artfs

[Len Ward]

Most[?] of the kits sold today are ARTF,and yet there is little iformation on how they are built.Occaisionally there's a comment about the covering ,eg self adhesive,or uses profilm etce.Sometimes [?] there is mention about "traditionally built with balsa...",mind you how this can be determined I dont know.Rarely is there coment on the adhesive used.
How do we know that the engine is going to stay fastened to the firewall/to the model?
Have we any idea what has been used to glue the ribs to the spars?
Some years ago an old mate of mine flew a Corsair at a show{Cosford} only to see his home built radial engine detach from the fuselage and wend it's way separately to the ground.Part of the model had been built by another..but that's no excuse is it?
How about some destructive examination of the artf airframe ,and conclusions as to the materials and adhesives used?

[winchweight]

I certainly take some time to go over as many joints as I can with cyno or pva. Many have frames that are only barely glued in place. That said, most kits I've had have been pretty good except for one or two joints.

[Peter Miller]

You see a lot of reviews mention that some of the joints are poor or not glued. I can tell you that there is one kit under review (not by me) which is so bad that they are not sure if they dare publish the review. Not what I call a good service to the modeller. My attitude has been that I ma there to help the modeller, not the manufacturer.
The old Kyosho Spitfire would lose the retracts on the first landing and half the tail plane was known to be liable to fall of. Two did at Sandown the year they introduced it. Just good old lack of glue.
The trouble is that the people building these things are not interested and don't understand modelling. all they want to do is earn another bowl of rice before knocking off time.
I also know of a trainer some years ago were the spars were like ultra soft balsa. Saw one fail (It was never over strassed) it was replaced by the importer and the replacement failed on the first flight.
They both broke just outboard of the centre section sheeting.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Mike Bell]

Peter's comments are spot on regarding the fact that ARTFs are assembled by poorly paid factory workers who have no interest or knowledge of the end use of the product. They are also often built using woods that are both heavy and brittle even if they are glued. The cost of virtually all ARTFs is artificially low and only achievable by the use of third world labour and cheap materials. This is not an appropriate environment for the promotion of quality so it is no surprise that some are a bit dodgy.
How long will it take. I wonder, before things go full circle and people go back to building their own? The trouble is that there will be almost no surviving kit market to satisfy the demand should it arise. Still, there are plenty of good plans out there.

[Peter Miller]

I can tell you that plans in the magazines are highly popular and built by many )I am very glad to say!) They don't cost a lot to build and you can select your own grades of wood etc.
My Easy Pigeon, the ONLY ARTF that I have ever liked, Seems to be buuilt out of old orange boxes.
I have just all the club member's dropping because I bought another ARTF. Reason was I wanted to do some experiments with Piggy Backing gliders and I got a price at which I could not build the thing myself, also It gives me time to design another model.
It seesm passably built but the tank position is so low that I do wonder if I will have any problems.
Actually I think that the Chinese are mising a trick. If they sold their ARTFs as kits they could charge nearly as much and save on assembly labour, covering etc although I don't think that they would save much on glue!!!

[Alistair Taylor]

There are still loads of kit-sellers out there. Support them or lose them!;

http://www.westfieldmodels.co.uk/

http://www.nicolade.co.uk/clients/billkits/index.html

http://www.benbucklevintage.com/shop/index.php?main_page=index

http://www.replikit.com/

http://www.westwings.co.uk/

http://www.flairmodels.co.uk/


AlistairT

[Len Ward]

It's always a worry flying an artf,at least if you crash youre own through structural failure it's your own mistake.
Perhaps if the artf market was to offer a more prefabricated kit which allowed the inspection of joints/wood quality leaving the covering to the buyer?
I know many fliers[potential flyers] lack the interest/ability/time to build from scratch and this may offer a compromise,and,as one writer says open a market for even cheaper kits where you can see what your getting???
Anyone know how to take this up?

[Peter Miller]

I was just asmebling the piggy back model. The screws for the control horns are not longenough to go into the backing plates. Typical. Also the pushrod for the elevator runs through holes in the formers, these have been bushed with plastic, result, the pushrods are stiff to operate.
I have huge stocks of screws and I know enough to knock the bushes out. What about the poor ARTFer who doesn't know any better and doesn't have all the bits

[Alistair Taylor]

I've bought one or two artfs that have looked like they needed a bit of extra glue, or were made from low quality wood, but what to do about it? Why are they so popular still? and have we really lost the cream of british kit manufacturers?

If you're a beginner, and you want to learn to fly, the building thing (which is pretty alien to the playstation generation.....for whom assembly means you plug it in, switch it on, and it works, but don't get me started...) represents a bit of a hurdle. Building skills don't come in ready to swallow form, you acquire them over years...decades in some cases :)

So why bother when someone in China can do that bit, allowing you to get to the flying field the same week (day even) that you decide to learn to fly and buy the plane, engine and radio?

