Thinking aloud about Spits...

[Foxfan]

A long way ahead maybe, but I was talking Spitfires with a friend and I said how difficult they are to fly alegedly.

Now, I would love a model Spit, like most folk, but I don't do cowpoo cammo, so mine would have to be the Cleveland Racer in bare metal. It was a Mk XIV e bubble top with the clipped wings.

Would this be any harder to fly than, say, a Mk. IX? Maybe easier with the squarer wing tips?

Is there a plan of this particular kite?

I would only want a tiddler. Maybe a 4-5 footer.

And lastly, how would I get on with an all bare metal finish where radio is concerned? I'm only thinking aloud and am aware of all the pitfalls for anyone, never mind a newbie.

Martin

[Peter Christy]

My limited experience of model Spits (had it about 18 months) is that the well designed ones are no more difficult to fly than any low-winger. The tricky bit is the landing!

A combination of narrow track undercarriage, small (scale) wheels, and wheels close to the CofG makes them prone to nosing over on landing. Take-offs usually aren't a problem, as we tend to over-power our models!

If you have a nice smooth runway (short grass or solid), a Spit shouldn't be a problem. Beware of trying to slow it too much on the approach, and if using full flaps, keep a bit of power on until just about to touch down.

Otherwise they are generally very nice to fly.

--

Pete

[fly boy3]

I always thought that "warbirds" were more difficult to land due to a faster approach, and that this was caused by this type of model having a quite high wing loading. Could be wrong here, but if a lighter model could be built, I assume the landing speed would be lower ? Cheers

[Colin Leighfield]

The full size Spitfire in some versions with flaps and wheels down had a stalling speed as low as 58 mph.

[Martian]

Maybe consider the Silver Spitfire currently doing an around the world flight . Www.silverspitfire.com

[Martian]

It's a mk ix

[Peter Miller]

Do a PR spit in duck egg blue

[Foxfan]

I don't do military, Peter, although a PR wouldn't be a bad idea if the natural metal finish was difficult. The polished finish of the silver Spitfire is so nice, but a pain in the butt to reproduce. Hmm, actually, I rather like PR blue.....

Interesting to hear that you chaps don't think it especially difficult to fly. Encouraging, if a bit anti the received wisdom. We have a lovely old chap in the club who flies a small foam Thunderbolt (very similar wings to a Spit.) as smooth as silk. It's a real example to us all. He has no trouble with it ever. The odd thing is when you look at it close up it's as scarred, creased, repaired and tatty as anything could be that can still fly! So Heaven knows when he did all that!

Any views on the bare metal finish affecting radio? Or whether the square wing tips are less likely to tip stall?

Martin

[Don Fry]

At 4 to five foot, your enemy is weight. Metal finish is not good.

If you don't like military, on a fighter, why not a great uncle, a S6B.

Edit, not a great idea, metal, though Mr Nighous did a good one. Spelling problem. 

Edited By Don Fry on 07/09/2019 19:41:22

[Foxfan]

Don, an S6B would be wonderful, but I have nowhere to run a float plane. I'm not obsessed with a Spit., but it would be nice. What about making one in Depron to keep it really light? I simply don't have space for bigger 'planes.

Martin

[J D 8]

The standard full size Spitfire wing has at least 3 degrees of washout and to counter tip stalling.

The squared wing tip was an adaption to improve roll rate for operations at low level.

[Cuban8]

My Brian Taylor Mk 1a Spit 70" (Geoffrey Weĺlum markings) a delight to fly, no vices just handles like a good sports model should when up and away...............except it will punish you if you get the landing circuit wrong and rush the finals. Stalling will only get you if you really push it and it'll only flick if you really get it wrong - too slow and too much up will be the killer.

Caught me out last week when dumb thumbs on the take off roll had the model in air too soon without enough air speed. Only a couple of feet off the ground so the stall and slide to the left just took out a retract mount. Very, very lucky and a warning to never relax with this type of model. Can lull you into a false sense of security. 

Edited By Cuban8 on 07/09/2019 20:24:24

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Peter Miller]

Here is a reference source that might help. Should be some painted aircraft in there

**LINK**

[Colin Leighfield]

All Spitfires from the prototype to the Mk24 had 2.5 degrees of washout from root to top, with positive incidence of +2 degrees at the root and negative -0.5 at the tip. They didn’t tip stall. Generally poor handling models of Spitfires are lacking in wash out and also may have non-scale wing section. The full-size was one of the best handling of all WW2 fighters and considered to be easy to fly. The Hurricane had a sharper stall and would drop a wing when it happened.

[Foxfan]

So where does this almost universal belief that a model Spitfire will always re-kit itself in double quick time come from?

I'm delighted you gents all seem to think otherwise.

