Hmmm!  Barry must be too busy building his Whirlwind!  My choices: Stuka Miles Hawk Speed Six Magister
  11. I didn't realise any commercial product had tackled the warping thing, I do hate putting dihedral on something that didn't have it originally, spoils the whole thing, still, in the Rake concept, it is only sport scale and much simplified. Btw, I meant to say 60" not 80". I don't know what the answer is to the fabric problem, if you need a tex finish your options are limited, on the positive side though, it will only be wrinkled when torsion is applied (ie. in the air) so you won't see it!
  12. All we need now is a working wing-warpng system.  I thought about it for a while after seeing the detail of the full size system but then wimped out and stuck in the dihedral! (mine is the 80" Rake design).   How nice it would be to have lovely level wings!
  13. No worries Ernie, I won't send it in the next couple of days!
  14. Ernie,  Have you seen the FSM 'Eindekker Special' at all?  I forget the date (it's at home and I'm at work!) but it carried Peter Rake's 60" version as a free plan.  It had some 3-view drawings along with a couple of old pics. Naturally I wouldn't dare suggest breaking copyright and scanning it to send you a copy
  15. Martin, I too recall RR299 when it was based at Broughton, just a few miles from me here where it underwent its restoration.  You couldn't fail to recognise those twin Merlins as it flew over!  Sad loss indeed.
  16. All this talk of contra rotating props, I'm wondering if that is the way to go.  Trouble is I've already built the nacelles, one of which has the sidethrust built in ( I don't do it the way they often recommend, that of building with bulkheads square to the CL and then shimming the motor to get the desired thrustline. I prefer to angle the bulkheads so there is no awkward unsightly tapered gap behind the spinner). Mine is the larger 46" version so torque roll shouldn't really be the same problem.
  17. I echo Terry's comments that opened this thread, the description/pics in the plans listing are quite poo tbh!  The other plan providers are little better if any.  These days it should be fairly simple, on the online version at least, to provide maybe a link to the relevant details with the listing? How about this scenario for an ideal world, the link takes you to a pdf of the relvant RCM&E build article, now that would be the coolest ever (may lose some revenue from back issue sales though!). It is asking a lot to part with our cash based on a thumbnail and one line of text! Sorry to moan David, take it as constructive criticism!
  18. I hadn't spotted that you had used short torque rods.  As you say, with them being that short there is no problem with alignment.  I'm amazed by the number of designs that are produced that show (say) top hinged ailerons and the torque rod halfway down the section.  Doomed from the outset! Agree about thesurplus power and the cooling of the ESC's, it's not the full throttle that gets them hot, it's when throttled back.  You could perhaps go for a bigger 2s pack instead, loads of duration.
  19. I'm glad I happened upon this thread as I am building the 46" version of Tony's design (it has been on hold for a while but I need to get on with it so I can build his Sunderland!).  I am well impressed by your positioning of the ESC's Martin, I was going to put then in the fus to avoid the volts spikes but I'm never happy about placing them away from the airflow, your solution ticks both boxes.  Also I like the aileron servos in the nacelles, I was literally just about to cut the slots for the torque rods this morning but now I'm having a rethink.  I'm not a fan of torque rods as I never seem to get the hinge line and the line of the rod in the same place and hence get resistance to movement.  Also it is easier to allow for differential with two servos.  Having said that, torque rods do avoid a visible control horn.............decisions, decisions. Btw, I intend to use the BRC A2217-6T for mine, this gives over 250w at 1500Kv which should be ample for the 46".
  20. I'm going to ask Andy Freeman to buy my next Lotto ticket for me, well if he can win TWO prizes in the Advent draw   ....................... (well done Andy!).
×
×
  • Create New...