In the ideal world the R/C beginner would join a club before buying a plane (or at least before building it), and would be mentored by one of the elder statesmen through the build process/setup/first flight/trimming etc to solo. if the beginner had bought an ARTF, the elder statesman would sagely chuck the linkages/clevis's (clevi?)/horns etc in the bin, before accompanying/directing the novice to the local modelshop for some decent horns/fixings etc.

So, hands up who's mentoring a beginner through the minefield of ARTF trainers? Do beginners join clubs these days? Do blokes ask for directions?...

In reality, the poor construction of some ARTFs, and our willingness to still buy them, reflects the price-focussed, low attenion span and throwaway nature of modern consumerist society. Fly it, break it, throw it away, buy another one, fly it break it etc etc until you're bored, cos each one is relatively cheap, then move on to the next leisure pursuit.

Did modellers in the 50s and 60s own more than three or four models? or more than two sets of radio gear? Only if they were really minted.

In which case, why should manufacturers build it to last longer than the time taken to pay for it, take it out of the shop, and put it in the back of the car? If it lasts, then the modeller is not going to come back to the shop to buy another... if the modeller doesn't come back, oh well, there's another one round the corner.

Now before I get hatemail from all the UK distributors, I don't reckon the above applies to more than a handful of "budget" artf manufacturers.

Web forums, UK distributors (with a reputation to maintain), magazine reviewers, and competition from UK kit manufacturers have all forced ARTFs to improve. Similarly UK kit manufacturers have had to sharpen up their act in response to competition from ARTFs.

So what about those UK kits? I've got some old (1970s) copies of radio modeller, and there are hoards of foam winged, 40 powered trainer/sports kits on offer from UK shops/companies. Some of these may have been really good, but I suspect that most were just clones of one another. I'm not in the liightest bit sad to have seen these disappear to be replaced by ARTF lookalikes. Most of the quality kits are still around.


AlistairT

[scott cuppello]

I don't build for 2 reasons, no time, no skill! The comments about ARTF's are right, but, apart from some dubious kit's [always foamie's....I fly EF], I have never had a major problem.

I think this is mainly because I have treated them as builds, and tried to look for the problems as soon as it comes out of the box. Several times Iv'e added a bit of ply here and there, ditched control links, and so on. Best of both worlds really, I'm still doing a bit of modelling, a lot of flying and no major headaches.

The comments on the Scorpio stuff were interesting, I have the DH Mosquito of theirs, it's an AARTF...almost an ARTF! And that foam needs to be handled with kid gloves for sure!

[Len Ward]

From the comments of members in our club,and from my own experience,I know Steve Webb sells good makes of artf.
Has anyone else experience of good retailers/makes ?

[Peter Miller]

When someone says "No skill" I wonder how all of us old timers ever built any models, after all we were not born with the skills, we had to learn them, often without any outside help.
You learn the skills by building.
The other thing is that back in the days when many of us started, R/C was for bloated plutocrats only. We started with simple models, Free Flight and Control line. We learned the principals of building, trimming and control with these.
Anyone remember the cretins in the free flight area at Old Warden who would launch a model, watch it crash, pick it up and launch it again without making any adjustments? They never even thought about trimming.
The daft thing is that people who never build don't know how to repair their models so they just buy another.
Quality is another factor, there are good ones but...
The model I am assembling for the piggy back experiment has a solid dihedral brace. snag is that it is 1/16" short of the depth of the hole it goes into.
Not a problem for me, just take a piece of 1/16" ply from stock, cut it to width and it glue on. What would the inexperienced modeller do?
I am told thad DB models are still producing a range of the old kits, Corben Baby Ace, Centurionand more with others in the pipeline.
Sig still make them, Galaxy Models have their range. There are kits if you look hard ennough. Better still, build from plans.
Finally (Thank God, I hear the mutters) For me half the pleasure of the hobby is in the building. Even if a model crashes on its first flight I never feel that it is a waste because I had hours of pleasure building it.

[Peter Miller]

On another thread people objected to the idea that ARTFers are not modellers. Well, I won't split hairs on that one but what I will say is this, people who build their own models, either, kit, plan or OD are craftsmen and those who have only assemble ARTFs cannot claim that.

[Aslan]

On another thread people are been told how to get free nappies......And I think it"s very unfair to say he is not a modeller, just because the nappies come ready to use.

[scott cuppello]

Spot on jetsome, and as for my comment on "lack of skill"....as a boy, I built and crashed plenty....I also work with people who are skilled in my field...I am not compared to them. I admire craftsmen [as you so rightly contradicted yourself Peter]....I'm not one of them.

I can, however, trim up an aircraft to fly spot on first time, I can modify an ARTF to improve/make it work properly, I can still personalise/add scale detail to an ARTF, and as jetsome pointed out....it's still modelling, and quite frankly...my main reason for doing this hobby is to fly. I fly ARTF's, and electric ones at that....some people would have me lined up against a wall I reckon!

