RE: Abufletcher's Nieuport 11
[quote]ORIGINAL: abufletcher I think what I'm essentially seeing on landings is the model stalling out about 2-3 feet above the field. It's not a nasty tip stall, but the nice low angle I've got up to that point disappears fast. [/quote] That statement leads me to believe that you are using the throttle to land, not the elevator. With forgiving planes like trainers, you can land by essentially stalling close to the ground. I have found that safer and realistic WWI landings are executed more with elevator than throttle. A suggestion would be to not worry about how much throttle you have on landing but have whatever it takes to keep the plane safely flying slowly. Use the elevator to get the wheels to touch. You will of course have to throttle back some however. Not to land the plane, but to compensate for the increased lift you will get from the flair. I guess I happen to be in the minority but always found that my landings with my Pup were better when they were not three pointers. I have much better control keeping the tail up with reasonable forward speed and the rudder in the slip stream and use the elevator to put the tail down. Throttling back only to rob the plane of ability to take off again. It is my understanding that three pointers were preferred in full scale when field conditions were poor. Catching a pot hole or bomb divit would have less risk of a ground loop if the tail wasn't up. I dunno. I think landings be like takeoffs in reverse. Certainly WWI planes do better when the tail comes up first and then gets enough airspeed to fly. Makes sense to me that planes should land sort of the same way; with the ability to fly at touchdown, first on the mains and then with the inability for the tail to stay up.
Posted on: 7/24/2009 6:16 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8961108

RE: Eindecker crash video
No disrespect meant towards Derek but his 3D planes can fly on their props. That Eindecker needs to be flown on its wing. Prop wash alone is not good enough.
Posted on: 7/17/2009 9:33 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8940726

RE: Hangar 9 Corsair - 3rd flight - too much power
I saw the same thing happen to a fellow in a NC club. He had an over powered H9 Corsair and was doing the most beautiful high speed low passes you have ever seen. On about the fifth pass, right over "show center" the wing at the gull joint exploded. It was amazing. The plane went into this horrendous high rate roll. Incredibly, the guy kept the plane in the air but not for long. It veered away from the runway and was shredded through the branched of a tree. I too am sorry for you loss but take solace in that you are not alone.
Posted on: 7/16/2009 7:52 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8939471

RE: Corvette
How about not replacing the girlfriend and get TWO vettes. :) (Gald that she is OK.)
Posted on: 7/16/2009 4:42 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8938980

RE: Eindecker crash video
I dunno about the CG theory. Looks like a new pilot (I hope he sticks with it) given that he walked the plane out to the centerline. The take off was too soon. The plane never really had airspeed to remain stable. Altitude was gained almost entirely on the motor. The turn at low speed put it into a spin and that was that.
Posted on: 7/16/2009 3:24 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8938755

RE: Machine gun sound and smoke systems?
Hmmm. I dunno about the doppler effect problem. The doppler effect will affect the frequency in both directions, increasing as the model comes toward you and decreasing when it goes away. The model will have to know its relation to the pilot to know how to change the sound and the model wouldn't just be going toward you or away. There are all sorts of angles, altitudes and directions that would have to be factored. And that is just for the pilot. Other people at the field would probably be put off by the unnatural sounds the plane would make when it is shifting the frequency higher because the plane is going toward the pilot but away from the spectators. My recommendation is to let nature and physics do their job.
Posted on: 7/14/2009 10:25 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8932058

RE: Abufletcher's Nieuport 11
I am always leary of providing flying suggestions (especially since you are WWI plane fan) but I do have an observation on the takeoff video. For a tail dragger it seemed pretty aggressive on the throttle. It looked like the quick run up pulled it to the left before the rudder had more air moving past it and out of the shadow of the fuselage (although not as bad as a DR1). Maybe being more gentle on the throttle until the tail comes up might help. Best of luck.
Posted on: 7/11/2009 9:40 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8923808

RE: 3D Models of Propellers Sought
Thanks very much. It came into SolidWorks not problem.
Posted on: 7/10/2009 7:36 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8921072

RE: 3D Models of Propellers Sought
I should be able to work with that model for my purposes. If you are willing to share it, you can email it to me at chevelle at wings-of-valor.net Thanks.
Posted on: 7/9/2009 7:40 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8918456

RE: How does one get RAF plans?
Thanks for all the suggestions. I have send emails to Replicraft and WWI Aero. Duxford has an RE8, not an FE8. I have been poking around on the National Archives site to no avail yet. I will probably send them an inquiry.
Posted on: 7/6/2009 9:53 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8910367

