Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by Manish Chandrayan on 23/08/2016 12:37:32: I have now found my next scale sbuject. An aircraft that is a perfect subject for modelling and yet I can't find a single plan for an R/C model of it. What size would that be Peter? And will that have provision for an IC engine ? 61" span. 48 to 52 four stroke. I may increase the wing chord by 1" to bring it up to 600 sq in area. I may not as it is pretty close to Super Marauder, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manish Chandrayan Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by Peter Miller on 23/08/2016 13:45:56: Posted by Manish Chandrayan on 23/08/2016 12:37:32: I have now found my next scale sbuject. An aircraft that is a perfect subject for modelling and yet I can't find a single plan for an R/C model of it. What size would that be Peter? And will that have provision for an IC engine ? 61" span. 48 to 52 four stroke. I may increase the wing chord by 1" to bring it up to 600 sq in area. I may not as it is pretty close to Super Marauder, Perfecto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 9 Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 what about a yak 18p. looks like it would make a great model and it is rarely modelled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by Phil 9 on 23/08/2016 16:36:31: what about a yak 18p. looks like it would make a great model and it is rarely modelled Various Yak 18s have been done. I did a control line one about 40 years ago NO onehas done a PIlatus P-2 as far as I can see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenz Mueller Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 If the plan is published in RCME I'll just have to build it. Great subject to go with my Swiss Air Force Bf109, I'll do the electric conversion. Lorenz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by Lorenz Mueller on 23/08/2016 19:14:19: If the plan is published in RCME I'll just have to build it. Great subject to go with my Swiss Air Force Bf109, I'll do the electric conversion. Lorenz It has already been promised to RCM&E subject to successful completion. And yes, you can do the electric conversion as I don't think it would fly ona Speed 600 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fun Flyer Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 Why does everyone want to build warbirds?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eflightray Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 What next ?. How about something that probably hasn't been done before, one of the 'fantasy' plane, from drawings, cartoons, films etc. There seems to be a continuing 'looking back at what has been done before full size'. Where's the imagination ? Or do models have to be based on an existing full size, 'a scale model' ? It existed as a full size, so someone copies it as a model, then more people copy the model. It's called progress ?. Many wont like this, but at least multirotors was something 'new', quite a few fixed wing VTOL models have developed from the MR concept. Just a comment, no need to flame as most of my models are based on existing full size. But the question was, What next ?. Ray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by Fun Flyer on 23/08/2016 19:41:34: Why does everyone want to build warbirds?? The Pilatus P-2 is not a warbird. IT is a trainer. Personally I chose it because it is an ideal shape for a model, I like the lines and shape and the huge variety of colour schemes. IT has a slab sided fuselage, a chin cowl to hide an engine, a nice simple cockpit canopy which is easy to make and doesn,t need complicated mouldings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Posted by eflightray on 23/08/2016 19:53:47: What next ?. How about something that probably hasn't been done before, one of the 'fantasy' plane, from drawings, cartoons, films etc. There seems to be a continuing 'looking back at what has been done before full size'. Where's the imagination ? Or do models have to be based on an existing full size, 'a scale model' ? It existed as a full size, so someone copies it as a model, then more people copy the model. It's called progress ?. Many wont like this, but at least multirotors was something 'new', quite a few fixed wing VTOL models have developed from the MR concept. Just a comment, no need to flame as most of my models are based on existing full size. But the question was, What next ?. Ray The Pilatus, as I have said, has not been done before. However I do have a future project that has not ever been done before as far as I know and I am pretty sure that the last two posters will never have the nerve to build it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin b Posted August 23, 2016 Share Posted August 23, 2016 Sorry Pete. **LINK** Not on my list of favourites, but aero modelling is a broad church of which I am happy to be part of the congregation. All the best with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 23, 2016 Author Share Posted August 23, 2016 