Mike T
-
Posts
1,068 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Calendar
Downloads
Everything posted by Mike T
-
Posted by Martin Harris on 01/08/2018 13:41:34: Forgive me if this upsets anyone but it feels like those who willingly entered into agreements to give them peace of mind against losing their jobs or changing circumstances are now taking advantage of the companies and claiming back payments for cover that wasn't needed in retrospect - I wish I could do that for my car, home and pet insurances over the years! I agree. However the original 'scandal' was that people in precarious financial circumstances who knowingly opted for the cover did not realise that making a claim was nigh-on impossible. It was in this sense that it was mis-sold. It was later discovered that PPI was being applied to all sorts of other financial products. Like others, I never knowingly signed up for it, but have no idea how I'd go about searching out my past borrowing history without recourse to some organisation that has access to the various records. As far as I can see the DIY templates are just a standard letter? The problem for me would be where to address it!
-
Posted by Engine Doctor on 29/07/2018 11:15:52: Use of foam might explain some of the horrendous repairs I see while driving around ! Never confuse the capability of a tool with the incapability of the klutz wielding it...
-
The biggest problem these days is getting hold of old pram wheels and axles. They just don't make 'em any more. Was a time you could retrieve a set from any local pond... Edited By Mike T on 28/07/2018 14:47:53
-
You need a range of surface conformity when sanding, from zero (Permagrits) to max (hand held paper) and all points in between. Top tip: What! ( the retail outlet - stupid name) sells packs of foam abrasive blocks in coarse and fine grades at £1 for 10. The first set I got were so good they lasted years. The most recent lot not quite so good, but as good or better than the branded stuff you get from DIY stores which cost a few quid each!
-
FWIW I flew my Wot4 Foam-e on PCM 35 for a couple of years without a glitch . Only swapped to 2.4 'cos I wanted the (bullet-proof) JR rx for a higher value project! Edited By Mike T on 23/07/2018 21:15:06
-
Every time I try and convince myself that I need a FrSky tx of some description, a thread like this pops up to convince me that (touch wood) my old JR 388 will be good for another year yet...
-
I'm not at all confident that the studding would not turn in the alloy when doing that final 'nip up'. I've done that kind of thing in the past, but I've epoxied the stud in first...
-
The Bristol Monoplane, Triplane and Camel were all built by the Northern Aeroplane Workshops in Batley, W.Yorks. The Triplane was declared to be a 'late production' model by Sir T.O.M. Sopwith himself. Sadly he did not live to see the NAW Camel finished or flying.
-
If you right-click on the file in your 'trash', you should get an option to 'restore'. Click on this and it should put the file back exactly where it came from. HTH
-
Posted by Denis Watkins on 04/06/2018 11:18:49: So one greedy receptionist is selling ex directory contact information to equipment sellers? LOL! Yeah - blame the poor sap on the front line. I don't suppose for one minute that it's the greedy bosses at your NHS Trust selling the data, do you?
-
See attached pic, clipped from the official announcement and quoted in the 2nd post of this thread. I suggest the highlighted paragraph is what we should be cutting out and pasting on our aircraft. Come to think of it, perhaps the BMFA reps should stick it on their foreheads when they go into their next meeting with the CAA! I note the BMFA's own statement refers to discussions to ensure "minimal impact". The above statement is unambiguous - "do not impact". The BMFA should hold the CAA's feet to the fire! Edited By Mike T on 03/06/2018 13:33:50 Edited By Mike T on 03/06/2018 13:35:35
-
-
That's a bit extravagant. If they're any kind of pilot, they need to learn to land an airliner like this: https://youtu.be/ugEBGY1nQn4?list=PL4QSDQr4yLnE9WlNGhKoIHyRqZyF6bMeA&t=16 Edited By Mike T on 01/06/2018 16:13:31
-
You're right. Why do traders do that?! It's a retail website, so who are they trying to fool by leaving the VAT off?
-
Posted by gangster on 22/05/2018 16:18:04: This brings back memories. I recall that as well as their own telemetry over the actual conductor I recall they were going to create a national network by stringing up fibre optic cables between the pylons. Anyone know what happened to that Much of the UK's fibre-optic 'backbone' network is installed on the earth wire that runs across the peaks of the towers. A bobbin was devised which spun the FO around the earth wire.
