Jonathan Lewzey Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I don't think i'd like the flying style of flying a bipe like that. I suppose different people like different planes. The sturmoviks retracts aren't as difficult to model as the previous 2 pick a planes. One i forgot to pick was the Luscombe Silvaire which makes a very nice alternative to the Piper cub. oh well, maybe next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris C Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 you could just edit your post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Richardson Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Chris c can you explain how to edit a post, I cannot for the life of me figure it out wondered if it was something else that has not been de-bugged yet??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Richardson Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Testing testing / thanks Phil it does work, it would be nice if you could change your mind in the pick a plane forum after a week or two, don't think anybody else went for the Blohm and Voss BV 141! I really think this would be a great free plan at 60 to 72 inch for electric or glow, really unusual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Tony The BV 141 would get my vote to. I do believe that it is a great pity that models of this type, the Dornier 355 is yet another, are never the subject of a free plan. Planes such as the Martin Bakers, Spitful, Wyvern, Miles M20 are the nearest British equivalent Unusual for us. I do not think they stand a chance in this type of major feature, though. Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Richardson Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Erfolg I think you are right just too different, the Lysander seems a popular choice but could present problems for some builders as the canopy/cockpit is very involved with all its glass, that said painted windows would work on a smaller model? Has anybody thought of the Lysander P12 ?? that would be really different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I guess the P12 is the tandem wing version? Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Coleman Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I can think of a way that the wing root might be securely attached (two t's boy, two t's) on a model Lysander. A frame work within the canopy securly joined to the fuselage (possibly fabricated from Carbon or aluminium tube)... You have me thinking now... I will get hold of some scale drawings and see what I can come up with. Maybe we (all of us) can design a plane on this forum? Cheers, Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 In the case of the actual aircraft, the loads will have been taken by some type of transfer frame or brackets. It may be possible to use the same type of structure, it may not be completly scale, but something that is acceptable. What is certain, it will not have been glass (plexi or something else) and the light window frame that took the loads and stresses. Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Richardson Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Erfolg Not sure its a tandem wing? but it is a very lage tailplane bit like a quickie but in reverse, tried to post a piccy but for some reason cannot get this site to accept U R L from photo bucket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.A. Barry Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Yes, Tony R. I have to agree with you about the concept of the Lysander, as a model, all that glass , ok you can have painted windows, the thing that worrys me is, those long dangling legs, on a flat, smooth flying field, will fine, but on "club field" grass, ummm I think that a lot of models will come to grief. Yes, Graham A, did a review on a "Storch" ,(almost a copy / similar, of Lissy), but a larger span, that can handle the ground lumps and bumps. I think that (Erfog) that carbon fibre and aliminuim tube is great. it will need a lot of "structual" building to take the the wing load and support the U/C. There is nothing stronger than (u/c) wheels located in nacelles..... Barry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Tony As I am still in the mist of a building site, called an extention, acess to all my books is limited. However one of my books "Westland", a rather slim tomb only 155p for a company with some history. Says K6127 was modified extensively, the fuselarge reduced in length to 7.85m, installing a 4 gun power operated turret, at the tail. A De larne type secondary wing was mounted at the rear of the fuselarge, just foreword of the turret. It goes on to say Harold pentrose flew the aircraft. There is a picture I do not know if this is P12, or yet another experimental airframe. I cannot think what its purpose, or envisaged mission was to be, but it looks strange. If another Boulton Paual Defiant type, the Luftwaffe would not have cot it mixed up for a Hurricane. The book also mentions P9105, a parrallel wing development. Which may look good? As for how how the wings were attached it is not at all clear from the photographs. There appears to be two compression tubes across the wing roots to theplates, There is a hint of a "A" type frame (with bent verticals to follow the glass housebehind the pilots seat. I guess a trip to Hendon could resolve the issue, or a better (comprehensive) reference book. I do think I have some reference drawings somewhere for the Lysander, but do not no where at the moment, or if this detail is present. Strangely i do not find the UC to daunting, only the strut attachment and spats, being a issue. Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwi g Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Have we all turnned into ARF/kitset builders... Its not that hard to do a canopy for it. the most part of it is flat sided. All this talk of wing attachment problems,Wot problem? a couple of formers ,some braces ,a good example is the airsail auster kit.. Does it have to be exact scale, whats wrong with a stand off scale, . Come on guys, remember scratch building from lumps of balsa, or have you all forgotten how to do it. INNOVATION ,EXPERIMENT, TEST, TRY, FIT ,SAND, remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Grigg Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Now youve been told chaps cant wait for my next Multiplex now thats a proper build(for Me) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Graeme What is balsa? Is it posible to cut plastic sheet without a laser? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Richardson Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Erfolg you are correct about the P12 it was actually a wing albeit a small one and a turret on the rear end, apparently it was a proto of what was destined to be a night patrol/fighter aircraft for the coastal areas of Britain, seems it was broken up well before the war ended. Graeme I too have the Auster by airsail 72" and plan to modify the cabin area to dispose of that unsightly servo and rubber bands that hold the wings together, as my old boss used to say anything can be done provided you give it the thought, time and money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Lynock Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I think I will sit down and cry if we end up with something that you can buy quite easily or something that is so common it will just get thrown on the pile, all this debate and trouble just to end up with another Lysander or Mustang plan would be a shame. Decided to play with an idea for something different just to fill the dark nights before that period we so laughingly call summer arrives - a 62'' span slope soarer Do 335 V4 with the long wing.. Presently working on the wing structure trying to keep it light but strong, also using Quabeck airfoil sections just to see how they perform so if anything at all actually develops and it gets further than the drawing board like many German advanced aircraft I will let you know...... Regards, Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Coleman Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Myself, I am working on a Supermarine Stranraer (will end up about 2.5 meters in span)... Just in plan and concept form at this stage. You won't see a kit or ARF of that. Cheers, Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Is there any particular plane that is way ahead in the vote? Or is it a case an incredible range of aircraft with a few votes, and then the almost predicatable planes with a similar but notable similar number of votes? Does any one know? Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Lynock Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Myself, I am working on a Supermarine Stranraer (will end up about 2.5 meters in span)... Just in plan and concept form at this stage. You won't see a kit or ARF of that. Cheers, Hugh Always prefered the Stranraer to the Walrus probably because it didnt look so damned dangerous to be an occupant of, the Walrus always looked like it was held together with string and sticky stuff and about to disintigrate at any moment. Considering it was designed by the same company that came up with the Spitfire and at the same time period as the DC3 and the big Atlantic Clipper flying boats it really was archaic, regards, Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Terry Considering it was designed by the same person who designed the the S5 and S6 etc, you do wonder. The reality is possibly as I mentioned in an other thread, the Walrus will have been in accordance with a government spec. Having said that, the aircraft was sucessful, could be catapult launched, in addition to taking of from the sea, in adverse conditions. Perhaps the spec and design were not all bad? How about the state of the vote! Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave S. Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Erflog, I thought it wasn't a vote, just a forum for generating ideas, the most practical of which will then be put to the vote. The idea that it is a simple democratic process is simply incorrect. There are plenty of very odd suggestions coming up, thankfuly they will almost certainly be ignored, as no one, not even those proposong them, are ever likely to build them, so we can have something that a reasonable number of normal modellers, with average building and flying skills, can actually fly from their average flying fields. Sixty inch Beaver for electric, please, with floats & skis options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Dave In the absolute sence you are correct, because David has told us the rules. Yet I am sure that there is a point in the vote, which i guess is to influence the decision towards a model which will be built, to the advantage of the many stakeholders. In addition i do like a competition. Your observation that many of the planes voted is in part true. not by the voter, I agree. I would be suprised if a model has not been built of even the most obscure aircraft, by someone at some time. Even the Douglas X3 proposed by me, tounge in cheek, has been modelled as a ducted fan, to my suprise, when i stumbled across a picture of it in a scale competition. Erfolg 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.