RE: Welcome to Club SAITO !
Now that we are back on subject, any thoughts on my question back on page 597? Thanks.
Posted on: 7/6/2009 7:30 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8910136

How does one get RAF plans?
Does anyone know of the best way to get copies of factory plans for Royal Aircraft Factory designs? I am specifically interested in the SE5a, FE2b, and FE8. Thanks.
Posted on: 7/5/2009 6:57 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8908769

RE: Welcome to Club SAITO !
Hello Saito-ites, Not only have I never owned a Saito, I have never even owned a 4-stroke motor! (I have 2-strokes and gassers.) So that is why I am clueless about how to solve my problem. I have designed the 1910 Glenn Curtiss Hudson flier for a full scale replica project underway at the Glenn Curtiss Museum in Hammondsport, NY. They don't have an engine problem. They are using an original OX5 to power the replica. (The museum intends to re-enact the Hudson Flier's flight from Albany to New York on the 100th anniversary next May.) I am building a 1/4 scale R/C version and am having a tough time finding the right engine. Even for a 1/4 scale plane with an eight foot wingspan (and two wings), the plane is very light. The CAD program is telling me the weight is 5-1/2 pounds. That is without the covering, motor, or rigging. Leaving out the motor, the plane should still weigh less than 8 pounds. I think that a 60 would be fine expect that this plane has a lot of drag. For this reason I would feel more comfortable with a 90. I could always use a lighter pitched prop. I am concerned about vibration. I originally thought about using an RCV90 but it has a significant torque pulse that could be a problem. A multi-cylinder engine would be the best. That leaves few choices. The Laser V-twins are too big. Saito is the only manufacturer that I know of that makes a 60 or a 90 twin. So that's why I'm here. A friend lent me a 90T and I have been modeling it. The needle valves are not in yet but as you can see in the picture, the side mounted carb rests right up against the engine rail. I will have to make some modifications to accommodate this motor, including a hole in the rail for the needle valve to pass through. Not a pleasant thought. In looking on the Saito website, the 90TS looks different. It looks as if the carb is mounted in the back. That would be good for this project. Also, in reading, it seems that some of the Saito engines run with the pistons in phase (in the same direction at the same time) and others run out of phase (away from each other or toward each other). The latter is what I would prefer. That would have far less vibration. Any information about these engines would be greatly appreciated. (If you are interested, there is a build thread on this plane in the scale section.) Cheers.
Posted on: 7/3/2009 10:22 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8904794

RE: Blerio III, 1906
Not much to be found about the Bleriot III. Here is the blurb from Wikipedia: The Blériot III was an early French aeroplane built by pioneer aviators Louis Blériot and Gabriel Voisin, and eventually became their first design to actually leave the ground under its own power. The Blériot III was a design radically different from what would later become orthodox for aircraft, featuring two large elliptical annular wingsjoined by a boom. A single Antoinette engine drove two tractor propellers and it was provided with float undercarriage. Blériot and Voisin made repeated attempts to fly it from Lake Enghein between May and September 1906, but the machine would not become airborne. In October they made major changes to the design, replacing the forward annular wing with a conventional biplane cellule, adding a second engine, and changing the propellers from tractors to pushers. At this point, it was renamed Blériot IV. Even with these modifications however, the aircraft still refused to leave the ground, so on 12 November, they removed the floats and added a wheeled undercarriage to try again on land. Matching power between the two engines proved to be a major problem, but they nevertheless coaxed the machine into making a series of short hops before one of its wingtips struck a gutter, damaging it beyond repair. Modern sources differ as to whether to dignify these hops as "flight", but the failure of the aircraft to achieve anything greater drove Voisin to terminate his partnership with Blériot and pursue his own designs alone. Here is something from PBS' Nova site: Blériot III Far from discouraged by the crash of the Type II, Blériot invited Voisin to join him in forming the world's first airplane company. Their initial powered machine, the Blériot III, had striking elliptical tandem wings made of hollow ash covered with French silk. Twin elevators were housed within the front wing, and a rudder was placed inside the back wing. Blériot insisted upon a 24-horsepower, eight-cylinder engine to drive two large tractor propellers at 600 rpm. The complex transmission weighed 243 pounds. In May 1906, the plane was taken to Lake Enghien near Paris for trials Voisin later called "disastrous." It never left the lake's surface.
Posted on: 7/3/2009 4:49 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8904063

