Should I bother with a fuselage jig ......

[toto]

Great suggestion and a cheap one from Screwfix.

 

However, I have bought the captive nuts already as in the picture at the start of the post. They will do the job as I have used them many times in building railway baseboards. Something to keep in  mind for the future though.-

 

Cheers

 

Toto

Edited October 6, 2023 by toto

[kc]

If  you use the traditional spiked captive nuts even if glued in as well  they tend to push out when inserting bolts ( especially if raised to avoid scratching worktop ) therefore the Screwfix type are better.   Both work but I find the spiked captive nuts on my fuselage jig go missing easily!   

[EvilC57]

5 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

Given the square nature of the model you are building i would skip it. I dont have one and am yet to build a banana so i question their usefulness personally. In your current case, just build the forward box section then pinch the tail together after it is all solid at the front end. Sighting down the fuselage will clearly show any deviances from straight. If you are short of squares, cd cases are excellent stand in's and they also double as reusable epoxy mixing trays, which is handy. 

 

While it is always important to strive for accuracy its not critical down to the thou. I know a chap who was going to scrap an entire wing as plan shrinkage caused one wing panel to be about 3/8-1/2 inch shorter than the other and it was going to be all out of trim and blah blah blah. I recommended he fly it before burning it and to the surprise of no one (except him), it was fine. 

 

I have also found over the years that measuring certain things (like wing tip to tail) is a total waste of time and you can just look at it to tell if its straight. Its very obvious when something is bent or out of alignment so dont loose too much sleep trying to measure everything to the Nth degree of accuracy as you will simply go insane. 

 

 

 

 

Lucky Boeing and Airbus don’t adopt your philosophy!

[Jon H]

12 minutes ago, EvilC57 said:

Lucky Boeing and Airbus don’t adopt your philosophy!

 

So all of your models are accurate to full size multi million dollar airliners manufactured with the height of technology? Give it a rest. 

 

 

 

 

[EvilC57]

16 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

So all of your models are accurate to full size multi million dollar airliners manufactured with the height of technology? Give it a rest. 

 

 

 

 

No, but I make them as accurately as I can. Why wouldn’t you?

[Craig Carr]

Hi toto

 

personally I always use a jig.  I aim to make them as accurate as I possibly can and find a jig essential if you wish to have the best chance of success 

 

As jon says about the wingtip to fin measure test that then relies on your wings being 100% equal to each other 

 

I still do it as an initial check but as well as the jig I’ve invested (about £30) in one of those self levelling cross hair lasers (got  mine from Lidls )

 

they automatically level relative to earth ….  You just need to level the model with a spirit level

 

then I use the laser to double check accuracy.  In the pic below I’ve aligned it with the formers 12, 3, 6 and 9 o clock positions on the removable nose former 

 

You can see the laser runs perfectly along the wing tube …..  it is also on the photo  running up the tail fin centre line (i now know the fin is perfectly vertically square to the fuse

 

so personally a jig and other tools like lasers will help you make the model to within a perfectly reasonable tolerance 

 

best wishes 

 

Craig 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Craig Carr

[toto]

Hi Craig,

 

An excellent tool. Which re inds me of the fact that I actually have a black and decker version that I used when bui.ding decorative dado panels in my living room many years ago. Also great for tiling and other DIY tasks. I can even reme,ber where it is in my shed. 

 

That maybe something to add to the arsenal at some point.

 

Toto

Edited October 6, 2023 by toto

[Jon H]

4 hours ago, EvilC57 said:

No, but I make them as accurately as I can. Why wouldn’t you?

 

its hilarious that you all think my models are as bent as a 9 bob note. Its not stated, but its at least implied, and i find it really quite amusing as the utter dogs dinner of a P51 i rebuilt recently is as straight as an arrow despite the insane amount of work i did to its wings, and the Hurricane which came before it was bent as received and straightened by looking at it. 

 

In any event, clearly you missed the point i was trying to raise. 

