Aeronca Sedan

[Erfolg]

I am trying to avoid flexible wire, as it needs a degree of tensioning to work well.

I do have some Stainless steel Nylon Covered fishing wire, left over from my glider days (closed loop sytem). Never really been a fan, although it does work.

I am thinking more 1.5mm or so CF that I can Cyno. The issue is I do not know a source anywhere near here. It seems that the only solution is to send away for some. In the distant past I bought CF from Robotbirds (for indoor Model) then, if not now the P&P was acceptable. I was even able to use the tube (that the materials came in) for installing 480 in-runners,

Perhaps I should emphasis, I want a model that I can fly in most circumstances and throw into the car. Rather than all aspects of the full size being adhered to. To my eyes the tailplane assembly is rather fragile.

Keep the ideas coming, as I will start Googling today for local fishing tackle shops. Living by the sea, you would think you would see many rod fishermen. I see non. Although the cocklers are back, on the Ribble estuary. I guess it is the sea goes out for miles, then rushes back. All the local piers are high and dry at low tide. I guess that could explain a lot.

[Bob Cotsford]

How long are the rods? Maybe something off ebay?

[Erfolg]

Sorry Richard, your post appeared in my in tray, out of order, for some reason. I agree the back does appear to be wobbly.

Bob, there appears to be 4 of them. In one photo one of the wires appears to have been replaced with a strut from the leading edge of the tail plane to the bottom of the fuz, all the other photos on Google appear to have wires. What makes certainty, less than certain, is that the vast majority of the photos are from the front, or the back end is slightly out of focus.

The length of the wires appears to be circa +300mm.

[Richard Clark 2]

Posted by Erfolg on 01/08/2020 16:55:36:

Sorry Richard, your post appeared in my in tray, out of order, for some reason. I agree the back does appear to be wobbly.

Bob, there appears to be 4 of them. In one photo one of the wires appears to have been replaced with a strut from the leading edge of the tail plane to the bottom of the fuz, all the other photos on Google appear to have wires. What makes certainty, less than certain, is that the vast majority of the photos are from the front, or the back end is slightly out of focus.

The length of the wires appears to be circa +300mm.

Erfolg,

Wire would be finer but Kevlar or Dacron is easier . But don't let your modelling knife get anywhere near Kevlar or Dacron when it's done .

On each side in the real one there are two wires from near the top of the fin to the taillplane and there are two from the bottom of the fusalage. If lightly tensioned (Kevlar and Dacron don't really stretch) their flexibility is fine as whichever way ther tailplanr tries to bend thry will alwayd be two cable ach side stopping it.

[Peter Miller]

Well when I fitted the wires tothe Chaos tail it was easy. I threaded the wire thor a 8ba solder tag and locked it by squeezing the crimp with pliers. Then pulledit tight and di the same at the other. end. I ended up with 8 nice tight wires.

They will not come loose.

Just how were you planning on securing your carbon rods because I can imagine one good knock will pull them loose from balsa.

[Richard Clark 2]

Erfolg,

Further.

I put 1/4 square hard balsa blocks in the tailplane attached to convenient ribs and filed/sanded to match the rib edges and similarly a slightly larger block with two adjacent holes on a cross piece of the fin. Then I drilled small holes though the blocks and similar (2) holes in the fuselage lower longerons All the longerons gather together at the tail so are strong and a pair of small holes each side  won't matter.

Then I covered the plane, not forgetting to poke a length of 20 or 22g wire though the covering to act as a marker before I covered the other sides. Then you can poke a hole in that side too.

When fully covered I passed a long length of Kevlar line though each set of holes, keeping each section slightly tensioned as I went and securing the line at each location with a tiny drop of cyano before I moved to the next., If you harden a couple of inches of the line with cyano  it's easy to push though the holes, even the lower fuselage ones, where the two ends pass each other and are later cut off, lightly pulling on the 'tag ends' of both at the same time when glueing. (Leave this 'double' glueing till last.)

 

It'd easy and look neat (provided  you haven't splashed  the cyano around). Should you break one at some later time you can carefully drill out the blocks and replace it, but ir's unlikely to happen as the line is very strong..

