2016 RCM&E Autumn Special- Free Plan Modellers Choice

[IanN]

Posted by Erfolg on 09/02/2016 13:25:38:

Although there is one military aircraft that should fly well, have good potential for sales. Could even build well with the right design and that is the Douglas A4 Skyhawk.

Erf, TN has already said "we'll park EDFs ....... for this year"

Although if you like the A4 the PSSA are currently doing it as a mass build, plan feature in the recent Tr*pl*t mag

**LINK**

[David perry 1]

The Stuka is nice. I'll vote for that

David

[Erfolg]

Ian, my building is now on hold, other things that have to be done.

[Steve Adams]

If the 2016 special is based on mentions and votes the Piston Provost Has it in the bag so far!

However as already mentioned maybe The great TN himself may possibly have a mindset on something already. Wouldn't be a bad thing either as this time around there seems to not be an overwhelming vote(scenario) winner which is strange as the TN pick a plane in the past years did. Maybe it's not strange though perhaps this time round most have been more imaginative with their entry's this time and that's great to see,better than the same old hum drum!

Kind Regards

Steve

[Tony Nijhuis]

Well the ideas are slowing down now so I think its decision time......... and these appear to be the top two

• Hawker Hind, Nimrod, Fury, Hart
• Piston Provost

I although i don't profess to be a biplane fan, I can see the similarities in the hawker variations which will hopefully push a lot more 'build buttons' than a single variant and therefore the potential to be more of a commercial success. Sound like I'm talking myself into it

That being the case some last thoughts on either subject would be good especially power options although I suspect electric with prevail as the most wanted

[Daithi O Buitigh]

I'd go for an electric powered Provost on the grounds that it's quieter (I do like infernal confusion engines but the noise factor is costing us flying sites). As for the Hart/Hind/Demon - Gordon Whitehead did that way back (check here ). I'll admit the Fury/Nimrod is under-modelled but the Provost would be a simpler build (I like biplanes, but a lot are put off with more than one wing especially when it comes to rigging)

[A.A. Barry]

Yep I agree with Daithi, rigging is a pain in the butt down at the flying site, but without all those turnbuckles, wires and odd looking adjustment thingos it rates poorly when showing it off, ( lots of works for minimum flurry of handclaps )

So my wishs would be the Piston Provost,(no retracts yippy ) I actualy looking forward to the plan

Cheers all

Barry

[Bob Stringfellow]

Hawker Fury Bipe as it is little modelled. I built the C/L one that was the Xmas free plan in Aero Modeller in the late fifties.

Cheers

Bob

[David Ovenden]

Well one of the Hawker biplanes would be a real change from the recent WWII low wing models. The narrow pointed nose means that I/c engines are difficult to enclose so electric seems the obvious choice. Wings could be designed as plug-on pairs complete with rigging? I am sure Tony could come up with a design for a wing support/ jury strut system to allow easy transport. Rigging would then only be a matter of 4 screws to hold the wings to the fuselage.

Alternatively, what about making the Provost the right size to fit a small radial engine eg Saito FG19 / 120r3?

Edited By David Ovenden on 11/02/2016 04:47:50

[Danny Fenton]

If Tony plumbs for the Biplane, I for one will be very interested in how he goes about the struts, and rigging, eundercarriage etc, as this is a break away from the warbirds, and big bombers. I built Tony's big Spitfire and the fuselage outline was as close to any Spitfire as I have seen. Hopefully a Hawker Hind, Nimrod, Fury, Hart would also be as good a basis to build from. Something akin to the Flair Scout series but a Fury is my thought, a little more accurate perhaps with simple rigging?

I am just coming out of a build of a Chipmunk and that is probably why I am not enthralled by the similar layout of the piston Provost.

I am predo,minantly an electric flyer and the pointed nose of the Camm design would point to electric being the easier to conceal the motor, but i think the final size would have a bearing on powerplant, I am guessing the size would be around 60" Tony, to fit the magazine?

Anyway I am sure it will be ace whatever is chosen, and all of Tony's design seem to fly wonderfully

Cheers

Danny

[Steve Adams]

Hi Guy's,

The Piston Provost would do it for me if chosen by all/Tony. No rigging or fiddling simpler build than the bipes,could handle a breeze better,not often modelled....Yep definitely a everyday clubmans scale model, and dare I say would make a good first low wing scale model! Whatever wins though Piston Provost or Hawker Hind / Hart / Fury etc will be awesome coming from TN....I look forward to the autumn special!

Kind Regards

Steve

[Daithi O Buitigh]

I don't know about Tony but I'm a bit bemused by statements like 'make a change from warbirds' in reference to the Hart and Fury variants - they were front line RAF aircraft (and the Hart did see some (limited) active service (with the Finnish AF). As for the 'needle nose' - there were also radial engine variants - Furys in the Persian AF and Harts in Sweden and Finland

I'm still voting for the Provost though

[Fun Flyer]

I'm still firmly ABAW, and the Provost is borderline.