-
Can't see anything listed on the Flightech website and the manufacturers website links to My Hobby. There are a couple of build threads on this and other forums. I bought one from the previous distributor (Flying Dog) when they were much cheaper. Then, they were incredible value for money. The mouldings quality is excellent and the wings are superb. If I had to be hyper-critical, I would guess that the finish quality is not as good as a £800+ glass ship - but even with the current price hike, you're not paying that kind of money! Everything supplied was fit for purpose, except the control horns, which I DIY'ed. I also replaced the bar/box wing joiner with a longer one, though the manufacturer insists that the kit article is sufficient. The wing hinges needed lots of careful fettling to get them moving full and free, but this is an acknowledged part of the build process. The polar veneers are fairly closely matched and I settled for finishing them with just WBP varnish (Ronseal). The wing mounting was fiddly to achieve, involving lots of patient assembly and removal before epoxying the mounting plates into the fuselage. I glassed the v-tails prior to spray finishing the entire fuselage/tail. I finished it in August 2017 and (due to circs...) it has yet to maiden, but I'm pleased with the way it turned out. I would certainly look a one of the smaller models in the range as a more convenient chuck about model. Edited By Mike T on 26/05/2018 12:06:46 Edited By Mike T on 26/05/2018 12:07:29
-
Posted by McG 6969 on 10/05/2018 20:12:51: Apologies to Mike T, but I can't understand people declaring that a proper glass covering isn't even more 'ding' resistant. Sorry... Just relating my experience, Chris, in covering using the 'approved' method. I agree that a proper 'lay-up' in a mould, with glass and resin is incredibly tough - and light. My experience of 'glassing', e.g. a foam wing is that it produces a very smooth, light finish, but that dropping say, a small screwdriver on it will cause a ding. I'm talking here about very light cloth and 'finishing' resin. I think Bob C and I are now on the same page with this... I think if you want foam wings which are as bullet-proof as your GF epoxy-moulded fuselage, then you have to go with a much heavier grade of cloth and the appropriate amount of resin to wet it. PS - apologies for resurrecting this semi-dead thread!
-
NB - use of a credit/debit card will NOT be a second line of defence if you are paying with Paypal! https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/PayPal-Section75 You will have some rights, but you will lose the pretty draconian rights you get under the Consumer Credit Act! Edited By Mike T on 21/05/2018 19:21:58 Edited By Mike T on 21/05/2018 19:25:01
-
Our 'pasture' is similarly rough. Ongoing mowing will bring it round (eventually) but we also roll ours by driving our cars up and down the strip in convoy. Even when the ground is quite dry, this will cause the edges of divots to break off and fill the holes. Ideally, you should roll when it's a bit more pliable, but it's difficult to time - one week can be the difference between too soft and too hard!. We find 3 cars are optimum - any more and you risk interference from metal-to-metal noise...
-
We wouldn't be having much of this discussion if Guvnor had just confined himself to "strongly recommend against..." Invoking "utter lunacy" is like waving a red rag to a bull... If someone asked me about kick-starting a LiPo on the NiMH settings, I would confess that I do it, but would't recommend anyone else to do it. (I'd be more likely to suggest they gave me the battery to try, tbh.) I usually use my cell tester (on the balance lead) to check individual cell voltages - as soon as the duff cell is at 3.7v, it comes of the NiMH setting and goes on the balanced LiPo setting. If it doesn't work then, it gets scrapped (after recovery of any usable connectors). If in-flight performance is compromised, then its likely to be relegated to workshop/set-up duty.
-
Confused, Bob. Going back to your original post, did you mean that the resin was not intended to be structural and just a substitute for a dope or lacquer finish? If so, I'd agree, and that the glasscloth in that case just serves to reduce the amount of resin required. I've certainly never found it as ding-resistant as some people claim!
-
I freely confess to not being an 'expert' here, but I can't agree with the assertion that the glass isn't intended as a structural element in Glass-Reinforced Plastic! All the various online/magazine guides I've read refer to the need to keep the resin deposited down to the minimum required to wet-out the glass. Most guides refer to dry application of the glass (or using a tack spray of some sort - which I personally have problems with*) and putting a sparing amount of resin on top, worked in by rollers and/or 'squeegee-ing'. However, in my limited experience I've had the best results brushing a coat of resin on to the surface, then using a brush, stippling and teasing out as necessary to draw the resin through and mopping off with paper towel as required. If you get it right, the towel mopping should be minimal. * I have a DLG with glassed balsa tail surfaces. The finish has wrinkled in the sun, due, I suspect to an excess of 'tackifier' being used at the factory preventing the resin from bonding the glass to the wood.
-
Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 03/05/2018 18:23:22: I wouldn't recommend self tappers. Better to drill and bolt As a general rule, neither would I. But a combination of small(ish) engine, the right mount, the right screws and someone who knows what they are doing should see you OK
-
FWIW I've got a TT 42 mounted in a Funfly using thread-forming self-tapping screws. It's been there for at least 10 years...
-
Following TWS' post - is your engine snug between the bearer arms? If the crankcase can move from side to side between the bearers, then your holes may be perilously close to the inner edges of the arms. If this is the case, then you need to swap the mount for one with a closer bearer spacing. It's usually possible to find one with closer arms, but with the same mounting hole dimensions on the bulkhead plate. If the case is a good interference fit, then you should be able to drill holes in the arms equal to those in the engine lugs, without problem