 

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 01/08/2020 21:18:33

[PatMc]

Posted by Erfolg on 01/08/2020 16:55:36:

Sorry Richard, your post appeared in my in tray, out of order, for some reason. I agree the back does appear to be wobbly.

Bob, there appears to be 4 of them. In one photo one of the wires appears to have been replaced with a strut from the leading edge of the tail plane to the bottom of the fuz, all the other photos on Google appear to have wires. What makes certainty, less than certain, is that the vast majority of the photos are from the front, or the back end is slightly out of focus.

The length of the wires appears to be circa +300mm.

There are several good photos of the tailplane bracing wires in the site that's been linked on here already. For example here & here. Probably more if you look through the site's "Sedan gallery".

[Richard Clark 2]

Posted by PatMc on 01/08/2020 21:34:22:

Posted by Erfolg on 01/08/2020 16:55:36:

Sorry Richard, your post appeared in my in tray, out of order, for some reason. I agree the back does appear to be wobbly.

Bob, there appears to be 4 of them. In one photo one of the wires appears to have been replaced with a strut from the leading edge of the tail plane to the bottom of the fuz, all the other photos on Google appear to have wires. What makes certainty, less than certain, is that the vast majority of the photos are from the front, or the back end is slightly out of focus.

The length of the wires appears to be circa +300mm.

There are several good photos of the tailplane bracing wires in the site that's been linked on here already. For example here & here. Probably more if you look through the site's "Sedan gallery".

 

The colour and registration of mine is that one.

With one detail I think is important - the line of the curve on the colour panel behind the cabin windows. That panel was part of the standard factory colour scheme for all of them except some early ones, and tends to make the plane instantly recognisable as an Aeronca Sedan.

But over the years most, possibly all, have been repainted and many don't get the line of the curve right and as a result some look rather ugly. The linked plane does get it right.

Just a comment on 'vintage models'. Although the Mercury kit came out about 1953 (and incidentally,   depicts  the early colour scheme) I don't think of it as 'vintage' model and our construction methods (except for ARTFs) haven't changed significantly since. So I think of it as a scale model of a (marginally)  'vintage' plane  rather than  a vintage 'model' and personally wouldn't enter  it in  'vintage' meet. no more  than I would a modern   kit or ARTF of a Sopwith Camel  

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 02/08/2020 06:57:08

[Erfolg]

You are both correct (Patmac & Richard).

In a way i had forgotten about these links, although having read them a number of times.

Even when being re-reminded, I had not spotted the specific pictures linked by yourselves. In a way it is the combined knowledge and brains that resolves and clarifies many issues for the builder.

I have made a number of errors, due to not knowing how the originals were built. Much of the sheeting i have on the outer surfaces at the front would have been omitted. Particularly in that I have sheeting on the box area at the front, to take and distribute the landing forces, plus something to get my servo plate & beams attached to. I assumed that the outer cabin area had been sheaved in plywood, as all the various plans and kits had sheeted this area.

Perhaps another not yet completed is the cowl. There are so many variations, I expect due to replacement at various times, probably during a motor replacement. My own is based on that the original is bent sheet material. Yet the nose area seems to be well rounded on some aircraft and on others,a minimum radius. I had thought that the original would be a mim radius. This based on my month long experience, almost 60 years ago , where I found that making a square to round item required a lot of bashing, a scar on my hand from the metal bit on a hide mallet. Although probably the biggest error in this area, is that I have just the one aperture for the oil cooler and carburetor, where the vast majority of cowls have this area split.

I am now working on the cowl.

My mind is turning to the detail of the wing struts, and fixating on increasing the robustness of the tail group. Where I am now thinking will require a lot more material, than a quick glance suggests. I am also thinking of some CF rods from the Fuz, through the tailplane and into the fin, as this general area seems rather weak, when subjected to me, storage and my flying.

Considering these issues, the cost of P&P could be minimal to the cost of the CF rod.

I know that what I am suggesting is not as visually true to scale as some other solutions. I tend to see it as PM pragmatism. Just like enlarging a tail plane area, to obtain better RC handling, although on this model that is not required.