(Anything But A Warbird)

[Steve Adams]

I see on Tonys to do list there is a Jet Provost,

So I'm thinking that a Piston Provost would make a good complement to this also is there a lot of design difference between the Piston and Jet Provost?....Apart from the obvious! If by chance there isn't providing the PP does get chosen would it be difficult to make it into a 2 in 1 plan that allows you to build both the Piston and or Jet Provost from the same plan with mods needed either way? If that could be done then the commercial viability would double effectively at a guess, though I could be wrong of course!

Cheers

Steve

[Daithi O Buitigh]

I really doubt that you could do a 'two in one' for the Provost - blown versus framed canopy, fixed tail dragger u/c versus tricycle retract, different tail feathers and wing tips. The similarities would be side by side seating and the name - not a lot to go on

I still can't understand why an unarmed trainer is classed as a warbird while a dedicated fighter and light bomber that actually saw action aren't

[Tony Nijhuis]

A long time a ago I did build a Flare Pup but hated the rigging and the faffing about....If i do go down the bipe route, the wings would definitely be plug with all the rigging attached in the outer panels.....just two bolts, one at the top and one at the bottom and away you go...the idea would be to make it as easy as putting the wing on a spitfire,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Steve Adams]

Daithi,

Yes I agree on both levels the Piston Provost is a lot different to the Jet Provost, I guess I was basing my assumptions on the Supermarine Spiteful / Attacker where Prop/Jet share at least the same wing! How anyone can think of the Piston Provost as anything other than a trainer is beyond me! I'm going to go with Percy as I believe it would make a great first low wing scale model,easy to build, no retracts and not a bad looker / different

All in all a nice plane and Not A Warbird!!

PS I'm hoping if it does get picked that TNs version will outshine the black horse one in all aspects, as I'm sure it will!

66/70 ins like his harvard at6 Got to be a fourstroke in this plodder though!

Cheers

Steve

Edited By Steve Adams on 11/02/2016 22:55:48

[Colin Leighfield]

The Mk1 Jet Provosts were virtually conversions from the piston engined original, even the main undercarriage legs were the original length of the main legs of the fixed undercarriage and the canopy looks the same.

[Colin Leighfield]

Although I did put the Provost on my list and I do like it, I don't think I could prioritise it yet because I must get back onto the Supermarine 317 project as I finish the Chipmunk, so it would be a year or two away for me. However, I still fancy the idea of a Fiat Cr42, built in one piece in a handy size, saybabout 38" span (1/10 scale), light sheet balsa wings Tucano and Seafang style for a quick build and electric, so I might knock one up anyway in the meantime.

[Daithi O Buitigh]

Sorry Colin but wiki says this "...In June 1957, an order was placed for the first 40 of the developed Jet Provost T3, featuring a more powerful Armstrong Siddeley Viper jet engine, ejector seats, a redesign of the airframe, and a shortened and strengthened version of the retractable tricycle undercarriage. ..."

It may have been based on the pison engine variant but there were a LOT of differences.

Just for fun Steve - the Supermarine Swift was a development of the Attacker with swept wings and trike u/c. In turn the Attacker was developed, as you said, from the Spiteful which was, in turn, a late mark Spitfire with laminar flow wings - similarities in name and so on don't mean that one is a 'simple' conversion of the other. It would be like saying that you could modify a Lanc to a Shack because there was an interim development (the Lincoln) in between (nor overlooking the York and Lancastrian variants)

[Colin Leighfield]

Hi Daith, I knew that. I was just trying to say that you probably could draw up a Mk1 using the piston version plan as the basis because it was largely a jet conversion, you couldn't do it with a Mk3.

[Daithi O Buitigh]

Still too many differences really Colin (btw it wasn't a 'Mk 1' and 'Mk 3' )but a 'T1' and T3'.

Besides that Tony did say at the start he'd prefer no EDFs

[Colin Leighfield]

It was T1 and 3, as you say. I have a habit of using "Mk" for all descriptions, I shouldn't. I don't plan to do it anyway, but although I've seen JPs done before, never a T1. If If I was going to do it, that's the one I would go for because it would interest me more. I like to see flying planes I wouldn't otherwise be able to, that's one of the reasons that I make models in the first place, for me it's part of being a dyed-in-the-wool aeroplane buff.

[_AL_]

A big Zero would be nice

I'm a big fan of the Dogfight Double plans & have most of them. What about a Dogfight Double?

A FW190 & a P47, or a Tempest & a 262. Perhaps a Mig15 & a Sabre. 40-45" span would make a nice combination.

Al

[Lorenz Mueller]

A piston Provost would be the first TN plan in years not to tempt me - too modern, too boring. Not while there are soo many nice warbirds of the thirties and WWII to do. The Fury would, but alas it is already on the building board... That is why my vote would go to a Bristol Bulldog, Gloster Gladiator, Aichi Val, Mitsubishi Claude,... I could go on for several pages.

No harm done, not while my stack keeps me busy for ages

Lorenz