Guillows Stuka

[Erfolg]

Today after returning from the flying field, I gave the model one coat of WBV.

 

I then decided now is the time to check the weights and CG.

 

 

The present weight is 460 grams. That is complete, with motor, a propeller, 750 3s Lipo, 3 * servos, ESC and Rx.

 

I am anticipating an all up weight complete of about 500 grams.

 

With the bigger model N wing, which has an area of just over 1.4 ft^2, the wing loading will be between 11-12 oz ft-^2.

 

At this weight and inherent toughness I am hoping for a light to medium wind model. With luck it may be capable of handling up to about 12 mph, well, with luck!

 

The remaining work is what can take time with me, how about the rest of you?

[Erfolg]

Although I have converted one free flight cabin job to electric flight, I have been shocked at my stupidity with respect to this conversion.

 

Previously I did make provision at the planning stage where the Nicad (later Lipo) would be located, I also planned where the servos would go, letting the Rx and Esc sort themselves out. After the first flight I realised a fundamental rethink was required to get the CG forward, as the FF, CG location was to far aft. and more power was required. This required the heavy 480 and gearbox removing. All making the CG issue worse.

 

So the question I ask myself, why had I given so little thought to the Lipo for the Thunderbolt. Anyway. the matter is in hand now. The kit as supplied obviously makes no allowance for a Lipo. The interior not providing any handy surface to attach the necessitates of Electric Models.

 

One of issues that I believe all electric fliers expect, is a convenient method for arming the model. The idea of connecting the Lipo then attaching the wing is not ideal. I am investigating how this can be done easily. Most ARTF models have a convenient hatch for this process.

 

Anyway I am on the job now, better late than never.

 

[Erfolg]

I have made a battery box, which is partly fitted. This has been done, partly, with a view to working out how to connect the Lipo to the ESC.

 

The other part is the under fairing. I have noted previously that inserting patches into the framework, was tedious and resulted in a less than successful finish. I remembered that i once had both a Jetex Faiy FD2 and F104 Starfighter, which I made by attaching preformed shells to a skeleton frame. The method worked well.

 

Replicating the idea required the formers reducing by 1/16" around the outer face and relocating the stringers. I pre bent the outer shell around a can, having weted the sheet with hot water, then waiting for it to dry. I am sure we have all done this before, to a greater or lesser extent.

 

As with most things in live, this approach is far better suited to my requirements, with hindsight. The finish is far better, it is easier, faster, and probably lighter.

 

I have still not sorted a convenient way of arming the model (plugging in the Lipo).

The next bits seem to take me an age

[Shane Sunday]

This looks pretty awsome man. I've done no work on my small corsair but done loads on the 60 size Corsair. Have you got a paint scheme yet?

[Erfolg]

Hi Shane

 

I have made some progress, although from now in, I expect progress will be slow.

 

I need to cut the ailerons out next and then hinge them. The cowl needs some attachment points making, then I will be ready to paint,

 

With respect to painting, there seems little choice, apparently not the most varied of paint schemes. Most later aircraft were un-painted aluminum. Early models were essentially drab green upper and a light grey undersurfaces. The paint scheme on the top of the Guillows box, seems the most attractive, in that it is light gray all over, with a lighter green mottle/stripe finish, in conjunction with black and white invasion stripes.

 

It will probably be scheme I will use, although not scale as my wing is a model N. Not being a slave to scale, just the overall look and feel.

 

Assuming the model flies, i am hoping that the colours can be seen, as it is pretty small. As we know small models disappear quickly, a slight mistake can have the model way down wind, out of sight.

[Erfolg]

I have started the process of cutting out or separating the ailerons.

 

Due to the method of construction of the wing, i now find that the lines that are normally very much evident, into which I insert and run my scalpel are not as evident as i would like. I am progressing very carefully, which means slow.

 

I guess luckily i have the photographs and the plan to act as a guides, pointing to the clues where the separation lines actually are.

 

There is one surprise, to date all the WBV have been similar, the Ronseal stuff does seem better for modeling. Some of the trade varnishes have been much harder, to the extent of being brittle, DIY stuff has been a bit rubbery. This stuff is different, just like "Goldilocks" just right. I think when I have gathered my thoughts, evaluated the stuff a little more, I will write a more comprehensive analysis.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 17/12/2011 15:00:34

[Erfolg]

The removal of the ailerons proved to be a non event in practice.

 

Hinging the ailerons also proved a non event.

 

What has stopped me in my tracks is the installation of the elevator servo. The most convenient location would not aid CG management.