RE: engine and servo 3-views
Did you get my reply? PM me your email address that I'll send out the file.
Posted on: 7/3/2009 2:54 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8903846

RE: Blerio III, 1906
Hi Dick, Very interesting subject. From what I have read, the Bleriot III never successfully left the ground. Not sure why. Engines of the day were heavy given their power and that may have been the reason. Also, I am assuming the the annular wings don't have much lift. The IV replaced forward annular wing with a sort of biplane arrangement but that wasn't successful either. Assuming your model with lift off, will it have enough attitude control? They were still figuring all that out in 1906. Anyway, great subject. Not many doing the pioneering era stuff. As a matter of fact, I would venture a guess that it is just you and me. I am in the middle of a Curtiss 1910 Hudson Flier project (full scale and 1/4 scale). The 1910 AVRO Triplane Mk IV will be next. Keep posting. I'd love to see your progress and learn more about this plane. I'll be following your progress.
Posted on: 7/3/2009 2:51 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8903839

RE: Perfect scale subject?
I LOVE the guns! I can see that scene in a movie. The designer is in the plane during its first test flight and all is going well. He gives the order to fire the guns for the first time and the reaction forces stop the plane's forward motion. The designer looks to the others on the plane as it is about to drop from the sky and says, "Oh @#*!" (or the equivalent in Russian).
Posted on: 7/2/2009 10:53 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8902417

RE: 1910 Hudson Flier Build Thread
The Engine Dilemma.. I have been struggling with engine choices. Of course, the ideal pick from a visual and sound perspective would be an OS IL300. Oh that sound! But at 3.0 cu-in, that is a monster of an engine for this plane. Without the engine, covering, rigging and turn buckles, the plane calculates out at 5-1/2 pounds. Add 1-1/2 for the covering and 1/2 for the rigging and turn buckles and we get a whopping 7-1/2 lbs. That IL300 is five pounds. As good as it would look and sound, I think it is not an option. I am very interested in a multi-cylinder because of the lower vibration. So I think my choices are: Saito 60 Twin Saito 90 Twin Saito 100 Twin Laser 160 V-Twin The Laser is interesting because it sort of fits the look of the first two cylinders in the OX5 V8 which is as close to what the original had as you can get. Even so, I think that at 1.6 cu-in, it is far too big. I think the ideal motor is in the range of 60-90. I have never had a twin before but from what I understand, you get less omph from them compared to a single cylinder motor of the same size. Given that the Saitos are 4-stroke, that also has to be taken into consideration. For that reason, my gut says go with the Saito 90. A fellow club member that is waaayyy into engines offered another suggestion. He has a Ross 60 Twin (2 stroke). Maybe that will work. As I always do when I don't know which option I want to take, I model 'em all up. I hope that by the time I get them modeled, the answer will be staring me in the face. So Jim lent me the Ross 60 and Carl lent me his Saito 90 and off I went at modeling. I've only done the Ross so far. It came out nicely I think. It fits very easily between the engine rails too. A simple set of stand offs and a plate that would attach to the rails is all that would be needed. The Ross is unique in that it has mounting posts on both sides. A custom exhaust will have to be made but I am assuming that will be necessary for whatever motor I pick. The Saito 90 Twin is next.
Posted on: 7/2/2009 5:07 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8901516

3D Models of Propellers Sought
Hi. I am looking for any 3D solid models of R/C propellers. (10-14in would be preferred.) I can probably take in any file format. (I have a model of a full size propeller but that doesn't scale very well.) Thanks
Posted on: 7/2/2009 9:05 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8900370

RE: engine and servo 3-views
I have solid models of a few servos: JR537, HS81, HS635HB, HS645MG, HS755MG If you haven't already found what you are looking for and any of these will work for you, PM me and let me know if you want the models, what format, or just views.
Posted on: 7/2/2009 8:58 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8900361

RE: I must be an adict?,.. or sick?
[quote]ORIGINAL: planebuilder66 That brings up another topic, designers,....if say goldberg is now owned buy great planes, but the good old extra and sukhoi are no longer being made, obviously, golberg/GP no longer want's to pay for the patent rights to it, so it reverts to the designer on the print. What's the chance that the original designer would like to make a few extra bucks and re-release the kit under a new supplier? I'm assuming that GP or CGM wouldn't bother with leagal litigation, especially since they bought CGM after the discontinuation of the product? Any Ideas, midwest kits, CGM, Royal/makutria,Pilot? [/quote] It is most likely not an issue of [i]patent [/i]rights. If it were, then the issue is easier. Patents expire or protection lapses for various reasons such a the non-payment of maintenance fees. Once expired or lapsed, there are no protections. This is what happens to drugs when their patents expire. Generics are manufactured when the primary drug has gone "off patent". Copyrights are another thing entirely. They do not expire. If GP (or anyone else) has acquired the copyright for a design, they are entitled to the protection of that property. That isn't to say that we as modelers do not have any options when it comes to designing but copyright infringement is different than violating patent rights. What those options are is a subject for another post. As an FYI, I pretty much live in this space.
Posted on: 6/23/2009 7:15 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8875156