The blue scheme is nice, but not the double cockpit. I take it good silver paint or silver iron on film doesn't affect the R/C signal so badly as ally or ally tape?

Martin

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Dad_flyer]

There was a red one that used to do shows apparently. It was the wings of one spit, and fuse of another. "Red spitfire" search will get you pictures.

If scale detail is not required, then a fun fighter style model can look good in the air. With hand launch and belly landing you lose any ground handling problems. A FliteTest foam board spit takes you even further from scale, supposedly in the direction of easy flying.

[Nigel Grant 1]

Only want a tiddler at 2" less than 4 foot you could do Tony Nijhuis's 46"spit featured on his website and was originally an RCM&E plan. There's a link on the web page for this model to the original article and the model started out in silver film before it was then painted. He does at least one larger one but this one would be a handy size for electric or a 30FS. There is at least one build article on this forum where retracts were fitted. Personally, I would go with the original design which was hand launch and belly landing. This keeps the weight down and does away with the two most difficult parts of any flight - well for me anyway.

**LINK**

Nigel

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Foxfan on 07/09/2019 22:48:16:

So where does this almost universal belief that a model Spitfire will always re-kit itself in double quick time come from?

I'm delighted you gents all seem to think otherwise.

Martin

Please note what has been said - the Spitfire is generally well behaved in normal flight but the re-knitting almost invariably occurs during the landing approach or occasionally on a hurried take-off. I have lost count of the number of model Spitfires that I've seen dropping a wing and cartwheeling to destruction after flying the sort of approach encouraged by learning on low wing loaded trainers and low wing follow-ons.

This is where the model Spitfire gains its (well deserved) reputation - and unless you have mastered consistent power on approaches, yours is very likely to add to the statistics unless it's a sport scale design. 

P.S. However you paint a Spitfire, and beautiful aircraft that it is, there's no denying that it was built as a weapon of war.  I'm sure that rather than glorifying war, most now see it as a celebration of the engineering design that led to such an iconic machine being created. 

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/09/2019 00:38:09

[Brian Cooper]

I have three Spitfires of varying sizes from 72" to 90" span. . They are all a sheer delight to fly but, as many have said, the landings are the critical part. They need to be "flown" down to the ground.

Where many people go wrong, is they try to glide them down (like a forgiving trainer) and/or try to land them while they are still 4ft off the ground.

Flair out too early and they will stall and drop the rest of the way. . Touch down flying too slowly and they will probably bounce and, unless you are quick with applying power, they will stall and drop. . . If you are afraid of the model, it will sense it and it will bite you.

Get it right -- show it who's the boss -- and they look truly fabulous. They have an attraction which is enchanting and never gets old.

B.C.

[Chris Walby]

Slightly off topic to the Spit, but I think its relevant. IMHO There are manufacturers that produce smallish foam park flying models that have wing profiles designed to be very well behaved and not exhibit the normal tendencies.

These are great models as it allows people with less experience to fly them more than once and move on from the "trainer". The problem is that as Martin has pointed out if you revert to poor landing technique with a less forgiving version it will bit hard.

Its a bit like the driving test, so much of learning is geared towards passing the test. Once you pass your test then the learning really begins. My advise is to fly as many different models as you can (+ different manufactures) some will fly well and some not, but you will be learning all the time.

Sometimes the challenge of flying a poorer behaved model is more rewarding than one that is very benign....as long as its not in the repair shop after every landing! I do have one current model that is proving very tricky and just wish we could crack the landing set up.

Did exactly as Martin described with a model which I can no longer obtain spare wings, so I contacted a chap that could make wings and he asked which wing profile I wanted as he had 5 different variants (from different designers) for the same aircraft type.

[Foxfan]

Just back from early session at the club.

Thanks for the answers, chaps.

The red one is, I think, G-FIRE and very nice too. Although the white, blue and silver one is very smart.

Having checked the links I think the Tony Neuhuis plan for the 46" version is the one I'll choose if I go this way as it seems viceless in the write-up, even landing dead stick on its maiden.

It's all a way off yet as I have to go through the trainer stage first and then there's the GP Cub I just built from a cheap kit and the Skyfarer and Miles Hawk from plans. Only then can I consider a Spitfire.

Cheers,

Martin

[wingcoax]

I used to use a LMS in Bolton many moons ago and usually ended up behind the counter. I remember a couple coming in and she was buying him a complete setup for his birthday(lucky fella) he wanted a spitfire but i was able to advise him by all means buy one, build it,Then put it away till he learned to fly. I was able to sell a good trainer kit with radio that would suit further advancement with an engine that would suit either plane. They went away very happy. PS, I have flown a spitfire and they DO glide like a brick.