Cambrian Fun Fighters

[Nigel Heather]

34 minutes ago, Andy Gates said:

Nigel,

 

Not to sure that you will find a slow Warbird - it kind of goes against the grain a bit.

If you don't like the starved horse effect on the VMC machine, why not sheet the starved bits with 1/32" sheeting? Will not add too much weight.

I appreciate that’s warbirds are fast, it just seems in the video that they are super fast, I don’t know how fast exactly but 100mph wouldn’t surprise me - the planes are about 1/10 scale so that is a scale speed of 1000mph, about 3x the speed of a real Spitfire.

 

Partially sheeting the VMC might be a good idea.

[leccyflyer]

Bear in mind that the videos you're watching are probably demonstrating the models as looking super fast. They are small, with a surfeit of power - they do crack on when fitted with a .25 two stroke or 300-350w electric power train, but some of those videos you are watching probably have hot .32 or .35 two strokes, particularly the display demo teams.

 

They do fly like they are on rails though. They aren't accurate scale models,  but can be made to look very nice indeed - especially if they don't have a dirty great lump of engine cylinder sticking out. Mine have been flown as glow models first, so have the full ply jacket and that big hole up front has had to be subsequently covered over, by making a hatch panel for motor access. The second Spitfire that I had from a pal had been built for the slope and is lighter and neater. I plan to make a replacement for my retired Bf109e from the plan and another pal has just started to do just that.

 

If you're an intermediate level pilot with a couple of low wingers under your belt you shouldn't have any problem flying the Cambrian Spitfire, it's a nice example of the genre and it's fun. They are good value for money and build quite quickly. The scale speed thing is a whole other debate. 

[Colin Low 2]

12 hours ago, Nigel Heather said:

 

Many thanks for the reply.

 

As for 'Hot' that is not what I'm looking for - actually one of my concerns because all the flight videos I have seen show the funfighters flying very fast.

Nigel,

The Bf109 flies slowly as well quite nicely, and so does the Spitfire.

Weighed it again last night - just under 1 1/2 kg > about 3.3lbs

Edited June 2, 2023 by Colin Low 2

[Nigel Heather]

3 hours ago, Colin Low 2 said:

Nigel,

The Bf109 flies slowly as well quite nicely, and so does the Spitfire.

Weighed it again last night - just under 1 1/2 kg > about 3.3lbs

 

 

Many thanks, super photo.

[Simon Burch 1]

It might be worth looking out for an old Balsacraft/Model Designs warbird kit.  These crop up occasionally on ebay; indeed, I bid on a Sea Fury only last week.  I didn’t win, but it went for £85 which, in my opinion, was a bargain.

 

My 23 year-old Balsacraft Spitfire IX flies nicely on a Quantum II 35, 3s 3900mah lipo and 10x6 prop.  That's enough for good aerobatic performance, but it's also surprisingly docile and flies happily at low speeds.  

 

Apparently, the Balsacraft FW190 is even better in the air....but good luck with finding one of those.

[Alan Gorham_]

27 minutes ago, Simon Burch 1 said:

It might be worth looking out for an old Balsacraft/Model Designs warbird kit.  These crop up occasionally on ebay; indeed, I bid on a Sea Fury only last week.  I didn’t win, but it went for £85 which, in my opinion, was a bargain.

 

My 23 year-old Balsacraft Spitfire IX flies nicely on a Quantum II 35, 3s 3900mah lipo and 10x6 prop.  That's enough for good aerobatic performance, but it's also surprisingly docile and flies happily at low speeds.  

 

Apparently, the Balsacraft FW190 is even better in the air....but good luck with finding one of those.

Of course the Balsacraft Grumman Bearcat is still available from SLEC. Not bad value at today's prices! 

 

https://www.slecuk.com/grumman-bearcat

[Rich Griff]

Bearcat, rcme did a free plan for one of those, I have one in the loft, I'm sure I kept the plan as well.

[Alan Gorham_]

34 minutes ago, Rich Griff said:

Bearcat, rcme did a free plan for one of those, I have one in the loft, I'm sure I kept the plan as well.

This thread is posted in the Scale and Semi Scale kits section of the forum, so the implication is that the original poster is interested in building from a kit and not from a plan though... 

[Nigel Heather]

10 minutes ago, Alan Gorham_ said:

This thread is posted in the Scale and Semi Scale kits section of the forum, so the implication is that the original poster is interested in building from a kit and not from a plan though... 