And you know what? As I'm the only EF/ARTF member of our club.....everything I have is original! How ironic.

[Alistair Taylor]

and then there's the rebuilding skills one inevitably picks up....

How much of an ARTF do you have to demolish and rebuild for it to become an "own design"?

Back to the firewall? back to the rudder post?

I'm reminded of the woodsman's 40 year old axe....

FOR SALE: 10 year old ARTF spitfire. Wings rebuilt three times, fuselage twice, tailplane four times, engine mount replaced, new canopy. Retracts installed, (spare set available - bent) etc etc


AlistairT

[Aslan]

Rule 1...If you want ARTF, go for it and enjoy flying....Rule 1....If you want to build,
go for it and enjoy flying....

[Alistair Taylor]

Rule 1

we do not talk about aeromodelling

Rule 2

we do not talk about aeromodelling

Once upon a time someone talked about football.... now look what a disorganised, poorly funded, sub-minority esoteric passtime that's become!

Spot on Aslan - a chacun son gout.


AlistairT ;)

[Tom Sharp]

These far eastern ARTFs are not produced in grimey back street sweat shops, they are produced in new factories, many have their own flying fields ajacent to the factory to test the products. The manufacturers are proud of their products and want to improve them if they are not performing to a required level. After all they need repeat orders for them to stay in business, not easy if the product gets a bad name.

I run our club web site and I am constantly being bombarded with e-mails from these said manufacturers. On their web sites many show pictures of their modern production lines, warehouses, flying fields etc.

Below is a link to the web site of the latest missive to arrive in my mail box.
This firm is more at the toy end of the market but it is well worth a look to see what is on the way to our shops.
Note the Tiger Moth and Lockeed Lightning.

http://www.lsmodeltoy.com/home

[Tony Jones]

ARTFs, like most things in life, vary widely in quality. I have been building from kits and plans for more years than I care to think about, and am happy to admit that I can not match the accuracy and lightness of the best ARTFs. But that's not surprising: these things are laser cut to very tight tolerances and very cleverly designed structure-wise.

I am building from a plan at the moment, but am using fretted light ply as per ARTF practice rather than balsa sticks. Lighter and stronger, but it does require a scroll saw.

The beginner will have to do what we all have done - learn by trial and error which manufacturers are reliable and which aren't. When it comes to repairing crashed models, some will undoubtedly bin the thing and buy another, but others will work out that it can obviously be repaired for a lot less money, and go along to their model shop for the necessary advice and materials. And having experienced the resultant satisfaction, they may well become a 'proper' modeller in due course.

However, I think manufacturers who imply that their ARTFs can be up and flying in just a few hours without any previous experience or skill do the hobby a disservice.

Best wishes
Tony Jones.

[Peter Miller]

Just finished the trainer being used for Piggyback experiments.
It has a heavier engine, a .32 instead of a .25. CG is specified as being at 75mm back from the leading edge. Only took 6 ounces of sheet lead to get it forward to the specified point. Luckily I have a roofing contractor just up the road from my house or the church would have had a new leak.
Must have used oak for the tail instead of the usual orange boxes.

[the unmagnificent man]

Hi all, just to say how much i've enjoyed reading this thread. I especially liked Peters comment.... they wouldnt save much on glue though.... and Scotts AARTF, i'll be using that one myself at my club. As for my opinion on ARTF or own build(what do you mean we didnt ask?) I like to build my own designs (look out in future RCM&E) but still fly an ARTF trainer as it was a quick way into the air to practice flying whilst waiting for my own design to aquire shape. keep up the entertainment. Al

[The real Ron Truth]

Ah my pet subject this!!

Lets be honest and say that the building part of modelling is rapidly being split from the flying part of things. You can be airborne in hours yet not have built the model or be able to even recognise how its built, why it flies, the purpose of its components or how to fix it should it crash.

Ive seen lots ARTF models and some are pretty good quality ( Hanger 9 being one)and some are truly dreadful and would be sent back in the post for a refund if it was me. The fact you are advised to reglue the firewall is enough for me to think the builders havent thought things through.

Its not about sweat labour but about the design and building processes necessary to recreate models cheaply and quickly as ARTF's. Where once you would build a wing with ribs , le, te and spars etc, its now foam supports and thin ply. Looks great static but is a nightmare to repair.

[Tony Jones]

IMHO ARTFs are another example of the instant gratification society that we live in. I work in the recreational boating industry and there is currently a big push to make boating 'more accessible' and 'easier' than previously to tempt more people into the pasttime. Well OK, pure sensual pleasure is nice, but until now, learning how to handle a yacht or motor cruiser and all the rest of that arcane maritime stuff was regarded as an important and enjoyable part of it - and gave people enormous satisfaction. Take that away and something valuable is lost.
It is tempting to say that we are all decadent, want everything handed to us on a plate, and no longer prepared to make any effort. But the rise and rise of risky, very arduous 'extreme sports' suggest that at least some people understand that you get out what you put in.