RE: Now here's what I call and ARF!
I dunno. Is it really worth $8000?
Posted on: 6/22/2009 12:19 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8871399

RE: I must be an adict?,.. or sick?
Ahh the good old day, eh Mike.
Posted on: 6/22/2009 12:17 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8871393

RE: I must be an adict?,.. or sick?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Thisstrangeengine Did any of you guys ever try designing your own planes. I've done a few myself and I must say they fly pretty good. I posted a picture today of a twin I finished a while back. Still learning to find my way around here but I hope to post more pics soon. [/quote] Well I guess it depends on what you mean by "design". I have thought about it but never actually did an original design, a plane entirely of my creation. I have done two designs to re-create full scale planes into a R/C versions. In one case, my design is being used to build a full scale. You can follow them on other threads in the Scale section but one is a 1910 Glenn Curtiss Hudson Flier. I did a full scale 3D model and drawings for a museum that is building a flying replica. My 1/4 scale version is under construction as well. I am also in the latter stages of designing a 1/4/ scale 1910 AVRO Triplane. I have (insane) aspirations of maybe started my own kit company. The AVRO may be its first offering. The RAF FE8 and Albatros CIII may be the next. As for a completely original design, I have been toying with the concept for what amounts to an R/C "Truck". One that can be adapted for many of the other aspects of the hobby like towing, dropping stuff, aerial photography, etc.
Posted on: 6/22/2009 7:46 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8870811

RE: hog bipe build oops
You might try adding more of a bevel to the ailerons or, if just the ailerons are beveled, you can add a slight bevel to the wing as well. That should open things up for you to get more travel.
Posted on: 6/21/2009 11:08 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8870265

RE: I must be an adict?,.. or sick?
Addicted? Me? Not me. I'm not addicted. I can quit any time it want to. I just don't want to.[8D] My first kit was a control line Shoestring Racer. Build up fuselage and a balsa sheet wing. Heavy as all get out but it would go around pulled by that starwart .049 motor. My buddy had the "Miss World's Fair". (Forgot who made 'em.) Never looked back. Oh, I've had ARFs and won't knock 'em but I certainly get the thrill of building stuff them and mentally "flying" them before their complete.
Posted on: 6/21/2009 11:03 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8870226

RE: 1910 Hudson Flier Build Thread
Part 3 - Covering After all the sanding, all the edges were covered in Stix-It. I felt that this was most important because of the undercambered wing. The last thing I wanted was to go through all this trouble only to have the covering pop off from the underside of the ribs. For covering, I chose SolarTex natual (no pigment). I have used SolarTex before and love it (except for the price). It is easy to work with. I will be brush painting the covering to give it a slightly imperfect and faded look. Not too much weathering though. There is no indication that the plane existed more than a year or so. This was common back then. Planes ended up "recycled" and absorbed into the next project of the designer, assuming they weren't destroyed in a wreck. (Curtiss planes were very stable and strong. They had an excellent safety record, remarkable for those days.) Covering was pretty straight forward, maybe even easy. It helped that the wings are panels and therefore of manageable size. (The AVRO Triplane I want to do is another matter all together!) I first covered the underside. I tacked the leading edge first using low heat. I wanted the covering to stick, not shrink. Usually one would do the trailing edge next but not in this case. Instead I ran the iron slowly down the ribs, again with low heat to stick the covering, not shrink it. I started with the ribs in the interior of the wing and worked my way out to the edge. When the ribs were tacked, I then did the trailing edge. After putting in some cuts in the covering that ran past the side edge of the rib where it curved, it was an easy task to seal the covering to the edge of the panel using higher heat go get just a little bit of shrink. As a last step on the underside of the wing, I ran a very thin line of thin CA along where the covering touched the ribs. This should ensure that the covering never pops off. Without shrinking the underside, I covered the top side. This gave the CA and the covering adhesive a good chance to set. The top side was a breeze to cover since the surface is curved in only one dimension. I tacked down only the edges and not the ribs. When the panel was covered on both sides, I used the heat gun to shrink the top first and then the bottom. I am inclined to put just enough heat on the covering to take out the ripples, not shrink it as tight as a drum. No need to put that sort of stress on any structure, even if it is beefier than an eight foot wing that is just 1/4 inch thick! The five panels of the bottom wing are done with the seven panels of the top left to go. After that, the next step will be adding the rib stiching. See ya...
Posted on: 6/19/2009 10:41 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8864605