 

It seems I have made a poor decision early on. I think it would have been better to have glued the wing onto the body permanently. A top hatch could then have been created without any greater reduction in strength than a removable wing. The top hatch would have permitted better access to ESC, Lipo, Rx and above all the servo, with little or no compromise with access.

 

Christmas is here so I predict there will little or no progress for a while.

[Erfolg]

I have restarted the model.

 

I have done a test balance with most of the equipment on board. It is possibly just tail heavy. That is not painted. Which could move the CG further back. To counteract this probability I have now built in a ballast box.

 

I have started the spraying process. This to date has not gone well. In the past I have used a fixed jet Badger airbrush, for large area spraying and then an twin action airbrush for mottling etc.

 

The new airbrush is one of those variable annulus types, which have appeared on the market. This replace the Badger on which I knackered the jet.

 

I have also moved to so called Acrylic paints. Not to save the environment, but because they are becoming the preferred media. This has also involved using "tester" pots of emulsion (otherwise known as Acrylic).

 

It is apparent that using water to thin down paint is not as effective as solvents were with enamels. I had used a "flattening agent" previously with tester pots, which did improve the flow characteristics. The other issue may be, that the milling process DIY paints is not as fine as "Artist Materials" or Revell etc. I have run out of "flattening Agent", which I used on art work, to get that completely flat brush strokeless finish, so Representative of much modern art.

 

Doe any one know of a domestic substitute, or will have to wait until I go to Fred Aldus, in Manchester (which is a big a hike as Webbies).

 

Anyway I am getting there. At first I thought that the new airbrush was useless, so I reluctantly put the thinned paint into my double action air brush. I would never put enamel through a good airbrush, as scrupulous cleaning is needed to stop any paint build up. That would not spray either, with the air at 25 psi and the needle right back. It was then I realised that tester pots are less tolerant of careful mixing than enamels, Artists Acrylics or inks (which I tried, to work out what was wrong).

 

Painting continues.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 30/12/2011 14:18:16

[Erfolg]

I am nearly there now

 

A few pictures. The first is off the battery and ballast box

 

 

Then the paint job, afetre the trials and tribulations, of the last few days. Also not being sure of what the paint job is meant to be. I concluded that I have got a few things wrong.

 

Part way through painting I came to realise that the top surface should be drab green, which has been over painted with a temporary grey.

 

I painted dark grey as per the description, then over painted with black green, again as per the instructions.

 

I did realise in time that the temporary paint, was mean to be rubbing off and streaking due to the wet and wind. The plan talks of wet blending. On reflection I came to the conclusion that dry streaking was the best way for me to achieve the finish required.

 

I have been extremely lucky and appreciative that Olly has provided me with a JST Female lead to complete the flying installation.

 

I will report a bit more on the CG etc, when the installation is totally complete.

 

The other issue I will have to come to terms with my Futaba 8FG Tx, which I have had lying about for a few months now.

[Glenno]

converted the stuka to Rudder/elevator. changed the cox 049(never flew it with engine in) to brushless outrunner.
covered in dope and tissue.
Battery goes in hatch to the right of the exzort.
Paint job from real stuka
flys great-keep up the speed up .
Infilled the stringers around the nose area.
only flew a few times-to good to smash up!!
Glenn

c

[Erfolg]

Hi Glenno

 

It is to early to say when I will build my Ju 87. A lot will depend on how the P47 goes.

 

I think from experience I would reduce all the formers by 1/16", so that I can make preformed shells to stick onto the formers and stringers. I will defiantly give far more consideration to forming a hatch onto the top.

 

I Had hoped to use ailerons for turning, but think the rudder will have to survive. Just as you have done. Have you got the ailerons fixed on yours, or missed them off?

 

How many whats are you drawing on your model?

 

What sized Lipo are you using?

 

I guess you are using 9g servos, or have you gone smaller?

 

I am interested in your all up weight (your model, not you)?

 

Your model looks good

[Shane Sunday]

Erfolg not long now before we hear a flight report? She does look the business. I like where you've put the battery. I was thinking of buying some 800 mah 3s lipos for my corsair. Keep us informed.

 

Glenno that stuka looks lovely.remember birds are meant to fly.

[Erfolg]

Shane

 

It could be a little time.

 

I have doubts if the transfers will stay put if not over sprayed with varnish?

 

I have to do a little internal fixing of the RX, ESC, wires, rather than just being stuffed in.

 

I will need to get to grips with Tx, I still have not read how to do it, and it seems it is not a user friendly concept. I compare it to my wife's recently purchased Samsung Galaxy phone. The instruction book is the size of a book of stamps, about 3mm thick. It mostly tells you about SIM card, battery and charging. The rest one page how to switch on, navigate as a concept, a bit on the camera, and switch off. Now that is one user friendly phone.