Yes that is correct, I simply wouldn't have the time or energy to build from a plan.

[Christopher Long 1]

Once in the air you don't notice the 'starved horse' look - so it is hardly an issue. They do fly well, a shown by the VMC Spitfire being flown in Switzerland and provides a great backdrop - https://youtu.be/2sxDXmopN2c

[Nigel Heather]

On 02/06/2023 at 07:11, Colin Low 2 said:

Nigel,

The Bf109 flies slowly as well quite nicely, and so does the Spitfire.

Weighed it again last night - just under 1 1/2 kg > about 3.3lbs

 

Hi,

 

May I ask how you made the Emil style spinner.

 

Clearly it looks like a standard spinner with the tip cut off but it also looks conical rather than the usual curvy domed.

 

Would rather make an Emil than a Gustav - I appreciate it's an off-scale model but the Emil spinner is very distinctive.

[leccyflyer]

I just chopped the front off a standard spinner for my Cambrian Bf109E. If I were doing it again I'd get a Durafly Bf109E spare if they ever  came available again, or Tom Hunt has produced a very nice 3D printable 2 blade spinner for the Emil here.

 

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3163737

[Nigel Heather]

2 hours ago, leccyflyer said:

 Tom Hunt has produced a very nice 3D printable 2 blade spinner for the Emil here.

 

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3163737

I have a FDM 3D printer at home and also a resin 3D printer on pre-order.  I imagine it would be best in FDM.

 

So will have a go at printing one.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Nigel Heather

[Colin Low 2]

5 hours ago, Nigel Heather said:

 

Hi,

 

May I ask how you made the Emil style spinner.

 

Clearly it looks like a standard spinner with the tip cut off but it also looks conical rather than the usual curvy domed.

 

Would rather make an Emil than a Gustav - I appreciate it's an off-scale model but the Emil spinner is very distinctive.

Nigel,

Its a metal backed Spinner, that yes I just cut the front off. Originally it came from 4-max "light weight plastic spinner"

Colin

[Eric Robson]

Not all 109E's had a cannon in the nose, but a useful way of getting air to the motor on an electric power model.

[Walts]

Great thread! I stumbled across this whilst researching Cambrian fun fighters again myself. I initially dismissed them out of hand when I first came across them many years ago for the exact same concern raised by the original poster here. They just fly rediculously fast! Whilst I always thought they must have been a great adrenalin rush for those guys flying them, to the spectator they just looked like a load of angry gnats buzzing about. Scale is my thing really, and whilst I'll admit I'm still yet to build a model that is capable of flying at a proper scale speed, these have always just seemed of the the other end of the scale to me.

However, I have recently moved to France, and have obtained permission from the farmer to fly on the field immediately behind my house. He uses the field for growing grass for hay, so I can only ever fly models that can be hand launched and belly landed from it. Hence my interest in the Cambrian fun fighters again. I have flown a Hobby King FW190 47" foamie on the field already with great success, but I am still concerned about just how fast these Cambrian fighters actually 'need' to fly. A Spitfire batting around at the rate of a Euro fighter just doesnt do it for me. So just how slow can they really fly? 🙂   

[leccyflyer]

You wouldn't be able to fly a Cambrian Spitfire at a scale speed, but that's true of most 42" span Spitfires and indeed most 42" span low wing, 3lb models. That's not the point though - they are aptly named as Funfighters. There's a real risk of over-thinking that and really, the only way to see if a Cambrian funfighter will work for you is to try one.

 

An alternative, which is very semi-scale, but can be kept very light and therefore have a better chance of flying really slow is the Flite Test Spitfire. My clubmate Bob built one recently as a Spitfire Cabriolet and it flies beautifully, with the investment of a few quid's worth of depron and cheap power train from the spares box.

 

[Outrunner]

If you can find one the 48" Balsacraft Spitfire is light and flies at a scale speed. I built mine years ago and it still comes out for a fly every now and then.

They do come up on eBay sometimes or the BMFA classifieds.

14 hours ago, Walts said:

Great thread! I stumbled across this whilst researching Cambrian fun fighters again myself. I initially dismissed them out of hand when I first came across them many years ago for the exact same concern raised by the original poster here. They just fly rediculously fast! Whilst I always thought they must have been a great adrenalin rush for those guys flying them, to the spectator they just looked like a load of angry gnats buzzing about. Scale is my thing really, and whilst I'll admit I'm still yet to build a model that is capable of flying at a proper scale speed, these have always just seemed of the the other end of the scale to me.

