Pick a Plane 2011 - chat and FW-190 build

[kiwi g]

Well sir

Once my new home is built and i settle again I will send you picks of my lysander ,Then i (as in me myself I )will consider if I want to build this years choice.

 

Now exactly what opinion is it that I have that you dont agree with.

 unlike you I havent run down warbird ,twins, or biplanes , nor have I said that your plane isnt a reasonable choice,

 unlike you I just dont think that we always need to cater for the beginner intermediate all the time. After all there are alot of easy aircraft designed for that market.

Who says that the top choice wont be built in numbers. even if your choice was to be top picked theres a good chance the same amount of people will build it over the next ten years.

What it comes down to is ,its great to have a popular choice be it a twin or a bipe or a warbird or even a magistar drawn and built by a designer rather than have to do all the work yourself.

My choice of aircraft are what I want to see built . and theres a variety  in my choice of aircraft.  I dont expect them to suit anyone else . just me

 Miles Magistar – Old Warden

Thanks for the spelling lesson but whos correct ..

 

And clive . do you read your PMs .I sent one to you three days ago.

Edited By kiwi g on 09/01/2011 02:07:28

[Ken Lighten]

Miles Magister

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Guys - just a mod comment at this point;

 

its fine to have a spirited discussion - nowt wrong with that. But make sure you keep it that way! Please avoid anything that might be construde as personal remarks.

 

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 09/01/2011 09:22:12

[Clive Kerr]

 

 ' Magister ' is from Latin, = teacher, master , expert.

 

  If Old Warden can't spell it either kiwi g, perhaps you could tell them what's right too ?

 

 As for the choice, I was recommending a change from the WWll battle wagons, but was not running down anything  in particular, simply indicating what I felt would get built in reasonable numbers, reasonably quickly, so a result would be seen within living memory.

 

 Perhaps  more hangar rats voted, than flying fools ?

 

  So saying, I'm  loading up for the field.

 

 

 

 

[kiwi g]

In my own opinion it would seem that it may be you telling us what we need clive . have a little back read  of these posts .

I do believe Ive been very open minded on the subject right from day one.

 

  It doesnt matter who votes , rats or fools , everyone gets a say as to which they like.

 

And I dont really care how you wish to spell your plane ,it wont be getting picked this time round ....

 

[Bob Davis 2]

Tierd of Warbirds - so am I.

Want a Biplane - so do I.

Antonov AN-2 - so many made but so little modelled. The only plan I could find is structurally poor. Plenty of tail and fin area so good scale subject on that score. Bound to be slow fying - so at least you see it.

Bob Davis

[Erfolg]

We have not had a WW1 plane for a bit.

 

The only ones i would not want to see are Camel, Dr 1 and Sopwith triplanes, BE2, ohh the list goes on.

 

Being more serious, I have grave reservations with respect to many DH planes particularly the rapide, is the extreme pointed wings. Given the wing section was thin to start with, thinning the wing tip is not practical (aerodynamic washout) and physical washout is of limited use. I have only seen two though, a Mosquito and Rapide, which both tip stalled in on landing, after not that much air time. With those models, you only slowed up to much the once.

 

 

Yet DH aircraft must all be considered universally beautiful.

 

So why not a more practical DH subject 

[Hugh Coleman]

 

 Yet DH aircraft must all be considered universally beautiful.

 

So why not a more practical DH subject 

 

Like a Chippy or one of the miriad of Moths.

 

Cheers,

 

Hugh

 

 

[kiwi g]

Interesting , 3 De Havillands  in the top 10  . must be popular.  I like the sound of a devon , now that would be different,

Have to agree with Erfolg about those wing tips, but that may not have been the only reason for the stalling being that one was a biplane and one was a twin.

 Im sure if either were built with care and thought the problem could be made less troublesome.

 I like hughs suggestion of a chippy , Im a bit of a fan of the super chippies,  but they are well catered for.

[Clive Kerr]

 

 You would not have to worry about tip stalling to the same degree as with the DH designs, with the following , and they are aerobatic.

 

 As for the Chipmunk, lovely aeroplane, but Airsail and YT do one , and Ripmax do two.

 

[kiwi g]

Posted by Clive Kerr on 04/01/2011 20:44:23:

. But I do prefer flying time to puzzling the next challenge in the hangar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 sums it up really I think.

Edited By kiwi g on 10/01/2011 02:39:17

[kiwi g]

Im sure those ,m20, magister, provost pics were posted somwhere else. a bit like this guy. And hes been fighting for three or four years. one day Barry ,one day

 

 

Posted by A.A. Barry on 19/11/2010 09:51:43:

 

you know who

 

 

[Hugh Coleman]

 

 As for the Chipmunk, lovely aeroplane, but Airsail and YT do one , and Ripmax do two.

 

 

Posted by Clive Kerr on 10/01/2011 01:02:47:

 

 You would not have to worry about tip stalling to the same degree as with the DH designs, with the following , and they are aerobatic.

 

 As for the Chipmunk, lovely aeroplane, but Airsail and YT do one , and Ripmax do two.

 

 

Yes, there are lots of ARF Chipmunks out there and heaps of plans available too.  But then, that is the case (plans available) with many of the suggestions (certainly all of the top 5).

 

What I thought this whole could be would be for us to suggest a subject that is not available as a plan, Kit or ARF.

The trick would be to come up with something that is reasonably popular and is not already catered for.  But there is pretty much nothing that David Boddington didn't do a plan for in some form or another.

 

Cheers,

 

Hugh

 

[kiwi g]

Once again thats a theme  happening .  its a great idea Hugh and should really be made a rule. the problem may then become people suggesting different variants of popular subjects just because that particular aircraft may not have been modeled.