[David Davis]

Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 02/08/2020 06:31:32:

.... Just a comment on 'vintage models'. Although the Mercury kit came out about 1953 (and incidentally, depicts the early colour scheme) I don't think of it as 'vintage' model and our construction methods (except for ARTFs) haven't changed significantly since. So I think of it as a scale model of a (marginally) 'vintage' plane rather than a vintage 'model' and personally wouldn't enter it in 'vintage' meet. no more than I would a modern kit or ARTF of a Sopwith Camel

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 02/08/2020 06:57:08

Oh I don't know Richard, I used to go to the Cocklebarrow Vintage October Festival regularly and I've seen SE5s, Flying Fleas and other models which could well have been own designs in amongst all of the usual vintage sports models. I'm sure they'd welcome an Aeronca Sedan.

[Richard Clark 2]

Posted by David Davis on 02/08/2020 11:13:15:

Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 02/08/2020 06:31:32:

.... Just a comment on 'vintage models'. Although the Mercury kit came out about 1953 (and incidentally, depicts the early colour scheme) I don't think of it as 'vintage' model and our construction methods (except for ARTFs) haven't changed significantly since. So I think of it as a scale model of a (marginally) 'vintage' plane rather than a vintage 'model' and personally wouldn't enter it in 'vintage' meet. no more than I would a modern kit or ARTF of a Sopwith Camel

Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 02/08/2020 06:57:08

Oh I don't know Richard, I used to go to the Cocklebarrow Vintage October Festival regularly and I've seen SE5s, Flying Fleas and other models which could well have been own designs in amongst all of the usual vintage sports models. I'm sure they'd welcome an Aeronca Sedan.

I'm sure they would.

I don't want to be pedantic or critical about this. But is a SCALE model of anything 'old' a vintage model or not when if it is a fairly accurate model it should be impossible to tell by looking at it who designed the model and when?

I've put 'Mercury Aeronca' on the wing of mine though I made it from a modern replica laser cut kit whereas the original had the parts just printed on the balsa so you had to cut them out yourself.

Does my doing that muddy the waters or clarify them?

[Erfolg]

In the case of this Aeronca Sedan, it would not pass as a Vintage or even a Mercury Aeronca Sedan.

The most obvious is that the wing is a single piece. The second it is fully sheeted. A a third is that the spar arrangement is very different. Another difference is wing section, which is pretty much Clark "Y" (or as near as i could make it, which is very different to the Mercury kit claimed Clark "Y". Then of course there is no dihedral. probably a finally is that there will be wing mounted aileron servos.

If we turn to the body, there are some differences in the formers. The Undercarriage is mounted completely differently. There are additional sheeted areas to transfer the landing forces from the UC. All of the cabin top area is different in materials and method of construction. The Firewall is a different design. There is the addition of the Lipo box. My method of cowl construction is different in structure and materials.

Even the tailplane is different, as is the fin and rudder, in most respects other than outline.

The wing to tailplane setting are is different, as is the motor thrust line.

I do not think even a blind judge, squinting would miss that it may look like a Aeronca Sedan, but not a Mercury Kit or plan built version of any other old kit.

I have slightly modified a few PM designs, yet in substance they were and still are PM designs. This is not just a slightly modified Mercury or any one else's kit.

The reason why, is some saw my intention to modify the kit (that I have) as sacrilege. The second is that PM pointed out the Mercury kit was not intended to fly as a modern RC model, which is what I want.

My only concern is what to do with the kit, as I do not collect kits. Yet I do not want the kit to go in a skip when I have gone. I certainly do not like the idea that some one may buy it as some sort of investment. In a way it is a worry for another day (hopefully).

Edited By Erfolg on 02/08/2020 17:18:16

[Erfolg]

Getting back to a post I have missed, somehow. How would I fit CF rods as asked by Peter. I simply poke them through the material then CA them either side. I must have used the Foam Friendly as I first did this on "Foamy Daves Ballerrina".

This is Paulena same method on PP material.

However I think that CF rod is OK. A better way of attacking the rod to the model is needed, something like the solder tags, that Peter mentions. Although they are not something I presently have.

[Erfolg]

While I continue to ponder the issue of the various braces, I have been tentatively being undertaking a little laying up.

