Who wants a Warbird Replics Hurricane?

[Graham R]

opps wrong thread

 

 

 

Edited By Graham Russell on 02/05/2017 21:35:23

[Mike Blandford]

I thought that, but, if I understand correctly, the rear (non-veneered) foam deck butts up to a piece of foam that is veneered. If these pieces are mounted on the plain foam, they protrude outside the veneer of the piece in front.

Mike.

[Jon H]

Andrew is right but you will have to fit them. on mine I ditched them and made my own in balsa as it was easier to sand. I also added a thin sheet of balsa on the outside of the fuselage to give a slight step to simulate the cockpit rail. see photo below

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Mike Blandford]

I thought I was missing something for the cockpit area (this venereed foam part). I found it inside the cowling in the box.

Mike.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Andy J]

Have to replace my canopy (for the second time) would any of you guys have a more detailed way of attaching the canopy to the model or indeed giving it some strength? Wondering if a loop of piano wire inside at the front would prevent any damage on a nose over.

Luckily Richard seems to have a supply of spares but assume I could easily consume his stock holding if I continue to fly of a small grass strip.

[Don Fry]

Andy, have you rolled it inverted on medium power, how much down was needed to keep it level. Put it in a 45 degree dive on a high tickover, did it want to keep straight in, recover or steepen the dive. In my experience, a well trimmed example of a proven model does not end up upside down that often. And this model s a proven design.

I would suggest the centre of gravity is forward. It causes all sorts of falling over problems on landing because you just don't have enough elevator to counteract the heavy nose.

I have not built mine yet, but I bet the designer did not suggest an adventurous rearward centre of gravity, just a safe one.

Before you spend money, ( fingers in a cross to ward off the devil), try a bit, 15 grams at a time, on the tail, to see if it flies nicer with the balance a bit further back. It looks crap without a canopy, but trim it first.

I may be speaking out my backside, but canopies are not routine renewables.

Best of luck.

[Jon H]

I have flipped mine over a few times but never bashed the canopy. Mine has scale legs though so is more tippy than most. I think its still nose heavy too as it drops like a brick when inverted.

I plan to edge my c/g aft more and more next I fly it. I might take some coils of soft solder and wrap them round the tail or something

[Andy J]

Well you have got me thinking Donald as to the correct CofG position as I did not build the model although I have now done several mods to the wing which would have pushed the CofG towards the rear. What is quoted on the plan?

Was thinking of increasing the elevator throw as the control is marginal in the landing run and all my landings to date have been on the hard side. Can experiment with moving the CofG back as there are several strips of church roof just behind the prop.

[Don Fry]

Andy, you are a designer. You give a position of the C of G.

Now your customer, and this designer cares about customers I will assure you, wishes you will survive the first flight, so you come back for more of the product. And buy another, cos you are hooked on the successful designs. This bloke is the last man standing as kit manufacturers.

So you launch it down the strip for the first time. Lift it off. It will roll right or left. They all roll. So, it either wants to climb or dive. Fifty/fifty.

Climb, no prob, sort the roll, reduce power, trim the elevator, success.

Dive, you now back stick, off centre, while reaching with a free hand for the trims, perhaps reducing power with the hand you have moved to the trims. And the backward C of G will tip stall you, the elevator is as sensitive as hell.

Best give a forward C of G.. you will live to fly again, given with a new canopy.

Trim it first, sort out the details late.

It is a flying machine, not an airfix kit. And C of G is where you are happy, and moves back with use, until it is right, FOR YOU.

Don't be afraid to move it back a bit at a time. Test it every incremental move back. You will know when it's right. When it becomes slightly uncomfortable to fly, put a few grams of roof back. Then sort the canopy.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Jon H]

By Richards own admission the Hurricane was never as thoroughly tested as the spitfire etc so don't take the plan c/g as gospel. Its a good start point but feel free to fiddle

[Andy J]

Thanks for the advice gents will measure the CofG position before removing some church roof up front.

Does Richard give any advice as to the elevator control thows in his instructions?