Example may be the likes of a fw190, theres a few good plans and arfs around but not so many for say the 190 ta variant.  

And before someone tells me ,,I know theres a few ta variant plans and arfs about . Its used as an example.

Cheers

Edited By kiwi g on 10/01/2011 07:49:27

[Hugh Coleman]

And there are plans for a

 

 as well.  So one wonders why there is a such a push for it to be the special edition plan.

 

There are, however, no plans for a Gloster Gorcock. 

Which I reckon is a pretty intriguing machine.  So much so that I aint waiting for it to win the popular vote.  I am drawing it up myself.

Whether it will be buildable or not is a completely different question.

 

Cheers,

 

Hugh

[Clive Kerr]

 Regarding preferring flying,  to building r/c aircraft. Quite right kiwi g, absolutely I do. The whole point of building a r/c model is to fly it.  Otherwise you may as well build plastic  scale models to admire, and never get out of the hangar.

 

The Fw-190, a front runner here : there is a Brian Taylor plan at 60.25 ", so what is the point of a Tony Nijhuis one at 60 " ?

 

I fail to see the point of duplication for the sake of it, would have preferred to see something new, rather than the over-done designs,  supported by this vote.

 

Hence my support for the aircraft types I suggested.  

 

 

[kiwi g]

I love to fly too Clive. Dont get me wrong there .

 I also like to build my models.

Remember that theres alot of people out there that like building models over a period of time. taking care and adding more detail than others. Not everyone likes quick easy building models as you keep suggesting. Some guys will possibly build it and never fly them .thats what they like and good on them .

I agree totally with the duplication issue, thats why i was pushing for the theme as said earlier.

Maybe tony doesnt mind duplication . hes always improving designs as was his spitfire last year. nobody asked him to do that.

At the end of the day theres nobody asking anyone to build a plane they dont want to .

 

Its good you support your aircraft clive but I think we know what they look like now.

Theres lots of aircraft out there like them that havent been suggested . thats why we need to narrow the choice somehow.

 but by year or use not the fact that theyre easier to build and fly. not everyone likes that option...

[Hugh Coleman]

And some of us are inspried by designs and plans and resolve that we have to hone our flying with the ambition to one day fly these things.

 

On that Basis, as a novice flyer, I would not be dissapointed if the Mozzie or the FW 190 or the Rapide got up and won it.  Iwould put the plan aside until;

 

a) I had finished a few of the projects that I have on the go, or

b) Am capable of building to the standard required, or

c) Am capable of flying the end result.

 

Notice that I said or.

 

Think of this too.  Tony is going to need to be inspired and challenged by whatever is decided upon.

 

The FW 190 is not going to do that.  Tony has designed any number of single engined war birds and I can almost see in my minds eye how the design mould pan out.  His sheet sided fuselage method would be idealy suited to that.

 

He has done a Mozzie before, but it was a smaller leccy version more sport than scale.

He may look at that and the options for split flaps, undercarraige customisation etc and decide that it rings his bells.

There are heaps of finishes you could do.  Military and Civil.  I am sure I have seen a Civil sceme for a Mozzie.

 

The Rapide, that's a challenge, but will it interest Tony?

 

Cheers,

 

Hugh

[Erfolg]

I note the reference to designs from noted earlier designers, and therefore should be dismissed.

 

With reference to the Fw 190, primarily as it is being mentioned, a well known plan exists, I have seen a number of these, very scale. Yet flying characteristics even under the control of good pilots has not been impressive.

 

It is noticeable that many ARTF models, both built up construction and foam, benefit immensely due to low wing loading. This is an area where TN could contribute immensely, not just scale, but fly well in addition.

 

The point that some just want to build is true, it is also true that many people want to fly the model as well. I am one, no hanger queens for me.

 

A major feature of the plan concept for me, as previously mentioned, is laser cut parts plus the moulded accessories. In addition it has to be a practical model, not one that takes hours to rig. That can be a major challenge with a biplane.

 

The suggestion that a FW 190 is slab sided is muddled. It is far more complicated. It starts of round, transitions to a rounded trapezoid, before a vertical tailpost. The fin area, cannot be adequately replicated by a simple slab of balsa, note the substantial thickness. A good FW 190, is no easy matter.

 

Waco SRE is a very practical bibe, as can be many others. Yet the DH Rapide, relied heavily on rigging wires, very thin wings, extremely pointed. All of which at model scales become a major challenge. Particularly as the low Reynolds numbers around the tips, is working against us, in a significant way.

 

 

[Tony Fransens]

Lockheed P38 Lightning

warbirds!!

[Tony Fransens]

However the Antonov would be nice too, we have one at the airfield nearby, just for show I guess I never saw it airborn. And there's one at the entrance of the Efesus-airfield in Celcuk Turkye but they chopped the wings of and use it as an advertising display, the savages!!

[Erfolg]

I was looking at the vote thread, whilst doing so i came across a vote for an aircraft called the "Pond Racer".

 

I had never heard of it. So I Googled it, out of curiosity.

 

I was surprised to see an aircraft that really is well suited to an electric powered model.

 

The aircraft does not stand any chance of being voted for as the favourite. Yet i am sure would make a good model, even a free plan. Maybe the proposer or anyone else could build and submit the model design.

[kiwi g]

The rutan pond racer, there was a composite model of this but I dont know who made it.

Awsome plane , for the racers out there.

 if unusual design was the choice the rutan aircraft were the pick.

I cant remember but was it rutan that was killed in a decathalon in the colorado rockies.

I remember seeing a progam where the aircraft tried to fly out of a valley and couldnt get lift , eventually crashing. i sure that was him.

[Erfolg]

I think this is the Pond racer referenced.

[kiwi g]

Yes thats it erfolg. would certainly be a great build and fly.