 

I would think about a month maybe, or a week.

 

The trouble is I have a number of models which I have not flown much, particularly my Nobbler look alike, finished a year ago flown now about 3 times and it seems to fly well, need to fly it more.

 

[Erfolg]

I have had a chance to install Olly's JST/Deans plug extension lead, so its thanks again to Olly.

 

I did foresee one major issue and that was operating the 8FS Tx. I spent one boring afternoon looking at video's of programming Futaba Fasst Tx's.

 

As a user of the 6ex Fasst Tx, I was well satisfied, as it does what it says on the can. My one gripe was the lack of model memories, only 6! How quickly I have forgot that my pre 35, 6ex Tx's, I was stuck with one memory, the one I set. Pre my Futaba Gold, I could not reverse even the servos, without a soldering iron, certainly not at the Tx.

 

Back to the videos, they can be misleading, in that it emphasises that the basic process is applicable to all the Fasst Tx's. It discusses that it is necessary to set the Rx type to either "multi" or "6 channel" Rx's. After wasting some time seeking the option, I have concluded that it is not an option with the 8fg Super.

 

So why am i so skeptical with the 8fg. Well I dislike things like appended alphas or numerics that mean nothing, well at least to me. So calling it an fg means nothing, might as well call it an 8.

 

Yet my biggest gripe is the input method, I do not like the tapping and running my finger around a dial to change the function etc. Compared to my wifes, Samsung phone or my daughters Iphone, it is a clunky process.

 

This is made worse by poor instruction manual. It should be emphasised that there are essentially 3 branches to accessing and changing functions. They omit the bold print that Tx basic settings are accessed via the Sys(system) option. The second important branch is Model, this as the title hints essentially deals with allocation of servos. The third branch LI (Link), deals with how the functions of mixers etc are managed. If they had provided a diagram, and emphasised the 3 principal menu's it would be easier to come to terms with how functions are linked. Also providing a general process, which logically indicates the basic sequential option selection. That is Tx system settings, which is really only a first time thing, putting your name in. Then Model identification and settings. Finally, Link, how you are mixing functions etc..

 

Anyway I have bound the Rx, a FRsky-6 , which is unusually easy. This model is commendably light and compact. I had intended installing a FRsky-Orange which is more of a phaf to bind, but more importantly, is bigger, although I have an original with the shrink wrap, which is much smaller (I am reluctant to fit the case bought later).

 

The dig by Shane has applied a bit of pressure to complete the model, I was starting to think about my next model, a Spitfire or a Clean Sweep(perhaps urgently needed to replace a poor model i have) or a Delta. Then there is the Bachem that stares at me when I enter the building room, just needs servos and painting. So Shane has whipped me into line to finish the model.

[Erfolg]

Hmmm

 

Just found the Multi/7 menu.

[Shane Sunday]

Well I hope to have encouraged you but if whipped gets the job done. Now I need to get all of mine done. I think I have six still needing to be finished. Your P-47 Has had me looking at my poor little corsair and got me itchy. I'm using a spektrum set up and it's relatively easy aside when I want to set up elevons and I haven't done it in a dogs age. I've used the orange receivers as well and they are great light weight kit. I've a couple ones I'll take the cover off to put in the Corsair. Only need one I know.

 

So until I see or read a flight report.

 

Ya ya .... ya ya. Giddup.

[Erfolg]

Shane

 

I do not think that 8 is difficult, once you work out the setting/menu concept. I strongly feel, that manual writers could beneficially start with outlining the accessing and menus strategy. It is there, just buried within the broad text of the manual.

 

I think the other issue is physical means of option selection. The 8 relies on tapping a dial and rotating your finger around the input/selection dial. Even my granddaughters "Leapfrog" game, is operated by a tapped screen, dropping down menus, sliding, icons about etc. I think the more expensive Futaba radios do seem to have these features, just not the 8. It is just a bit clunky, it is a bit more intuitive, once you get past the dial device, which I see as the barrier to really user friendly operation.

 

The radio is pretty much set up now. The main remaining issue, is which ESC to stick in. Given I will need some nose weight, I am tempted to put in a bigger ESC. Then I think, it is just a substitute for Lead, so why not just put lead in, and a 20 amp Esc.

 

Oh I think I will need to purchase some matt WVP to spray the model, to ensure that the decals do not come off, if and when it gets damp.