RE: Arizona Models
[quote]ORIGINAL: PROVOSTGUARD One big difference I notice is the forthright way to talk to each other. There is no way I could ever imagine a British website being this way. Not wrong but definatley different, and for us Brits a bit of a culture shock, Maybe not a bad thing, but one that takes a lot of getting used to. [/quote] Mr. Guard, I would not call the difference between your conversational habits and ours a matter of "forthrightness". It is a matter of civility. I have made several trips to the UK (England, Wales) on business and work with you fellows regularly via email and phone. (Including two trips to Shuttleworth in my own persuit of the AVRO Triplane.) I have always been impressed with the calmness and civility you continually exhibit, even when "the pressure is on". It has always been a joy to work with our kinsmen. I only wish we in the colonies had retained a bit more of the habits of our origins. Cheers
Posted on: 6/15/2009 6:52 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8852968

RE: Tips for shooting in-flight videos
Great subject. I'll underscore some things previously said, respectfully disagree with some others and add a few new ones. I agree, keep it short. Unless there is continuous new stuff, two minutes is about all you should go. Maybe even less. Lead into the take off but not dwell on activity in the pits. We really don't need to see all the trouble you had getting the engine running. Taxi is nice and here you can move with the plane for a nice "dolly shot" (without the dolly). Try getting low for a scale looking perspective. Watch the tight zoom. Too tight and there is too much shaking. Watch the zoom in and zoom out. Stay with the zoom setting for a while otherwise people get sea sick :) Get plenty of background or other objects in some shots. I helps with sense of scale and speed. For flybys, have a mix of wide shots and closeups but again, just a couple and you're all done. Otherwise it is boring. For landings, here is what I like to see and shoot. On base, be in tight. Once on final, slowly zoom out to a medium shot to bring in background and foreground. As the plane approaches touch down, stay with that zoom level if the plane is going to get very close and therefore big in the shot. Otherwise, zoom out just a little as the plane slows down and taxis. For editing, use cuts for related shots. Use fades, wipes and other transitions to indicate changes in time or location or point of view. Take it easy on all the fancy transitions. They can be distracting. Music is important but if possible retain the organic sound in the background. Personally, I think most music I've heard in R/C videos stinks. Leave the heavy metal, rap, etc. for the combat quick edit stuff. The music should match the pacing of the video. Here are a few of my videos... [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79jhpHzvzB4[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Mkf1fUTAk[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBqU_6IfJgM[/youtube]
Posted on: 6/14/2009 5:40 PM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8851521

RE: 1910 Hudson Flier Build Thread
Part 2 - More Wing Panels and Preping for Covering I have been able to spend a reasonable amount of time on the Hudson Flier and all of it on the wings. An eight foot wingspan is one thing on paper and quite another when you see it on the bench, especially when this model doesn't lend itself to convenient assembly and disassembly in the field like others with bolt on wings. Anyway, I was pleased with the assembly process. It all went together in a pretty straight forward way. I believe that I made the right choices with materials too. Spruce for the LE, TE and spars and basswood for the end ribs. The rest of the ribs are balsa. All the thicknesses feel appropriate too. Not a difficult procedure to build undercambered wings. The transition from rough wings to being ready for covering was tedious but not hard. The spar guide tabs in the ribs snapped off pretty cleanly, especially when care was used to apply the CA so that the bits above and below the spars were not glued to the spar. I first used the Dremel and sanding wheel to sand down the cross bracing rougly to the contour of the wing. I needed to use the cable extension for the Dremel to get further from the edge of the wing. Then I went over it all lightly with 100 grit sand paper on a padded holder to contour it closer to the final shape. I didn't use a sanding bar here because I wanted the curved shape of the padded holder. Next I went over the top with 150-200 grit paper with the sanding bar to get the final shape. The underside had to be done without the bar. So that's it for this installment. I'll coat the ribs and edges with Stix-It and then start the covering process using SolarTex natural.
Posted on: 6/14/2009 10:22 AM by Author "Chevelle" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8850738