 

So to reiterate it yet again...As with all things in engineering there are tolerances at work. Materials, processes, etc. And in the case of a newcomer to building, as our OP is, the objective is to not discourage the poor chap by making the whole thing seem far more complicated than it is. The model in question would fly just fine if one wing was an inch longer than its mate and the fuselage totally flat on one side with the other curved to meet it. Would be perfect? of course not, but it would fly fine and still be a valuable tool for learning. On the subject of learning, if you cannot build a box fuselage with nothing more than a flat board and some squares then a fuselage jig will not help you. in fact it may well be a hinderance as any tool is only as good as the person using it. I have no idea how many box fuselage models i have made over the years and a jig was never needed at all. So to finally answer your question, yes i would build as accurately as i could, but a fuselage jig (the type we use anyway) is not any guarantee of accuracy so i would not use one. 

 

RE the laser beams, awesome work on the tin triangle, it really looks fantastic, but its not the same as a 40 size trainer. The two models are in different leagues and their builders have vastly different skills and levels of experience. The vulcan is an exception being a delta, but you can level wings/tails by eye very easily without the need of a laser level. In any event, presenting a model like the vulcan as a justification for needing X,Y or Z is pretty disingenuous as the two are not comparable. You also need a large space for the laser level to be of any help at all. Certainly it would be utterly useless to me in an 6x8 shed. 

I also have one final question. What about the wings? Warped wings are far more likely to impact the performance of the model than a slightly bent fuselage and yet no comment is being made about them. i would recommend putting more focus there rather than worrying needlessly about the boring box that keeps the engine, wings and tail spaced out from eachother. 

 

 

[GrumpyGnome]

Yup, as said loads of times, a jig is great for some models...... just unnecessary for totos nice, boxy, trainer.....

[ken anderson.]

over the years most of my models have been sports types...and at one AGM of of our club i was awarded a prize for building warps into several models...i normally use the MK 1 eyeball.....some of my best flyers have had "iffy" bits built into them...

 

ken anderson...ne..1...mk 1 eyeball dept.

[leccyflyer]

13 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

I also have one final question. What about the wings? Warped wings are far more likely to impact the performance of the model than a slightly bent fuselage and yet no comment is being made about them. i would recommend putting more focus there rather than worrying needlessly about the boring box that keeps the engine, wings and tail spaced out from eachother. 

 

 

Toto has written multiple posts detailing the care and attention which he has paid in creating a quality, true, robust building board, which gives him the best chance of building a true, unwarped wing for this and future models. This follow on thread is seeking opinions on fuselage jigs, for which he has already purchased most of the required materials and hardware.

[Nigel Heather]

Just built a SLEC fuselage jig - wanted to do it as cheap as possible.

 

First of all, surprised to find my local store selling it significantly cheaper than SLEC - that was a good saving.

 

Then I started looking at MDF, initially from the likes of B&Q and realised I was talking at least £16.  So paid a visit to my local timber shop and they had loads of offcuts more than big enough for £2 each.  So managed to complete my jig for around £18.

[toto]

Sounds like a bargain Nigel.

 

When are you pressing that into service then 

 

Toto

[Nigel Heather]

5 hours ago, toto said:

Sounds like a bargain Nigel.

 

When are you pressing that into service then 

 

Toto

Over winter and spring at least.  Have three traditional builds on the bench.

 

Mick Reeves Gangster 63 Lite

Evolution Models Fusion II

Cambria  Messerschmitt Bf 109E

 

Cheers,

 

Nigel

[toto]

wow ...... lets see the builds in action as they happen then ..... a nice selection of models there and a bit of variance.

 

I'll keep an eye open for the builds kind Sir.

 

toto

[John Stainforth]

On 07/10/2023 at 09:25, leccyflyer said:

Toto has written multiple posts detailing the care and attention which he has paid in creating a quality, true, robust building board, which gives him the best chance of building a true, unwarped wing for this and future models. This follow on thread is seeking opinions on fuselage jigs, for which he has already purchased most of the required materials and hardware.

There is nothing more disappointing than spending days building wings and fuselages for them to come out warped. (I learned this the hard way as a child.) So my view is that some kind of jigging for both wings and fuselages is highly worthwhile. It does not have to be sophisticated, just fit for purpose. It is very satisfying to set up a build so that you know it is going to come out more or less dead right, because you have ensured that it has no where else to go. This takes surprisingly little extra effort. It's in the same spirit as measure twice, cut once; or better still, measure four times, cut once.

 

Let me put it another way: when I have left things to chance, they often or usually turn out badly.

Edited October 31, 2023 by John Stainforth