 

I think that the Corsair wing shape is probably far better than the Thunderbolt, having a broad tip. I have set up my model with differential aileron with built in washout, to try and manage any tip stall issue.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 10/01/2012 16:18:10

[Erfolg]

I have now essentially finished the Thunderbolt, the radio equipment etc installed.

 

I have encountered a few unanticipated issues.

The first was the lack of room in a apparently voluminous fuselage, so much has been crammed in, the Rx being further back than anticipated.

The Rx being the Frsky 6, rather than the initially intended Frsky 8 (orange), as a consequence of size. The 6 is much more compact and far easier to bind than the Orange, not requiring the dexterity of a octopus.

There has been a consequence to this issue, which moved the CG further back, I guess not just theweight of the Rx, but also the cables.

Whilst doing the installation I was monitoring the CG. My initial thought was to place the CG at the "Free Flight" position. Yet I had reservations. I had noted that the CG recommended for the VS Tomboy, was to far rearward for an all weather RC jobbie. Moved further forward the model flew a treat. My solution was to work out the wing area then select a point just less than 30% of chord. This moved the CG forward by about 6mm.

Once all the changes and installations had been completed the wing loading is 20 oz ft^-2 (using the N model wing). Not as low as I had intended, not as bad as I had feared. The all weight being 705g.

The motor is a CF2812 which pull a max of 152w, turning the prop at 11,500 revs peak. Settling back to about 116w and 10500 revs.

I do however a few important decisions to make. I have set up the ailerons with differential. There being no down at all. just the up going surfaces. I now need to settle on a adequate end point on the servo, as possibly the movement at present is excessive. It is a similar story with the elevator, quite a lot of movement. I am considering using the dual rates, to provide a measure of handling options, based on how it does behave in initial flights.

There is one worrying phenomena and that there is a transient, vibration in the mid range of the propeller revs. I have checked the propeller on my balancer and it is very good for static balance. I have also done some checks with a dti with the collet and motor assembly, which also seem to run true, using a dti. There being no apparent run out.

[Erfolg]

As I have suggested I am doing those last things, which seem never ending, but are forgotten until you ask, can i fly it?

 

The biggest issue which I am appealing for peoples experience is the probable throws on small models like this. I know that at least two Guillows models in the same series have been flown, from this thread. What deflections were found to be OK.

 

Which memories which you preffer to put to the back of the mind are relevant to this type of model?

 

I just have two additional cowling screws to put in, then it is finished. That is other than setting throws etc!

 

So come on

[Olly P]

Erfolg - I have an 8FG (also Super due to an update).

 

If you want I have some programming guides somewhere which make it a lot simpler.

 

I can email them over if you send me your email address, assuming I can find them!

[Erfolg]

I have programmed the Tx and the model, it is not an issue so far. I just think it is a bit klunky in this era, the interface that is.

[Olly P]

I find I forget where the submenu's sit - but it doesn't take long to find them.

 

 

I have to say I love the Tx in general though.

[Erfolg]

The model has almost flown now. It managed about 300m before,rocking its wings one way then the other, then piling in at full throttle. The ailerons were set with high differential, only the surface inducing downward roll moving, the other aileron remaining still.

I was not flying the model, the task being entrusted to a more competent modeller than myself.

He complained that the elevator was not effective.

My own observation was that there needed to be some up elevator, set in. I had set the tailplane elevator at 0 -0 degrees relative to the underside of the wing.

It is a pity that a little more up was not built/set in, as with more altitude, it may have been sorted out before hitting the ground. On the other hand, it could have been totaled.

As for the damage, the nose parted company with the firewall. I had thought it was not a particular well designed joint, from the point of view of distributing stress in any event, that was less than a good landing.

I will repair it, then into the garage for ever I guess. Not my sort of model, just a little to small.

Edited By Erfolg on 28/02/2012 14:03:29

Edited By Erfolg on 28/02/2012 14:05:09

[Shane Sunday]

Wow it's too bad she didn't fly.

She looks lovely.

If you can get her sorted out maybe you could have a good indoor model?

My 2 cents

[Erfolg]

Shane

It was going like a Bat from Hell, not much chance of indoor flight.

The reason I do not try on some first flights is to figure out what is happening. On reflection it was under elevated. Though I am not sure there was enough power to maintain speed and climb. Before going in it seemed to wobble from side to side, as if it were stalling. The washout, possibly making the stall a non event.

I did not debrief the flyer properly to find out if he was trying to climb. His comment was "I thought I had it". Fix it and I am sure it will go next time.

I have just finished repairs. It took so much time because I was working primarily on other models.

I am not sure That I will try with it again. Primarily as it does not fit my main criteria, in that it should be an everyday model, it was more in keeping with a pylon racer.