[Andy J]

Also received my new canopy today (thanks Richard) so would be interested how each of you have modified the acrylic to give it a more realistic appearance on the model. My last one used lasso tape on the inside to replicate the structure, but found that was peeling off wrt time.

[Jon H]

Control throws are as low as possible! I think I am down to no more than 10 or 12mm. I say think as I have no idea, I just eyeball it, fly it, and then adjust as required

[RICHARD WILLS]

The Hurricane has a very thick wing , with washout and a mild taper ,there is no reason why it should be a handful .

The C of G shown on the plan is on the safe side of nose heavy , If you find that with 15 degrees of up elevator you are struggling to lift the nose at slow speeds , then your C of G is too far forward .

So set the maximum elevator accordingly , take the model to a height and then start experimenting with slow speed flight into wind . Gradually move the C of g back bit by bit .

There is not really a definitive set of measurements because if a model is one pound lighter , it will be far more tolerant to a rearward C of G . Equally , the bigger the area of the stabiliser , the further rearward you can push the C of G .

Regards to all

Richard

[Glynn]

Just done the first decal set for 32 Squadron, Biggin Hill. Which was in the Battle of Britain.

[Andy J]

Posted by Andrew Ray on 04/05/2017 20:48:04:

Andy, 78/79 mm back from the LE at the root. Hope it helps

Well a quick measurement today came up with 80mmback from the LE so will fly again and try the dive test before I remove any lead.

[David Davis]

My Hurricane kit arrived this morning! It looks great! Thank you Richard.

As I'm currently renovating a house and I have one or two other projects on the go, I regret that my Hurricane build will have to wait for the winter.

[Andy J]

Still pondering how too detail the canopy. What have you guys done wrt this item?

[Jon H]

I just painted mine in situ, nothing fancy at all.

To give some more info about the c/g I took yet more weight out of the nose of my model and had some interesting results.

The removed weight caused a nose down (yes down) trim condition and needed some up trim to sort it out. It de sensitised the elevators slightly and made the model more pleasant to fly through loops. The model is also easier to land but I still find it hard to get down as the blasted thing just will not stop flying. Indeed on one occasion I made a mess of it, bounced badly and the model came to a complete halt about 3 feet off the ground with its nose slightly high. I looked at it perplexed for what seemed like an eternity and couldn't help but think 'well crash then, there is no going back from here' only to find that the thrust of the idling Laser and the headwind rising up the hill just let it hang there for a moment before it floated off gently, that was until the wind dropped it and with full up elevator applied it just parachuted down for a vertical landing a Harrier would have been proud of. No tipstalls here then.

In any event, I will chop a bit more weight out and see if I can come up with a final position I am happy with.

[Andy J]

Most interesting. Well if the wind would abate for a day or two I would get out and do some test flying myself. Looling at the long range forcast I am going to be stuck in the house for some time!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Andy J]

Well not a good start to a flight test as found the battery had been left on so it was 0V! Recovered the voltage using a recover charge and both cells seemed to hold the charge to proceed to the flying field.

After a couple of circuits performed a dive test and I I found the plane pulled out so that would indicate it is tail heavy Yes???

Then noticed the Rx voltage was dropping off so attempted a landing ... not good, as a hard arrival resulted in a go around with one leg half down and one leg up. So landed in the long grass which resulted in what could be called a stalled tumble. So returned her to the car.

Testing the battery on return to the house indicated a failed cell so obviously a battery replacement was required.

Then the story took a turn for the worse dear readers. In the process of cutting out the battery from the forward compartment I inadvertently shorted the battery with the scaple blade. A continuous plume of white smoke erupted from the now partially exposed battery. Making a rapid exit from the garage with the model I then went back for the fire extinguisher. Having pulled the pin and was just about to fire the extinguisher the battery went quiet for a minute or two before again the battery started hissing and pushing out volumes of smoke. By this time I could get my screw driver into the battery compartment and extracted at least one cell and again all went quiet in terms of smoke generation. Having donned some surgical gloves then did a quick extraction of what was left of the battery.

Luckily the battery had little charge left I think and the fuel tank which semi melted had zero to no fuel left in it so think myself very lucky to have saved the model.