However, I have recently moved to France, and have obtained permission from the farmer to fly on the field immediately behind my house. He uses the field for growing grass for hay, so I can only ever fly models that can be hand launched and belly landed from it. Hence my interest in the Cambrian fun fighters again. I have flown a Hobby King FW190 47" foamie on the field already with great success, but I am still concerned about just how fast these Cambrian fighters actually 'need' to fly. A Spitfire batting around at the rate of a Euro fighter just doesnt do it for me. So just how slow can they really fly? 🙂   

 

[Nigel Heather]

On 23/06/2023 at 16:16, Eric Robson said:

Not all 109E's had a cannon in the nose, but a useful way of getting air to the motor on an electric power model.

 

Yes, I'm sure there were sub-variants that didn't have the 20mm nose cannon fitted or where it wasn't being used operationally.  I believe there was a cap that could be fitted for occasions where the 20mm cannon was not present or not in use.  That might be what the dividing line in the picture above shows.

 

I wasn't an iconic flat-nosed spinner though.

 

Not sure how that would help with cooling though if the spinner has a backplate.

 

I keep thinking it would be a lot easier and cheaper to throw a 25 engine in.  There was a nice OS 25 LA in the Wings and Wheels bring and buy - sort of regret not buying that. 

[Nigel Heather]

14 hours ago, leccyflyer said:

You wouldn't be able to fly a Cambrian Spitfire at a scale speed, but that's true of most 42" span Spitfires and indeed most 42" span low wing, 3lb models. That's not the point though - they are aptly named as Funfighters. There's a real risk of over-thinking that and really, the only way to see if a Cambrian funfighter will work for you is to try one.

 

An alternative, which is very semi-scale, but can be kept very light and therefore have a better chance of flying really slow is the Flite Test Spitfire. My clubmate Bob built one recently as a Spitfire Cabriolet and it flies beautifully, with the investment of a few quid's worth of depron and cheap power train from the spares box.

 

 

 

They look good in the air.  I sometimes think I am focussing too much on how it looks on the ground.  Another option is the Vintage Model Company (Spitfire, Hurricane and BF109).  I think they would have been best for me but I couldn't look past that 'starved horse' look on the ground - too much vanity possibly because you don't notice it in the air - and they can be launched single-handed with an underarm throw.

[J D 8]

My Cambrian Spitfire XI with Irvine 25. Looks good in the air but needs a head wind for a tidy launch.

[Eric Robson]

5 hours ago, Nigel Heather said:

 

Yes, I'm sure there were sub-variants that didn't have the 20mm nose cannon fitted or where it wasn't being used operationally.  I believe there was a cap that could be fitted for occasions where the 20mm cannon was not present or not in use.  That might be what the dividing line in the picture above shows.

 

I wasn't an iconic flat-nosed spinner though.

 

Not sure how that would help with cooling though if the spinner has a backplate.

 

I keep thinking it would be a lot easier and cheaper to throw a 25 engine in.  There was a nice OS 25 LA in the Wings and Wheels bring and buy - sort of regret not buying that. 

This is a lightweight electric spinner 4" diameter, they are available in a large range from 4 Max. It is fitted to a 63" Warhawk. The front could be cut off for a 109 e as there is no centre bolt. 

I built the Cambrian Spitfire and 109 when the kit price was £20, both flew well on an OS 20 max  but I prefer something bigger nowadays. 

[Nigel Heather]

15 hours ago, Eric Robson said:

This is a lightweight electric spinner 4" diameter, they are available in a large range from 4 Max. It is fitted to a 63" Warhawk. The front could be cut off for a 109 e as there is no centre bolt. 

I built the Cambrian Spitfire and 109 when the kit price was £20, both flew well on an OS 20 max  but I prefer something bigger nowadays. 

Excellent, thank you, never knew they existed - will be fitting to all my electric models (well the ones that use spinners)

[Eric Robson]

Nigel, there is a range of ultra light spinners on the 4 Max website that have slots in the spinner to let the air through but they only from 50- 80mm. 

Apparently the nose firing cannon was troublesome on the 109e and was replaced on some by a cannon in each wing.  Wikipedia.