Jump to content

Building TN Halifax


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
Advert


Hi guys
 
First thank you for your kind words ( those I haven't thank yet ) and
then A.A.Barry forgive me for all this time without answer you.
About using FS 40 in a way I think more power in the plane
gives more confidence because you know that if you need power
you have it and this is important, BUT if you have only the power
to fly like the real one you have to fly like the real one and that's is
a challenge for the pilot ( in almost models we fly we have much more
power that are needed and that make us power adicted because power
solve many of models flying problems)
As a conclusion, and that's only my opinion, this Halifax don't need the extra
power that gives the 40 FS, because she flyes quite well with the 30's.
 
Regards
Mário
 
PS - I have more videos that I can put later.

Edited By Supermario on 31/05/2011 00:39:49

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant Mario - the world needs people like you! I feel very humble when I see what you have done. I usually don't like to see large scale models actually flying because they don't look right with their speed against the background of a real sky but you have changed all that for me - encore maestro!
 
TW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
HI ALL.
 
A rather late update on progress.
 
Despite my best efforts during construction to keep the weight down to somewhere near the figure of the prototype, i was significantly over, even before painting / detailing. With the 4 SC30's running well, on a 1 mile concrete runway the plane was struggling to lift off, and managed only about 3 feet. After much discussion with others, the conclusion was reluctantly drawn that while it would probably get off the deck if i uprated to OS40 (4 strokes) or the SC52s, flight would never be be pleasurable or even safe due to the very high wing loading, and the landing speed would be far too high to ever allow safe operation from the (large) grass fields near home.As to refit flaps would be a huge task and would only add to the weight, i have reluctantly pulled the plug on the project.The plane seemed tail heavy first and foremost, with a significant amount to lead in the nose required, as well as the heaviest radio batteries i could find.In retrospect i still don't see where my mistakes lie, i built as per the plan, using the wood supplied in the pack, picking the lightest for the tail wherever possible. My fibreglassing was sanded down to a mere coat, and of course the paint / tail turret would have only added to the tail weight requiring even more metal f'wd.
 
Oh well. That's aeromodelling i suppose!
 
All the best, Ian.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all
 
Mine is quite heavy been electric & worked out to be just over 13Kg with flight battery’s and fly's ok, so if mine flies at that weight maybe you are under powered, however I don’t know how my electric motors compare power wise to glow.
 
Cheers
 
Andy
 
 

Edited By Andy Wood 1 on 14/08/2011 17:54:25

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4S is going to give around 6000 rpm on 14.8 volt pack, HC recomend a 14 x 9 on 4S you are using a 12 x 8.3 3 blader which would be around a 13 x 8.3 two blader.
 
Unbelievably nobody seems to have reviewd it with just 4 cells.
but optimum is 50A max is 68A
 
Chris Bott and I just played with some numbers. Drivecalc says that you should get 256 Watts. Sounds way too low to me. I usually push that motor to between 500 and 1kw.
However here are the numbers.
 
 
If you times that by 4 then we get roughly 1kw.
 
For a 13Kg 28.6lb model that is only 34 watts per lb. John Ranson flew his 100" Lancaster on 40 "Brushed" watts per lb.
 
I would have opted for more power, personally, and would love to know the numbers you get from a wattmeter Andy???
 
so 1kw is roughly 1.5Hp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Andy, Danny only just brought this thread to my notice, I do appologise, don't know how I've missed it.
It's very interesting to me as I hope to be building the John Ranson Lancaster soon.
 
It did surprise me that you are flying OK on 4S with 400Kv and 12" props, but then John did explain that 40W/lb was fine for the Lanc. Something to do with it being a "blown" wing. i.e. there's lift generated by prop wash even without forward motion.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
Hi to all, just wanted to know how those Halifax are flying. Are there some of them still in service? Especially Andy who had a landing crash. I hope now the plane fly again...
About me well... I had stoped construction when the wings where almost ready and since I have done some ARFS and also I have flown my fiberclassics douglas DC-3 succesfully.
 
best regards to everybody
 
Michel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Andy,

glad to hear your plane is flyeing better now! After some hesitations after reading some unsucessfull flights I restarted building my Halifax. I am building the fuselage now. I have some questions about the flynig charcteristics of your halifax: wich is your auw? do you have flaps? is the cg ok? do you have to keep airspeed for landing?

regards

Michel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...