Jump to content

The Big Question ?


RICHARD WILLS

Recommended Posts

Advert


No axe to grind as I only have my late wife's Ripmax Spitfire so only gets taken out on high days or holidays. Rather have a Hurricane...oh I already have a WR one of those in a box!

Perception is

  • Shopping trolley undercarriage, so less robust
  • Habit of nosing over
  • The elliptical wing is not very friendly for the beginner
  • Every rivet counter is an expert on the Spitfire
  • Not looked, but assume there are plenty of ARTF Spitfires about

If enough people wanted a Spitfire I would probably join in, but happy with something less main stream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

I suppose the other thing I notice about any of these threads is the virtual lack of shout outs for a Spitfire . Is that because you all know I have one already ? Or is it so obvious that you feel everyone would roll their eyes ?

Personally I’d say it’s the opportunity to have something a bit different to main stream (I like the fact your 109 is a G rather than an E!) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're wishlisting, I always prefer something I can put a FAA/Coastal Command colour scheme on. 

 

I've done my Galaxy Hurricane in early war 882sqn FAA colours. I'd love a nice Martlet, Corsair, Barracuda. Blenheims, Bueas, or Hornets for twins. My only gripe with the 110 is that there's little/no naval link - I reckon it'd look cracking with a torpedo hanging off the belly. 

PXL_20241110_120115262.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, payneib said:

If we're wishlisting, I always prefer something I can put a FAA/Coastal Command colour scheme on. 

 

I've done my Galaxy Hurricane in early war 882sqn FAA colours. I'd love a nice Martlet, Corsair, Barracuda. Blenheims, Bueas, or Hornets for twins. My only gripe with the 110 is that there's little/no naval link - I reckon it'd look cracking with a torpedo hanging off the belly. 

PXL_20241110_120115262.jpg

Ooh a Barracuda! Can’t see an easy solution to the undercarriage though unfortunately… 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chris meek 1 said:

Ooh a Barracuda! Can’t see an easy solution to the undercarriage though unfortunately… 

Same with the martlet. I have seen some "man in a shed" engineering wonders to make it work at larger scales, but absolutely no clue how it would fit in a smaller model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

I suppose the other thing I notice about any of these threads is the virtual lack of shout outs for a Spitfire . Is that because you all know I have one already ? Or is it so obvious that you feel everyone would roll their eyes ?

Can't be that -it's impossible to have too many Spitfires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, leccyflyer said:

If there was ever a model that really didn't need an undercarriage the Martlet is it. Fantastic configuration for a belly lander.

That's fine on an easy to hand launch 40" span model, but once you start faffing around with dollies, bungees, helpers etc, I instantly lose all interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, payneib said:

That's fine on an easy to hand launch 40" span model, but once you start faffing around with dollies, bungees, helpers etc, I instantly lose all interest.

Seems to be working perfectly well for a number of folks, as the whole original design ethos for the WR FW190 this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

While we are musing prior to the second Christmas dinner....

It is astonishing to me that the original WR 109 dates back 22 years and made it to the front page of the RCME . The following year ,saw the La7 do the same . 

The more recent 109 that Paul had on our stand is more sophisticated , but perhaps not significantly ?

What is also interesting, is that they both pretty much followed the format of this years Fw190 . So apart from electric propulsion and lighter ,more reliable radio , not much has changed . 

Here is a picture of the 2002 109G together with one of the many variations of my Spitfire to keep it company . 

The bottom line really is that a practical and tough model with a decent finish (which we have all proved capable of ) is far more useable than a competition winning scale model with a "showroom finish " . 

Typically I will go to the field with a pair of these little chaps in the boot and have a great morning with no drama.

I think it was Nigel Dell and Paul Bardoe (old friend and British Pylon racing champ) who said to me that despite them owning and flying lots of bigger and more exotic models , they kept coming back to the "40"size stuff because it was just so practical 

 

bf109 gold.jpg

kiwi7.jpg

kiwi 7.jpg

Crikey I think you may well be right Richard, I know we were always interested in what you had brung! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, chris meek 1 said:

Ooh a Barracuda! Can’t see an easy solution to the undercarriage though unfortunately… 

Barracuda, definitely an acquired taste. When it comes to ugly aeroplanes I prefer the Blackburn Firebrand. (thinks… I must finish mine!) at least it has a ‘proper’ undercarriage.

Edited by Piers Bowlan
Link to comment
Share on other sites


As I have a WR spitfire as my regular flying model & early spits  are not my favourite I probably won’t want another unless something happened , 

I would however like a later model spit done down the same lines as the tempest/ fw190. MK XIV upwards low back  clipped wings if it were to ever happen 

 

E9660C59-47D7-42EB-A4BC-BEB39096F1D4.thumb.jpeg.85c5edf9beb47032c8cb1f271b7e619c.jpeg

 

 

Edited by andrew exton
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, payneib said:

If we're wishlisting, I always prefer something I can put a FAA/Coastal Command colour scheme on. 

 

I've done my Galaxy Hurricane in early war 882sqn FAA colours. I'd love a nice Martlet, Corsair, Barracuda. Blenheims, Bueas, or Hornets for twins. My only gripe with the 110 is that there's little/no naval link - I reckon it'd look cracking with a torpedo hanging off the belly. 

PXL_20241110_120115262.jpg

It's belly is a naval link🙂

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, John Britton 1 said:

For me a stuka is a plane I would like to build, no idea if it would be an easy build or how hard they are to fly

I've built 3 Stuka's two built up one Aerotech which was mainly foam veneer blocks for the fuselage and foam veneer wings. I currently have an FMS Stuka. The biggest problem with the wings is lining up the flaps and ailerons which hang below the wings on brackets, which tend to be vulnerable to catching on anything the come close to. Every one I've had flys like a trainer, for me they are a little boring as throwing them around the sky in not very prototypical. 

Screenshot_20231106-160434_WhatsApp.jpg

Screenshot_20231106-155952_WhatsApp.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hunted for one of those FMS Ju-87s for ages before finding one, but haven't flown it yet. Those panzerknacker guns had to go and the Stuka has to have a working bomb release trapeze fitted, which I've printed, but have yet to fit. I can live with the horrible thin wingtips of the Ju-87G, but would have preferred the earlier Ju-87D Battle of Britain period aeroplane. I've got a larger Great Planes Ju-87D ARTF brand new in the box, but it's a bit shiny and if a Warbirds Ju-87B -D came out, would jump at it. I very much doubt it would sell a dozen kits though, so is very unlikely.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we always say , the litmus test is , would I get twenty hands up ?

For most non mainstream types , you would struggle . 

Even twenty kits in no way justifies the time put in to get a kit out . 

Fun to speculate , but realistically for the more obscure stuff , you have to find a way to do it from scratch. 

You all have experience building my stuff and others , so you can take , perhaps and old plan and use it for the basic outline and sections . 

If not feeling that bold , why not modify something that is close . Spitfires into a different mark ? Buchon 109 from an Emil kit ? Sea Fury from the Tempest ?

Typhoon from the Tempest ? Twin mustang from two kits ? Short nose 190 to long nose ? 

Its all there if you really want a one off . 

A couple of my old friends built "WR style " prototypes after having built and flown my stuff .

Brian Brassey ( a good and well liked designer) designed a Yak 3 after build my La7 . Another friend did a P40 and the last one a superb Mig 3 . 

They all flew very nicely and were relatively simple to make . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...