Although in the past I have done quite a bit of laying up, I have been reminded that it is practice that makes things easier, knowing what to do, how, the difficulties and the time involved. In short I have struggled. Even the resins have changed, for the better. One really upsetting aspect is that all the tools and special tools i had or made, were thrown away. Why, because i would never again would do any laminating.

The nose and hatch after covering, still more work to do, in rubbing down and then anything else that is needed.

My UC mould.

Product from the mould.

Temporary fitting to see what needs doing next.

Perched on the ground.

Again a lot of finishing work required.

I do not think I have done anything quite like it before. My initial intention is to block back using wet and dry paper. Done wet with soap. The intention is to round all the edges, smooth out flat surfaces, with sufficient key, to take a paint finish.

That is unless you know better and can advice of better ways of achieving a good product.

Edited By Erfolg on 25/08/2020 16:02:57

[Erfolg]

You may gather that using Epoxy is something new to me, being far more familiar with polyester resin and methods. To try and rectify the situation i have taken advice from some one who does use epoxy a lot, with great results. Alas, my short comings have been exposed.

Go get a descent finish on the bits and pieces, I put a thin coat of resin on top of the laminated cloths. I was aware that such a thin coat benefits from a touch more of the hardener and is best applied whilst the surface has a tad of tackiness, just like a Gel Coat, at least that is the case with polyester. I left the bits for a week, to go off. The top did not. In the end, I waited for my wife to go out to golf, then used the oven as an autoclave, setting the oven for 80C for 2 hrs. It did work, although the surface is not as good as I would like.

It seems I will have to use high build primer and rub back, repeatably until an adequate surface is achieved, not what i wanted, but needs must.

I have now started the process of assembly. I have had a nasty shock, in that the model is massively nose heavy, with all the big bits together, with servos temporarily in place. The extent of this problem has 2*2200 4s lipos in the rear cabin area. Not what had been planned at all. I will need an additional servo tray, which will need integrating with the body structure to spread the forces.

The Lipos can be seen in the above picture, This is a real problem.

I will immediately set about a structural re-enforcement to the tail area, I will probably ditch the use of CF rod and move to piano wire, as i now know that weight at the back is not a significant issue, A good integration of the rater flimsy tail unit being far more important.

I will now go for a cry, muttering about, plans and mice and men.

[Erfolg]

I have been doing a bit of this and that on the Sedan. Getting ready to start covering.

The most obvious is making templates for windows.

Normally I have just ironed on covering film after a light sanding of the airframe. I have increasingly experienced the film not adhering as well as i expected.

I was thinking of painting some water based varnish on, or perhaps some dope, in the hope of improving the adhesion. Has any one else done something similar? What is the experience if so?

[Erfolg]

If I had all the bits and pieces handy that are needed to finish the model, I would say I am weeks or even days, away from completion. However that is not the case, i am short of small screws, suitable control horns and other small items.

I have placed an order for the stuff, with HK. It will be weeks at best, before they arrive.

In the meantime i will install all the servos, complete the wing struts, sort out where the Lipos will approx be located.

I also need a number od white letters for Aeronco, and a registration. I could cut out a registration set of numbers and letters. The small Aeronco letters are another matter. Normally I would be heading to my clear decal paper, but, but, I cannot print white, grrrr. A problem

I desperately need a tidy up, as even with a fair bit of diligence, Junk does keep on multiplying.

[Engine Doctor]

Hello Eflog. If you can locate some "Clearcote" made by Solarfilm this will cure any adhesion problems of iron on covering to balsa , ply or any surface that the "Clearcote" will adhere to . Failing that a coat of Cover Grip by Deluxe materials will help . Apply to all the areas where the covering touches . Iron down edges and shrink .

Don't iron down the covering to the ribs until you have shrunk the covering and checked for any warps . Once happy go over all the ribs etc with covering iron and the rigidity of wing will be increased.

[Erfolg]

ED, in general I have found that the HK film adheres considerably consistently well, particularly when compared to Solarfilm.