Nice! And the scheme that I planned to use. There are still no commercial plans that I can find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fun Flyer Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Posted by Peter Miller on 23/08/2016 21:05:17: Posted by Fun Flyer on 23/08/2016 19:41:34: Why does everyone want to build warbirds?? The Pilatus P-2 is not a warbird. IT is a trainer. Personally I chose it because it is an ideal shape for a model, I like the lines and shape and the huge variety of colour schemes. IT has a slab sided fuselage, a chin cowl to hide an engine, a nice simple cockpit canopy which is easy to make and doesn,t need complicated mouldings. OK, but YAKS and BF109S were mentioned. I'm really intrigued to know what I wouldn't have the nerve to build. (You could be right! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 Yaks are mainly known as arobatic types these days. Yes there was a Yak fighter but that is rarely modelled. The Me 109 was mentioned because the poster had one and the Pilatus trainer actually used the Me 109 wings and tailplane so the two make an interesting comparison. And YES the undercarriage on the P-2 was modified to an inward retracting type as oposed to the Me's outward retracting one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 Posted by Fun Flyer on 24/08/2016 00:52:36: I'm really intrigued to know what I wouldn't have the nerve to build. (You could be right! ) Well I will just say that it is one of my Way out types that might fly, actually this one could be better than the other three. The Stits did fly, so did the Payen...briefly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fun Flyer Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Bizarre, unusual, and very nice. I seem to remember Peter that you talked about designing a Turbulent a few years ago. Did it ever happen? I like Turbulents! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 The Turbulent was designed for RAM Models. They have a vast list of models that they are planning to produce including the Turbulent and a MIles Magister. I don't know what is happening with them I did do a lovely Turbulent which is in the Traplet plans range. That was a favourite model until one day I was doing a lowish inverted pass and the engine coughed...I gave full up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 Hi Percy. Nice! I found that if one lost the windscreen the trim change was really massive and then when the screen was repalaced one had to wind the original trim back in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fun Flyer Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 This is my example, built from the Gordon Whitehead plan and powered by a 26 four stroke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 Very nice. Like the engine detail. Gordon was a great designer. Wrote a great book too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 The Gordon Whitehead Turbulent was only 48 inch span, plan was in Radio Modeller Feb 76 plan no RM155 from MyHobbyStores. He also did a Fly Baby of about the same size. Peter's Turbulent was bigger at 57 inch span,was in RCModelWorld Jan 1985 plan no MW2017 from Traplet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenz Mueller Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Posted by Peter Miller on 24/08/2016 08:17:26: Yaks are mainly known as arobatic types these days. Yes there was a Yak fighter but that is rarely modelled. The Me 109 was mentioned because the poster had one and the Pilatus trainer actually used the Me 109 wings and tailplane so the two make an interesting comparison. And YES the undercarriage on the P-2 was modified to an inward retracting type as oposed to the Me's outward retracting one not quite: The airframe of the P-2 was entirely designed and built by Pilatus. But as the Swiss Bf-109Es were at that time being taken out of service and scrapped, the Pilatus designers used the landing gears (as you said swapped to retracting inward) and sundry small items such as the trim wheels and some instruments out of these scrappings. Lorenz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted August 25, 2016 Author Share Posted August 25, 2016 Thanks for that Lorenz I was going by an article in Pilot magazine. I must go back and read it again.. I probably got it wrong. v Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fun Flyer Posted August 27, 2016 Share Posted August 27, 2016 Posted by kc on 25/08/2016 09:53:28: The Gordon Whitehead Turbulent was only 48 inch span, plan was in Radio Modeller Feb 76 plan no RM155 from MyHobbyStores. He also did a Fly Baby of about the same size. Peter's Turbulent was bigger at 57 inch span,was in RCModelWorld Jan 1985 plan no MW2017 from Traplet. Don't forget Ron Moulton's 32" FF version in Aeromodeller, December 1955. Plan still available. Coincidently, the current issue of Aeroplane has an article on the Turbulent which includes the three view drawing from that issue of Aeromodeller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.