Advice needed for new modeller

[kc]

The Sky 40 seems to be just another trainer.  The Wot4 is so much more aerobatic yet forgiving, it would be a mistake to miss out this kind of intermediate model.  Nothing is known to be better than a Wot4 although the Basic 3D by Mike Keay seems as good. 

This was free plan in RCME a few years ago and should be avail from plans service.   Also the Maricardo which is mid wing or the Wight Crusader by Keith Humber.

The Wot4 is very simple to build and you might find someone at your club with a plan you can  borrow.  It will be the kind of model you always keep for engine testing and all weather flying.  Dont missout this type of forgiving aerobatic model before you start on scale.You will learn much from building from plans rather than buying an ARTF and of course it saves lots of money.

 

If you want a scale high wing trainer model then the Flair Cub fitted with a proper cowl & inverted engine looks scale  Or a plan built Cessna C37 Airmaster from Fl*** Sc*** Model mag earlier this year ( buy the 2 back issues to get the free plan )

The Americans seem to like the Sig 4 star 40 and rave about the Ultrasport 60 ( NOT the 40 which is not considered as good ) .  The Ultrasport 60 is a plan from RCM magazine and still avail and sometimes a kit is avail too, 125 dollars from Tower.  Many build thread for Ultrasport too, but this is a bigger leap up than the Wot4 etc.

Whilst checking up this info I noticed that the RV4 kit is avail for 109 dollars from Tower in the US so it might be worth buying it from the US although carriage,import duty, and VAT on top of all this might make it as dear asUK .

Edited By kc on 21/08/2009 18:20:58

[Phil 9]

I could only find the RV-4 on US web site also.

 

I will have to think about it. I am a bit  with overwhelmed choice

[andy watson]

re an alternative, well it's well worth remembering your build will probably take you 6 months or more.  I fly a cheap ARTF (blackhore travel air) as a plane to throw into the boot and fly.  The DVII only comes out on perfect days!

 

Just because you want to build, and especially because you want to build scale, the planes take a lot of time, are expensive, and can be awkward.   A cheap ARTF allows you to fly easily and more often.

[kc]

The kind of models you might be able to build and the kind of models you need to progress with your flying are two completely different things.
Some people have the skill and experience to build beautiful and complex scale models, but they may not have the flying skill to go beyond a trainer.  There are good fliers who are very poor builders.
So you need to build what will help your flying to progress.   But at the same time if you are good at building you might start building a scale model for flying later.

So the flying sequence is

High wing trainer   until it is too easy & boring

 

Aerobatic high wing or mid wing  ( both with a thick wing section ) Wot 4, Basic 3D, Maricardo, Wight Crusader  or Rival by Mike Delacole ( or larger version Big Easy ) etc  to learn aerobatics and recovery from spins etc

 

Low wing aerobatic  Ultrasport, Kaos or Jetta by Mike Delacole (Plan Service )

 

Simple scale models ( without tapered wings or small tailplane )

 

Scale models  WW1 or civilian types

 

Scale WW2 fighters

Edited By kc on 21/08/2009 19:13:02

[Phil 9]

I will have to marry up the two. I know I could build a serious model well. But I dont want to build something only for it to be stored in my shed because I am unable to fly it safely.

thanks all for the advice

[Bob Cotsford]

One possible route would be something like the Skyways Chippahawk, a semi-scale Chipmunk.  Very aerobatic, but forgiving, and it can be tarted up to make a reasonable facsimile of a Chipmunk.  I had one years ago powered by an Enya 60, done out in trad RAF silver/yellow.  An excellent low-wing trainer that satisfies the scale urges into the bargain.  They are supplied as plan packs, with the wing cores, ply bits etc and you supply the stock balsa needed.

[andy watson]

Phil, don't forget the concept of scale flying.

 

By that I mean if you go to all the trouble of building something that looks like a [insert any plane here] then really it should fly in that way too.  So your RV-4 shouldn't be able to prop hang, fly inverted etc etc etc (I'm assuming it's a commuter plane not an aerobat).  Technically that means you don't need to be able to do those manoeuvers either- so actually a scale model can be much much easier to fly.  But sooner or later you will want to throw it around, and a cheap ARTF will satisfy those shallow demands for instant adrenalin gratification!!

[Phil 9]

I think the real RV-4 is capable of some aerobatics. But still andy I see your point. I want a model that will do everything and thats not going to happen

Edited By Phil B on 21/08/2009 22:22:36

[Phil 9]

KC the Wot4 is now available as a ARTF and cost about the same as the kit. So I dont think building your own is a cheeper option these days.

 

Skyways Chippahawk could be an option for me. I did see this super chipmunk an liked it alot.

 

I saw another Large Super Chipmonk That I thought was fantastic but maybe a little to large for me.

 

Maybe the easyer chippahawk is the kit i should go for. I wonder it it would look good in super chipmunk colours?

