Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Change of plans... As i was putting all the bits away i looked at it all again and i now think im going to build it the other way up. I will still cut the formers in half, but this time i will build it upside down like my pica models as this allows me to install the large ply crutches that hold the engine and wing. This will make sure the fuselage remains straight when i remove it from the board. Now to stop thinking about it before it ends up on the building table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Freeman 3 Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 The Fokkerc Spitfire is a serious build, I was given a kit by a modeller who had no idea how to build it once he got the kit. I framed up the basic fuselage to see how it all fits and to be fair it went together better than expected. The hard part is now to jig it so that it can be planked. I did not progress further and hope to get back to it at some stage when time allows as this needs dedication to get it right. The parts are almost like a ply 3 view with a lot of detail eteched into them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHR Dave Posted February 26, 2020 Author Share Posted February 26, 2020 Cheers for the info Jon, I still think i will go with DB, but will keep a watch out for yours or any other builds of Fokkerc spits and then maybe will I get one as well in the future. Regards Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Chris Freeman 3 on 26/02/2020 08:55:13: I framed up the basic fuselage to see how it all fits and to be fair it went together better than expected. The hard part is now to jig it so that it can be planked. These are my thoughts on it as well, and to be honest the DB Spit had the same problem. You end up trying to sheet something that is floating in mid air with no way to keep it all straight. Thats why i intend to pin mine to the board. Once the fuselage bottom half is finished and sheeted i can remove it from the board as a rigid item. I can then build the top onto it without worrying about it bending all over the place. On the DB i will not be messing about with the diagonal sheeting they show. It looks like a road to disaster to me and i really cant see the reason for it. I suspect i will glue a sheet to the tail mounts, and then clamp it to the fuselage frames. Once its all looking nice and straight i can glue that sheet in place and that should give the fuselage enough rigidity to tolerate the rest of the sheeting being applied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 25/02/2020 14:32:04: Cuban, i am not a massive fan of the Brian Taylor models myself. To be clear, they fly very well and look fantastic but they are also difficult to build, very outdated in their design, and often too fragile for club use. That isnt to say they arent an option, just that they tend to be quite a faff to sort out. As for the TN spit, i agree. They end up very heavy unless special care is taken. Dave, i will see if i can dig it out later. If its too much hassle i wont bother but i will see how it all looks. Why is it 'Outdated'? It really isn't difficult to build at all for the modeller with the experience it is aimed at. And what's a 'club' model? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Guvnor on 26/02/2020 14:38:04: Why is it 'Outdated'? It really isn't difficult to build at all for the modeller with the experience it is aimed at. And what's a 'club' model? solid wood, heavy, can be used to incapacitate the unsuspecting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 The whole construction is of an older style. Making bits out of tin plate and brass tube, all sorts of wire bending and even simple things like the position of servos, use of bellcranks etc. As for its target audience i consider myself quite proficient in kit building and i wouldnt touch one for the reasons i have already mentioned. I could do all the complicated bits, but why bother? If another model is out there that is easier to build and achieves the same end why make life hard? Admittedly i would not be trying to win a scale champs with it, but i dont think the rest of the guys here are either so if your argument it based upon it being aimed at championship pilots then my comments about its unsuitability still stand. As for the rest, If its not flying at championships then it becomes a club model and so will fly all day every day from a lumpy grass field. This is the opposite of a championship model which will fly once in a blue moon off a hard runway. Naturally, our club model will see more abuse and Brian Taylor models are often not well suited to this sort of treatment due to their light construction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 26/02/2020 15:36:08: The whole construction is of an older style. Making bits out of tin plate and brass tube, all sorts of wire bending and even simple things like the position of servos, use of bellcranks etc. Words fail me... That's exactly what makes it such a pleasure to build... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 I know what Jon is saying about BT 's designs, but given that they're not aimed at the inexperienced builder, it's not a problem to make some sensible mods that will make life easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Guvnor on 26/02/2020 15:50:45: Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 26/02/2020 15:36:08: The whole construction is of an older style. Making bits out of tin plate and brass tube, all sorts of wire bending and even simple things like the position of servos, use of bellcranks etc. Words fail me... That's exactly what makes it such a pleasure to build... Ah yes but you have muddled up objectivity a subjectivity. Objectively they are a faff to build, fragile, and out of date when compared to other kits. This may be be enjoyable from an subjective point of view, but i do not agree and believe there are objectively better models out there for the purposes of our OP. The OP originally asked about the DB and TN kits, and i raised the fokkerc kit as it was likely our OP had never heard of them. Given that BT kits are well known, and were not mentioned in the OP, and are more of a faff than the DB or TN offerings i didnt mention them as i assumed they had been considered and rejected. In short, i tried to understand what it was the OP was looking for, and make recommendations that were suited to his needs and not mine. I think this was more helpful than joining a thread 2 weeks in just to be pretentious and condescending Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 26/02/2020 16:56:08: Posted by Guvnor on 26/02/2020 15:50:45: Posted by Jon - Laser Engines on 26/02/2020 15:36:08: The whole construction is of an older style. Making bits out of tin plate and brass tube, all sorts of wire bending and even simple things like the position of servos, use of bellcranks etc. Words fail me... That's exactly what makes it such a pleasure to build... Ah yes but you have muddled up objectivity a subjectivity. Objectively they are a faff to build, fragile, and out of date when compared to other kits. This may be be enjoyable from an subjective point of view, but i do not agree and believe there are objectively better models out there for the purposes of our OP. The OP originally asked about the DB and TN kits, and i raised the fokkerc kit as it was likely our OP had never heard of them. Given that BT kits are well known, and were not mentioned in the OP, and are more of a faff than the DB or TN offerings i didnt mention them as i assumed they had been considered and rejected. In short, i tried to understand what it was the OP was looking for, and make recommendations that were suited to his needs and not mine. I think this was more helpful than joining a thread 2 weeks in just to be pretentious and condescending What an unpleasant post. Unfortunately I don't have time to read every post here every day, so yes, I'm late to the party, as if that matters. As for being pretentious and condescending, I suggest you re-read your own post... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 You dont have time to read every post...Ok cool, so why didnt comment on the first post? You ignored the question and cherry picked a post from the middle of the thread in your reply. To find that middle of the thread post you must have read them all as the first/last one is much easier to find if you only dipped in to the thread. Surely if that were the case you would comment on that and not something random from the middle? It seems strange that your first forum post in nearly 3 months would happen to be in reply to that short, middle of thread comment of mine. To me, it looks as though you read it all, contributed nothing, and only posted as a presented view conflicted with your own. You post was also written so as to belittle those who either arent able, or arent interested in a design that complex and did nothing to aid in the conversation. Had you said something like 'While BT kits are a great deal of work i really enjoy the challenge and find all the metalworking really satisfying. If however you want something simple then they arent for you' Then there would have been no problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 I posted a very simple post, politely asking two questions, and making a simple comment about BT's models. I had read evey post on this thread, YOU introduced the Fokker model, someone else mentioned the BT models. YOU then rammed YOUR opinion down everyones throat. Like I said, re-read your own posts occasionally... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Posted by Guvnor on 26/02/2020 17:43:43: I posted a very simple post, politely asking two questions, and making a simple comment about BT's models. I had read evey post on this thread, YOU introduced the Fokker model, someone else mentioned the BT models. YOU then rammed YOUR opinion down everyones throat. Like I said, re-read your own posts occasionally... Steady, you said you hadnt read them all to begin with. Bit of a continuity error there. And our definitions of polite clearly differ. Your post was pointed at the very least. Yes, i did introduce the fokkerc model...which is what i already said, and explained why so i dont see how that makes any difference to anything. As for BT Spits, perhaps you should read my post again. I commented on their pro's and con's, just like i did with the other models and yet you dont seem to be complaining about my issues with the TN spitfire often ending up a porker, or the potential balance, sheeting and washout issues with the DB and so on. Given that i offered a balanced appraisal of each kit..like i was asked to by the OP, i dont see that i have shoved anything anywhere and given that your outrage at my comments is only connected to what i have said about one of the 4 or 5 options mentioned i can only assume you have some sort of personal agenda on this matter. Given that, the contradictions in your last post and the fact that Dave has already chosen the DB model i dont really see much point in discussing the options and will focus instead on the DB kit itself. Its been fun though, thanks very much for playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHR Dave Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 Just caught up with the thread as only really get a chance once at work (Ha Ha). I would like to thank everyone for there advice especially Jon you provided me with some excellent info and much to think about. I may not be intune as some modellers with knowledge/ skills but I always get provided with top info from you guys. Cheers Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 No problem Dave. Do you know which power plant you are likely to use? I would go for a 30cc 4 stroke or equivalent. If it helps i can upload a photo of my half built fuselage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHR Dave Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 Not sure which power plant yet, that decision is quite a way off yet. Would appreciate photo's. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 27, 2020 Share Posted February 27, 2020 i fished out my fuselage/plans and it dawned on me that i had never really looked at them before with a view to installing an engine. Another rummage turned up my intended power plant, a laser 180. It fits the cowl lovely, but fuel tank position and cooling look like they need some consideration. The cooling in particular looks a challenge, irrespective of the power plant used but that is usually the way with inline engine warbirds. There just isnt much room for the air to get out of the cowl. If i use the 180 glow i will have to get the tank as low as i can, which i think should be easy enough. The cooling problem might have to wait until i have buld more of the model and i can see where the wing structure sits and how my tank position mods impact it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHR Dave Posted February 28, 2020 Author Share Posted February 28, 2020 Cheers for the photos Jon, the Laser 180 does seem to fit in the cowl very nicely. When it comes to the engine choice it will be a top contender.As I said at the beginning of this thread once i get my hands on my kit it will be a very slow build indeed, they are still out of stock at DB. I have a few projects to start/ finish first anyway but I like to have as much info on a new project first before i start them. If anyone else has any info/photos of a DB sport and scale Spitfire It would be appreciated. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flight1 Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 see this build thread ,had it in my saved links when trying to choose my next project(built up wings version) hope it helps Edited By flight1 on 28/02/2020 08:49:58 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 Yea its a neat fit but the tank and cooling are a challenge. Looking at photos on the DB site i think i will add another pair of ribs, chop out part of the undercarriage mount, leading edge and anything else that gets in my way. As i plan on a 1 piece wing i can leave out the structure for the wing joining. The idea of all this is to clear enough space in the centre section to create a tunnel in the wing for the hot air to escape the cowling. For the tank i will probably use another of the very thin sullivan V tanks. They are intended for boats but a tank is a tank. My idea at the moment is to nibble away part of the wing to allow it to sit lower but again it all depends on how the wing structure sits and how i can fit it all in. I wont know for sure until i have all the parts in my hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Green2 Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 For what it's worth, I did a study of the DB and BT spots. I purchased the drawings for the Monforton spitfire and then scanned the plans for the DB and BT. I then overplayed then onto the Monforton. The BT is very close but the DB seems to be stretched in the y-axis. As the DB is a copy/enlargement of the Millinship spitfire on Outerzone, I then compared those two. I found I had to shrink the y-axis scale on the DB to fit the Millinship, which it then did exactly. The Millinship spitfire is close to scale also compared to the Monforton. I think it best to treat the Nijhuis and DB as sport scale in outline. Hope that makes sense! James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Green2 Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 I have also overlayed the Ziroli spit on to the Monforton, that is accurate too. I plan to scan my MR plans and see how that compares, but being 1/4 scale it might be beyond my handheld scanner. I used to have a copy of the plans as a drawing file that I found on the internet, but I seem to have lost them. James. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard B (DB Sport and Scale Ltd) Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 I wouldn't agree with that I'm afraid. I have just done a very quick comparison by overlaying a 3 view onto our plan and it's pretty darned close. Bearing in mind that it's not the right mark and 3 views sometimes differ slightly. This may be a link to a very obfuscated screen grab showing a blurred 3 view outline superimposed onto the plan. It may or may not work as it's my first pic outing on here. If it doesn't then I'll read the instructions later! P.s. Please don't scan our plans. It's clearly for an innocent purpose but once scanned it's only a simple accident away from appearing on a download site. P.P.S. They have been out of stock for some time but should be back in the next two weeks...deliveries and machinery dependent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted February 28, 2020 Share Posted February 28, 2020 Neither the DB Hurricane or Spitfire are totally scale but both are certainly more accurate than almost all of the artf's out there. I know the BT offerings have always been very close. I wonder how the fokkerc version compares. Truthfully though, i am not that worried. As i already mentioned they all look miles better than most ARTF's and are instantly recognisable. For my purposes they are perfectly satisfactory 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.