RAF's Finest Biplane? Hawker Fury MkI

[Martian]

come come Danny I think he deserves more than 1

[Danny Fenton]

Te he, dont want to be seen showing any favoritism

[Danny Fenton]

Not sure if I should let you all see this. Gwyn's Fury is an absolute treat for the modeller. But it is a very long build....

Ours won't be to this standard, but Gwyn's is so good it isn't unreasonable to use some of the pics as reference for ours. Straight away you can see the Bryant design is innacurate around the elevator and rudder hinges. Which was why i waded back into the RCSB build.

Gwyns Fury MkI

You need to register to view the builds, and subscribe if you want to comment

Cheers

Danny

[Andy Sephton 1]

Brass bits were waiting for me on return from a holiday in the USA; they look absolutely smashing. Many thanks indeed Ernie.

As an aside, thanks also for the packing, which included an interesting article on Picasso. As an amateur artist and french speaker (12 months with l'Armée de l'Air), it brought back memories of my time in Provence and passed a very pleasant hour over a well earned coffee!

[Danny Fenton]

Glad to have you back Andy, mine was a French sports page

A quick note on the parts, as this question has cropped up. The fin, rudder and stabiliser ribs are made up from rectangular stock. Build up both sides of the core sheeting and then sand to shape. This route keeps the part straight while you glue it together

Cheers

Danny

[2W]

Hi Danny, I'm following with interest.

Whilst building the fin and rudder and waiting for the glue to dry, I started on the fuselage sides, but there's a slight problem. To get the two front panels to fit the outline I found that there is a small gap which tapers from the 'V' to F!. on checking the positions of F3 and F4 I realised that a shim is required between the two parts to get them to fit correctly.

Here's a picture to show what I mean with my shim fitted:

Hope this helps.

William

Edited By Chris Bott - Moderator on 02/10/2018 19:03:24

[Danny Fenton]

Posted by 2W on 02/10/2018 18:23:55:

Hi Danny, I'm following with interest.

Whilst building the fin and rudder and waiting for the glue to dry, I started on the fuselage sides, but there's a slight problem. To get the two front panels to fit the outline I found that there is a small gap which tapers from the 'V' to F!. on checking the positions of F3 and F4 I realised that a shim is required between the two parts to get them to fit correctly.

Here's a picture to show what I mean with my shim fitted:

Hope this helps.

William

Hi William, it would be best to put posts in your own thread or this one may get confused. You could put this question in the general thread.

Anyway not to worry. I have just pulled my other sheet out and laid my fus parts out and they fit spot on. Which begs the question has the plan been printed true? You certainly need to get to the bottom of this.

Can others check their plan, fus parts to see if they are seeing a similar issue?

Cheers

Danny

Edited By Chris Bott - Moderator on 02/10/2018 19:04:19

[McG 6969]

Hi Danny,

I didn't want to clog your own build thread but I thought it could be of general interest and posted it here.

Anyhow feel free to (re)move it if unappropriated.

Regarding the position of the top rib of the rudder, it isn't a straight line with the fin's top rib.

This is a part of the DB plan showing the rudder rib being positioned 'higher'. I checked with the Westburg drawing and another 1:10 scale plan and this seems to be correct.

Having a look at your pics, yours is correct, but it seems that José and Tony B built it in a straight line.

I thought this could be of help for future builders.

Cheers

Chris

[Jose L. G.]

Hi Chris.

I marked the cores over the plan, so I think that the diference must be there. Its only the thick of a rib so probably difficult to seein the pics. I`ll check when dry.

Thanks.

José Luis

[Martyn K]

A quick question on the (full size) Fury Aileron linkages. I assume that the upper ailerons are connected to lower ailerons with pushrods and then a closed loop cable system. The lower ailerons were 'driven' by the pilot.

 

Is that correct? Still in the planning stage..

Edited By Martyn K on 03/10/2018 11:42:48

[McG 6969]

Hi José,

Then it should be correct, but a bit difficult to see as it is indeed just a rib's thickness difference.

I truly hope for you it is and, of course, apologies in that case.

Cheers

Chris

[Jose L. G.]

Hi Mart?n.

Only ailerons on upper wing.

Edited By Jose L. G. on 03/10/2018 12:03:07

[Jose L. G.]

Chris.
No problem. Always a few eyes are better than one pair.....

[Stuart Rusby]

I am ready to send off the litho plates to the following:

William 2W, Richard Mallam, Martyn K, McG 6969, and David Avery.

Please give me your adresses, cost is £10.

Thanks, Stuart

[Martyn K]

Hi Stuart

I have already sent you a PM with my address but I can see it hasn't been read. Click on the letter/inbox icon at the top of the page ModelFlying web page. It should be flashing at you

Martyn

Edited By Martyn K on 03/10/2018 13:08:24

[McG 6969]

PM sent as well, Stuart.

Cheers

Chris

[Richard Mallam.]

Me too, thanks Stuart. Regards, Richard M

[Ernie]

Good morning, I'm looking at the tail end of the fury. I really don't see the need for the metal control horn and joiner for the elevator. Why not make things lighter with a functioning closed loop system to each elevator.

I ask because I've got great respect for the designer, and wonder if I'm missing something

ernie

Also, I'm on to labelling the brass bits

[Danny Fenton]

Morning Ernie, funnily enough Andy S and I were having the same conversation this morning. I was keen to eliminate the joiner and use a closed loop system to each elevator. However as i am going to do mine multi role again (C/L and R/C) I think a single pushrod will be better (less friction) and safer under light line tension.

Andy and I came to the conclusion that it probably isn't worth the weight saving and build as per the plan

But that doesn't mean you have to

Good news on the labels

Cheers

Danny

[Andy Sephton 1]

Morning Ernie,

I'll support what Danny says, but I need to qualify it. I'll be doing mine as per plan, but a closed loop would be lighter. However, as I'm putting a Laser 70 up front, the extra weight is not an issue for me. I'm also strapped on time as I want to get the model flying by the spring for the new 5kg scale class. So changes to the plan will be minimal.

Notwithstanding the designer's status, the model is very much a 1970s design. Things have progressed a lot since then and there are numerous ways to save weight. Closed loop would be better, the use of carbon in places would help, removable wing panels are better than one piece wings, etc. However, it is what it is and it does give a good basis for a flying model. I'll encourage any changes that modellers wish to make, so let's ring them and see what our imaginations can come up with.

[Ernie]

Hi, I've added some notes to a drawing of the brass bits. There are too many bits, and some at slightly different sizes. I did this because the minimum size for a sheet is A3. Also, I added a few extra bits that I thought might be useful

[2W]

Stuart, please see my PM in your in box.

Cheers, William

[Andy Sephton 1]

That's very useful Ernie, many thanks.

[Andy Sephton 1]

I have a question for the more seasoned builders. I've managed to separate the laser-cut plywood parts from the main sheet using a craft knife, but looking ahead, what's the best way to separate the glass parts and the brass parts from their carrier sheets. Any advice in this direction would be most welcome as I have no recent experience of models this size.

[Fats Flyer]

Andy i'll be using a Dremel type mini drill with a cutting blade to remove parts.