It is with considerable sadness (to me) that the Solarfilm quality seem to decline with time. That the possible opportunities of the 70s, when margins were good, there were significant product sales and that second hand coating machines (from the wall paper industry) with colour analysis devices,mixers etc at give away prices (with hind sight), came on the market, and that the opportunities were not seized.

The HK and Asian products as used by myself, to-date, have all been of consistent quality (high enough for me) with respect to colour matching, adhesive and consistency of product characteristics, for my needs at an affordable price.

I do still use the Balsa loc and a number of fabric adhesives as used in dress making to stick down the odd lifting corner, as my older models suffer from.

[Erfolg]

As is usual for me the best made plans of men and mice, turn into sand, running through my fingers.

I finished making the struts for the wings, was reasonably pleased with them. That is recognising this is a stand of scale type model, where scale fidelity is put to one side, in favour of practicality. Much to my surprise the the "R" or "P" clips I have bought previously are nowhere to be found. This is a similar scenario to a batch of servo lead plug keepers i bought many years back. I promised a fellow club member that I would give him a couple, as his aileron leads kept separating. It was years later that they tuned up, in a kitchen draw, in our new house, in a cupboard that we did not have prior to moving.

 

Anyway, I have purchased about £14 worth of various fasteners, from China, which will arrive any year now.

After completing 90% of the construction It seemed a logical or appropriate point to check where the Lipos needed to be to achieve the CG range.

At the same time i also decided now was the time to see what the wing loading would be.

It was a surprise to discover that with the wing Loading would be 18 oz /ft^2 empty. and with the largest 4s Lipo I had lying about 21 oz ft^-2. Which has made me think, do I want to buy 2*2200 4s Lipos, when I have something similar on the bench?

The real surprise is that just film covering and installing 2 * MG 9 g type servos at the back, the Lipo what ever the size needs placing at the CG. Which is a nuisance, as the tray has all the strapping to the rear.

Which means the tray comes out and some additional apertures are needed.

Meanwhile up front, where the Lipos were meant to go, the ESC now occupies a cavernous void intended for the Lipos.

I probably would have done things differently, if I had got my estimates in the right ball park. Right up to near completion, I had thought i had things right. How wrong I have been

Edited By Erfolg on 06/11/2020 20:24:01

[Erfolg]

Well the model is now something like 95% complete. It may have looked pretty much complete recently, , although in reality it was not.

What have I done

• Installed the glazing
• fitted all servos and linkages
• Installed a Lipo
• Balanced the model
• Set up the throws and FS.

What have I to do, the first annoying thing is buy some new "R" clips as the ones I have purchase a a little small, requiring a bit of brute force to insert and remove (they hold the wing struts in place).

I have found that my blue foam and glassed cowl has developed a bulge on the side you can see. Why, I do not have a clue, other than could it be related to ironing on the Film?

The second and more of an immediate issue is lettering for the model, Both the Registration and "Aeronca" wording is in white. I was tempted to use the once upon a time trendy, nerdy, "Alpha Numerics", the once essential posing nomenclature is now so old hat, to show my age and the need to try to impress.

Any way, I have no idea how i can deal with the issue. My printer does not print white. The lettering for "Aeronca" is so small it is not practical to print a black outline on white decal film and then cut out the letters. SO HOW DO I DO IT, please advice.

[Erfolg]

Yesterday was pretty much the first post lockdown day I could go to our field.

 

The weather was good enough for a test flight of my redesigned and built Aeronca sedan, actually it was ideal.

 

So how did things go? I would say exceeding my expectations. The model in all respects performed as I would want from a RC full house model, of its type.

The model has adequate power to fly in a reasonable wind (still to be fully tested), unlike the Mercury kit, which was designed as a FF model. The ailerons seemed to work well, although differential movement will be dialled or adjusted in. The GF undercart has worked well, not so stiff to bounce, or sag due to lack of stiffness and damping. Elevator balance appears to be just about on the money. Perhaps handling characteristics such as a stationary begin stall, spin tendencies, possible to the left, spiral dive to the right, quarter turn pull out.

 

Am i chuffed, you bet. A proper all reasonable weather model, not a evening still air floater.I will at some time sell the Mercury kit, perhaps for a collector, or a FF modeller.