Colin Leighfield

Great picture Charles, I can almost smell the grass!

Why don't you have a go at it yourself Chris.? There's loads of information available on it and it's a very straightforward design. I saw your earlier mention of it. It's definitely been done before, more than once.

Cox engines are manufactured and suppiled by Cox International in Canada. www.coxengines.ca. They do the whole range of reed valve .049s, including the Davis Diesel version and with r/c throttles if needed. You can buy the throttle backplate unit separately if you wish to convert an existing engine. Their prices are reasonable and service is excellent. Have a look at their website and buy on line, it will arrive in a very few days. There is an excellent feature in the current edition of the new Aeromodeller about them. My Snipe will definitely have rudder, elevator and throttle control. I have no nostalgic wish to recreate the days of single channel. I don't have those kinds of masochistic tendencies and it's easy to confuse rose tinted spectacles with cataracts!

I've got the Replikit Snipe part kit with a Cox .049(r/c throttle)waiting to go in it. I got it because of nostalgia, I built one in 1965 and fitted it with a new Babe Bee. On the first flight in Sutton Park I made the mistake of launching it with a full tank. About two minutes later it was a dot in the sky heading out of the park towards Four Oaks. I never saw it again and as you may guess, I hadn't put my name and address in it. It certainly flew well! I will build this one the traditional way, covered with tisue and dope. However, it will definitely be fitted with radio this time! It's about number five on the build list, but I will get around to it!

No doubt about the MB5, it's mostly straight lines and with the later larger tail it's got all of the ingredients. It's been done quite often and is a proven flyer, but I'm not aware if anybody has kitted it. A slight variation would be the MB3, it's aerodynamically much the same as the MB5 (same wing) and I've never seen it done. I'm not sure that people go for relatively obscure types in sufficient numbers to make a kit commercially viable though. The Supermarine Spiteful and Seafang are similarly attractive but not familiar to most people. I'm only aware of one commercially available plan. Straightforward wing design and generous tail surfaces, definitely excellent candidates.

Thanks Chris P, it's all good stuff!

Hi Erfolg. Yes, I know that. It's just that in the original posts about Peter's Bootlace design (2009/10 onwards), there was a lot of discussion about the co-incidences with earlier "Bootlace" models and Ian Peacock's creations were mentioned. (We both contributed). My earlier post was triggered by Ian's contribution to the new Aeromodeller, I hadn't realised he was still designing and building. His original "Bootlace" was different to Peter's reasonably accurate and practical design and clearly later on was translated into "Miss Tangerine". I just wondered what his recollections of those days were, although it doesn't look as if he participates in this forum. I trust that all is well with you.

Chris Bacon. That's a demonstration of just how a basic and well proven lay-out can be made attractive, very nice. It's a lot like a Carl Goldberg Skylark, you can't go wrong with something like that. It's interesting as well that Mick Reeves decided to re-introduce the Gangster, although I think that it's the bigger version, not the 52 and he says that it's lighter. Another safe bet.

Harking back to earlier discussions about Ian Peacock's involvement with a version of Bootlace/Miss Tangerine, I was astonished to see him writing in the second edition of the resurrected Aeromodeller, with a new design for a control line stunter for a 2.5cc diesel, based on the Nobler. He must be getting on a bit by now (even older than me). I wonder if he's aware of this discussion, he could probably answer some of our earlier questions!

Thanks Plummet. That's a very pretty plane. The illustrious Alex Henshaw had one, but lost it when he had to bale out because of an engine fire. Later of course he moved on to the famous Mew Gull G-AEXF. There used to be an Arrow Active in the Aeromodeller Plans Service back inmthe 50s, I can't remember the size but it's probably on the small size. Perhaps it's still available.

Hi Percy and Tim. Yes, the Elf is still at Old Warden. I think it's a very pretty aeroplane and a refreshing change from the excellent Moth range. The Warren strut wing bracing is a bit like a Fiat CR42, very rigid and needs no bracing wires. It's all straight rods and I think it wouln't that be that difficult to do. Perhaps even make the left and right side wings in pairs, permanently assembled with the strut bracing in place? That would also make assembly and dismantling on the airfield easier! The previously mentioned Fiat CR42 is another one you hardly ever see that I think would be really good, as is the CR32, although that has been done a bit more often. In fact there is a number of very interesting Italian WW2 subjects just waiting to be done. Breda Ba65, Meridionali Ro51 etc. If only we had the time!

Thanks Percy, I remember the Cranfield, must have been one of the last of Pat's productions and based on a very interesting prototype that most people have never heard of. Like the Zlin, it,would be a good subject today. I remember also his Tiger Moth Monoplanes in two sizes and his Vampire. I agree with your suggestions about the Miles, Percival and Comper designs as good subjects, qthere are also interesting and attractive biplanes, such as the Arrow Active and the Parnall Elf. I could dream all day!

I wish someone could resurrect Pat French's designs, sold under "PFM Models" and "Economy Scale". The Team Special biplane was a brilliant flyer and the Giant Zlin would be great with modern radio and a 120 four stroke. There were several other designs, all easy to build and really good flyers. After Pat decided to buy the Metisse motorcycle rights from the Rickman brothers and develop a very successful business making high quality frames, he sold the model business to Stagg Models in Northampton, but I never heard any more after that. Sadly, Pat died a couple of years ago.