[kc]

It is not really aquestion of building a model you like the look of, its important to obtain a model that improves your flying.  You will learn a lot more from a Wot4 or something similar with thick wing section and low aspect ratio wings without taper.  

 

There are many Wot4 plans floating around most clubs and this will be very cheap and easy to build from scratch.  Otherwise build a Basic3D etc. You will learn more from building than buying ARTF.

 

Build a Chippahawk  (if it is still avail ) after you are really the master of your Wot4. 

 

The Chippahawk has a  Chipmunk canopy not a Super Chipmunk bubble canopy I think.

 

 

[Phil 9]

 

You are right about the chippahawk canopy. But I thought I could modify it or even make a replacement canopy. Boddos book show how to form your own canopies(would be time consuming though)

 

I have been looking seriously at a wot4 build. And you are right it would be a good model for me.

 

The wot 4 is just not one plane though there are a few versions. some with flaps ect. I think you have talked me into building a wot4. You are right I need to learn and build up my skills before attempting something more ambitious.

 

From what i have read about the wot4 if i build one it wont go to waste they are very versatile. If you have any specific tip about the wot4 I would like to hear them

 

Edited By Phil B on 26/08/2009 20:12:51

[Ernie]

Hi Guys,

There can't be many experienced modellers who haven't flown a wot4

But,do build it, it's not difficult, it's got foam and obechi wings that are a doddle, and the instructions are great, with lovely illustrations.

I would suggest, that you get a carbon fibre undercart, and a glass cloth (not plastic)engine cowl. Finally, I'd use separate servos for each aileron (I had problems with dirt in the torque rods that you use with one servo)

 

ernie 

 

 

[Phil 9]

Thanks earie. Thats pretty much what I had in mind. I thought a JEN 57 engine would be nice in it also.

 

I just put a carbon U/C on my tango and it very good. I found the ally one a bit too springy and now landings are much smoother. and i heard a f/glass one can break all to easy.

 

I would not put on separate flaps but as you said put a servo on each wing. then i can always program in flaperons.

 

This would be my model for trying new suff. I thought I would experiment with smoke.

 

From what I have seen on this forum the wot4 can end up heavy if not carfull. If I add smoke will i be makin it too heavy. Can I save any weight when biulding?

[Ernie]

Hi Phil,

I've got a JE 57, and it's just fine. I don't think weight will be too much of a problem, as a 57 has more than enough power. You could also add a purple tuned pipe if you need to go to the moon.

Also Just Engines are a fine company. Jenny really knows her stuff. and their service is second to none

Flaperons are a good idea, and two aileron servos make setting up much easier

Finally I seem to remember that the drawings show lightening holes on the wings, though never bothered

ernie 

[Phil 9]

Not sure what a tuned pipe does. does it make that much difference? I am guessing it would be alot louder too

[Ernie]

Hi Phil,

 

A tuned pipe is fitted to your engine in place of a silencer. The one that I have for my JE 57 is over a foot long, and hangs under the centre of the fuselage.  No, its not noisy, in fact its quieter than a standard silencer, also, and critically, it increases power, by using back pressure from the exhaust to make the engine more efficient. ( I think)

There are more sophisticated versions available, but they can be tricky to set up

 

To be honest, I don't think you need it, till you get your wat4 sorted out, and decide you need even more ooomph 

 

ernie 

 

[Phil 9]

No I dont think I need it either. But it is interesting to find out about these things. Just engines motors have a large choice of silencers. tuned pipe, purple pipe and pits in cowl . I am not at this level of sophistication yet. I think tuned pipes can give better throttle response.

 >>

To me more oomph means get a bigger motor lol

[kc]

Torque rods have never given any trouble on any of my models.  Only getting the trailing edge to fit over the torque rods is a bit fiddly.

The Wot4 kit has veneered foam wings. so digging holes through the foam for the servo extension leads is too tricky, risks structural failure and makes 2 servos not worthwhile.  If you obtain a plan for a built up balsa wing then make provision for 2 servos (paper tubes etc)

The whole point of building a Wot4 is to have a model with a wide range of flying speeds so building an overweight model and fitting a more powerful engine just to compensate defeats this object.  Its easy to build one to about 4.5 pounds. 

If you fit a powerful engine to  a lightweight Wot4 you will get a model capable of sensational performance.  If you fit the same powerful engine to a grossly  overweight Wot4 you will only have missile that wont fly slowly and certainly wont hover in a stiff breeze like a correctly built one.  Also beware of tail failure in overweight Wot4's, see the comment by Chris Foss in the instructions.

The wing bolt option is much nicer than the rubber band wing fixing, so build this from the start.

The Super Chipmunk is different in outline to a Chipmunk in tailplane shape, fin, cowl as well as canopy so really little point in trying to disguise a Chippawk to Super Chipmunk.  You might still use the paint scheme or use a scale type RAF trainer scheme.