YT Spitfire Advice

[Mike E]

I have the 72 inch W/S kit and would welcome advice on the engine and retracts to use.

 

I want to fly scale like ( not zooming!) but have something in reserve. I fly off a well mown grass field and will have retracts. At the moment I have options on 125 Saito 4/ stroke,an RCV ( not sure of size, or a petrol DL 20.

Look forward to hearing you opinions and advice on choice of engine

 

I have also an issue with the retracts where the supplied type sit down and do not look scale at all - any views on choice of and spec on the retracts

 

Good flying

[Danny Fenton]

Hi Mike, I am sure Alan C will be along later, but in my oppinion the rails are not angled correctly, the pintle angle is not taken into account. This is not too bad on the Spitfire, but was awful on the Hurricane to the point of having to leave the U/C doors off.

 

I did raise the issue and was told that this was to allow a universal retract to be used across the range.

 

If you want to get the angle right then you will have to recalculate the pintle angles and change the rail mount angles. Quite a bit of work But doable.

 

As far as the engine goes a 120 seems a very popular choice, there is a massive blog on RCMF for the YT Spit.

 

It flies beautifully by the way, really nice.

 

Cheers

Danny

[Mike E]

Thanks Danny - the flying reports all speak very highly of the model and is why I have chosen the kit

 

I am concerned about the retracts and wonder if a 100 degree unit would be better than a 90 which I thinks is supplied.

I am going for a Mk 14 and with the retract rear wheel and think the weight will come out at about 13 to 14 lbs.

Should have put this in the original would you still be happy with a 125 Saito?

I will have a read of the RCMF article as well

 

Mike

[Danny Fenton]

Hi Mike, its not the angle of retract that is the issue, I assume you want the doors facing the line of flight and lying flat against the wing? Or have I misunderstood your issue with them?

 

The new YT air up air down retracts are much better than the ones I got with my kit. They have only landed once without a leg collapsing.

 

A few people used the RCV 90 and though it flew well in my eyes you had to use momentum for your manouvres. Most people have opted for the 120 to give some power in reserve.

 

Cheers

Danny

[Alan Cantwell]

The new kit has the gear moved forward, mine does not suffer from nose rash, i dont use the doors, once in flight, its not noticable,

The hurricane is impossible to duplicate, the full size has a pivot piece, the retracts do indeed have to do the range, there are some differant angles on the 190, and 109, but these are extreme,

The rcv 90 will NOT power the new version of the spit, i would now not go near any big expensive to run glows, instead, i would spend my money on a DLE30CC, with rear carb intake, and use a rear manifold pitts style silencer, that goes down with 2 pipes, behind the engine, you should then get away with just the head sticking out the bottom,

 

Its been said the Spit is the best flying one out there, but if you want total scale, with the retract angle etc, then there is only one recoarse--build the BT one, the YT one, though nice, is clubman scale, not competition scale, my older spit is the original, i simply shimmed the rear of the rail up, the retracts are the original silver ones, i have re-bushed them, to lose any wag, and they have given good service, if anyone has the original retracts, with the nylon bushes, i have replacements made out of brass available

[Mike E]

Thanks lads for all the advice - what I am looking for is a scale look undercarriage - ie straight legs and doors straight in flight with wheels not splayed on the ground.- from what you have said Alan the new ones are going to be the best bet so I will have a long chat with YT - I think I would prefer a compromise as this will be a learning model for me to get semi scale appearance and move on from there.

Good flying

Mike

 

[Peter Eve]

Mike, I'm just going through all this 2yrs later and I wondered how you got on. Did you buy the YT retracts? It begins to look as though they are worth paying the somewhat extra cash for. I have a seconfhand Zenoah on offer from a club mate, have you gleaned anything on the engine front? What did you use?

And the big question - did it live up to the claims that it flies well?

Cheers

Pete

[Peter Eve]

PS - the one in my photo is a Kyosho 90 which flew well but the retracts and their mounting were the source of its final demise!

P

[Jon Laughton]

Hi Mike

Here's my two pennyworth:

I have the same model from YT (XIVe). It is fitted with their Robart air up/down retracts and as OS 120 Surpass III four stroke up front.

The model flies well and in line with your desires with this engine and a Xoar WWII prop. However I think that it is slightly underpowered and I have a Magnum 180 fourstroke on order to retrofit: this will give me more power (but not silly) and will save some of the considerable extra weight I had to put up front to get the C of G right (don't even think of not setting this 'bob on' - so more power for a little more responsiveness for the same weight.

Whichever engine you fit you will need to ensure there is plenty of cooling air which I found meant cutting a lot of the bottom of the cowl away iteratively. You may also need to cut back some of the chin radiator moulding to accommodate the engine exhaust (I did)

As for the retracts I have found them to be somewhat unreliable: In the first place the alloy wheel hubs seem to be made as the same material spec as the axle and therefore they were binding to the point of seizure after a few flights.After reaming & lubrication at the field the problem was resolved but then one of the axles must have been loosened and I lost a wheel/axle in flight...it cost me about £17 for replacements (I'm not happy as this is poor design!)

The u/c doors are not good quality and I am presently making replacements from alloy sheet. You need to set these in place when the u/c is retracted to avoid fouls and they will not be totally scale for the reasons stated above but I think they look OK. Flying with the u/c down does deteriorate the flight performance somewhat...

Finally I bought some detailed rub down stencilling for the model to bling it up from Flightline Graphics. For some unknown reason they will not adhere to the surface of the model - I have had great support from Nigel at Flightline and he is currently looking into the reasons why so I would hold off on that for now if you were tempted.

Hope this helps & in spite of the comments above its a great model and looks superb in the air - on the maiden flight earlier this year the model was even 'joined overhead' by a real Spitfire.....heaven!

Cheers

Jon

[Mike E]

Hi chaps - and many thanks ffor the advice and experience you have given.

The latest is that I bought a CML Spit and put a 125 Saito onboard which flew for the first time this summer. The idea was get used to a Spit and get on with the YT when I can. There have been lots of delays in both projects for "elderly mother " reasons but the CML flew very well and can be flown very realisticallly except the retracts are rubbish - I am modifying them to see if I get them to stop bending on landing ( no not rubbish landing - just not man enough). I am looking at the possibility of putting heavy duty electric mains instead of air from Hobby Store but have not taken this any further. There are lot of scale people thinking the same way. Hope fully I can resolve this problem and see where we go with the YT

I have taken the YT chaps advice and bought a 150 Lazer for the good Spit but as yet not started the project in earnest . I am told the Lazer will need cooling which was solved by putting full height baffles inside the cowl and directing air from an enlarged front hole down the barrel sides and out via a large cut out in the back. The head will be partially exposed to cooling air with the inverted engine. The Saito works very well like this

Look forward to reading the reasons why the Graphics won't stick

Cheers for now

Mike