Good summing up Erfolg, well said.

Thanks Martin. It certainly looks the part. I'm impressed with Vortex, they seem to try very hard.

I'm sure you've got all of the detail you need Martin, looks great. Did you make a plug for the canopy and send it to Vortex, or were they able to do it from a drawing?

Hi Piper Cub, I didn't say what you imply, see final paragraph lines 4&5. You're right that we drifted from Graupner, but it was 10 posts ago.

Frank sums it up well I think. UK manufacturing is increasingly world class and we're going to benefit from it. The model business is highly competitive and the market discerning and demanding. Businesses will come and go, that's life. At the end of the day, it's the purchasing decisions we all make that decide who prospers and who fails, that's the way it should be.

Thanks Erfolg and Tony. I don't argue that UK engineering had it's issues in the 70s particularly, the only point I'm making there is that my own expectations of German excellence which lead me to get involved taught me that poor quality control was not confined to the UK, I experienced some very significant failures with German products and the problem I found, similar to that I had with the BMW later, was an arrogant lack of preparedness to admit any fault. Although semi-retired now, I am still significantly involved with matters European and I can assure you that narrow minded attitudes from German colleagues are still a very significant issue, even though I have many friends there and love them dearly! Tony is right about F.1, most of the significant teams are based at Silverstone or nearby and the British element is dominant in the sport. As far as Jaguar is concerned, what has changed is that Ratan Tata told JLR to get on with designing and producing the cars they wanted to make, whereas Ford insisted on controlling design from Dearborn, (look at the X-Type) and never got the benefits expected from their huge investment in the business. Although the investment in JLR is now originated in India, it is being run as a British company and the difference is obvious. I am still working in private manufacturing and I see more optimism and genuine success than I have for many years, regardless of some of the things I read in the press and hear on the news. The chattering classes get too much air time, unfortunately. In spite of my comments earlier and lack of sympathy for Graupner, I would also say that I have been pleased with products from Multiplex and have respect for their product design and quality. I get the impression that Robbe is pretty good as well, certainly in both you see the evidence of modern design and manufacturing methods which will certainly be minimising cost. The secret to success though is not necessarily low prices, it is offering the Customer what he wants to buy and getting the quality right.

I understand that in recent years many of the aircraft sold by Graupner are made in the Far East, as are most others. I'm sure that is a basic question of economics, there is no way that they could produce traditional build kits in Germany and sell them at a price most people are prepared to pay. I never bought any Graupner stuff in the old days and wouldn't argue with anyone who did and praised their quality. I am sure that is true. However I am one lf those whose experience with German engineering, including a period in the 70s selling German precision machine tools, is that the reputation for constistently high standards of quality and reliability is exaggerated. The most disappointing car I ever owned was a BMW 5 series bought new that had persistent defects related to electrics, transmission and high oil consumption throughout my three years of ownership. The failure of the manufacturer to accept responsibility even under warranty made me decide to never touch them with a barge-pole ever again. "The Ultimate Driving Machine"? Ha ha. That's also been our experience through the business, if you don't do high mileages and pose value is important is important, buy a BMW. If you are totally dependent on it for daily high mileage business use, they go wrong a lot and we find that the young managers who have one, don't buy another BMW next time. Mercedes are worse. I've run Jaguars in recent years over very high mileages and there is no German car I'd swap my current XF for. It's sad to see old names go, but if Graupner can't hack it in today's environment, that's their management failure. Tough. Obviously German modellers aren't buying their products in sufficient volume to keep them afloat and that must tell you something. Those are my personal experiences of course, no doubt others are different. As an aside, in the last 15 years I've had five Honda bikes, (currently 2012 VFR1200) and my wife has had three Honda Jazzs. There's never been a problem with anyone of them, totally reliable and not even needing oil between services.

Hi Terry. Is this Varsity the one that crashed near Marchington several years ago?

Cymaz, that's a brilliant piece of engineering. I note that you've decided to air-cool it rather than put a water jacket around the cylinders, was that your plan from day one? From one who's engineering ability is stretched by trying to drill a straight hole, you have my greatest respect.

Keep going Martin, looks like this is going to be good.

Try [email protected]. He makes them.

I've followed you on this one with fascination. These VQ models are great value for money based on experience with the Macchi MC205 Veltro they do, which I've had two of. Bought the first one several years ago at Weston Park and fitted it with an ASP70FS bought off the Just Engines stand at the same show, when Paul Landells was there. that tells you how long ago it was, because sadly Paul passed away quite some time ago. Also bought the optional retracts, which were a fiddle to fit and have a bit of slop in them when down, but work surprisingly well even so. My son loves flying this. Although like the Hurricane it is very semi-scale, it definitely looks the part in the air and flies in a very scale manner with no vices. Two years we crashed it after a radio problem, so bought another and transferred the engine and retracts. Like the first, the build quality is very good and it flies beautifully. Very highly recommended based on experience so far and I reckon their Fw190s (two sizes) are well worth a look, as indeed probably all of their offerings are. Looking forward to seeing how you get on with flying the Hurricane and wish you all of the best.