RE: Sig Ryan STA
I got the same kit, same condition, and for the same reasons [;)] However, and probably most will disagree with me (even though my approach has proved successfull many times), when I build such a kit I try to remain faithful to the original e.g. use same or similar type of power (a DLE 20 is way overpower and out of character of this model) and I usually even use bellcranks where they were used on the original model. Keep in mind most real full size light aircraft use bellcranks so why can't a model use them successfully? of course they need to be installed and connected properly, and there are ways to do that. Good luck and please do post a build thread with lots of photos!
Posted on: 8/28/2012 11:56 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11209232

RE: First Advanced kit build, recommendations on tool purchases recommended
Hello Neddy, Allow me please to offer a different view. IMO you do not really need power tools for this kit, and some tasks may be more difficult to perform accurately with a power tool than with hand tools. You really only need a good MITER SANDER and a good RAZOR SAW. Also some flat and half-round files and a simple saw (like kids use for cutting out bits of wood). The balsa although thick, is quite soft and easy to cut. Most parts have straight lines anyway (easier with a razor saw) and the tail parts can be cut with a hand saw and filed easily to shape. The miter saw is essential for perfect spar fits. I fail to see how a power sander can give you perfect fitting spar ends. Just my 2 cents (based on my own experience with this and other models).
Posted on: 8/21/2012 8:30 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200871

RE: Sig Smith Miniplane build
I use a 12-6 APC on an OS 46 FX. Plenty of power (almost unlimited vertical) but can be flown very slowly too in a nice scale manner. Also allows good slowing down on the approach.
Posted on: 8/11/2012 10:30 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11190011

RE: Dave Platt T-28B Trojan 1/7 Scale 65-inch
[quote]ORIGINAL: ChinookRC Here's a <a href=''http://youtu.be/ttuohZUsJ5U'' target=''_blank''>vid from YouTube.. looks like the same size. [/quote] The ESM ARF version is ~80" span I think, like my Pica kit. It looks very good if you're into ARFs, however the video demonstrates (yet again) why I dislike retracts...[8|]
Posted on: 7/28/2012 10:08 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11172917

RE: Dave Platt T-28B Trojan 1/7 Scale 65-inch
Looking at the canopy in your pics, it is obvious to me now that the canopy in the 65" span kit is very different than the one in my 79" span kit. My canopy did not extend downwards as does yours. Actuall I trimmed it right at the point where the horizontal flnage all around begins. The balsa sides are exactly as on the plan, no mods done here by me. BTW, my kit came with a plastic underbelly pan, supposed to fit under the wing center, and that was more than 2 (two) inches too short (so I made it out of balsa). But even though the 79" span kit has quite a few 'shortcommings' I'm past them now and on the way to soon start the finishng process on the fuselage.
Posted on: 7/22/2012 2:51 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11164219

RE: Dave Platt T-28B Trojan 1/7 Scale 65-inch
Here are some pics of the canopy and cockpit area as you requested. The canopy was not made removable since I’m not going to use electric power for this model. The whole canopy issue was rather frustrating. First, as already mentioned in this thread, it is not quite the correct scale size or shape. I did not want to invest in after-market replacements, so I did the best I could with it. Maybe after some paint it'll look better but still it seems not tall enough and not as "bubbly" as some photos of the real one show. Second, the supplied canopy was too short (by more than 1/2" ) in comparison with the canopy shown on the plans, so I had to add some material to the block just aft of the canopy to compensate, and then carved and sanded it all to more or less blend together. If you can source a better canopy, I'd give it serious consideration. The canopy installation was done per the plans and carefully sanded and blended with the fuselage sheeting. Be very careful if you make your canopy removable since it means the cockpit floor will now not be fixed to the structure, leaving you with a rather large ‘hole’ that may weaken the whole fuselage, unless other changes are made to compensate for it. Possibly, a ply frame all around the opening may help but watch the weight. I’ve seen quite a few ARFs that have such a large opening in the middle of the fuselage, and was quite amazed in some cases to see how they fall apart after what I considered to be no more than rather heavy landings that should not have caused damage to a properly built model (or maybe it was the lack of glue?)
Posted on: 7/20/2012 7:27 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11162359

RE: Sig Smith Miniplane build
I twisted both the torque rods backwards a little in order to have differential ailerons with my single servo setup. It doesn't need much (or maybe any at all?) as it has a rather low aspect ratio wing(s), but a little diff never hurts. BTW the main reason I moved the servo back was since I thought it could free some space above in the fuselage (later found not really necessary). I would not be too concerned about the wing's strength since the upper wing and N struts do 'close' the structure to a very strong 'box', plus it is a rather small model to begin with.
Posted on: 7/14/2012 5:25 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11154710

RE: Sig Smith Miniplane build
[quote]ORIGINAL: senrak ...Dorona. You never cut into a wing spar. [/quote] Actually the plan shows you do in this case, in the center section. For that reason I assume they provided spar doublers, and the whole center section is sheeted. If you have the plans for this model, check the cross section that shows the aileron servo installation. On my model I moved the aileron servo aft a little in order to avoid it, but that is just a personal preference. The plan shows otherwise.
Posted on: 7/14/2012 5:04 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11154694

RE: Sig Smith Miniplane build
Hi Doron, In order to upload pictures you need to 'Reply' to a particular message. You will then see at the bottom an option to upload files/pics. Re your question on the aileron servos - why not use what is shown on the plan i.e. a central servo driving the ailerons via torque rods? IMO it's the lightest and cleanest installation and after ~8 years flying with mine, I cannot fault this setup.
Posted on: 7/14/2012 12:28 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11154624

RE: Dave Platt T-28B Trojan 1/7 Scale 65-inch
Here are a few pics. The wing is finished and ready for flight, the fuselage still needs some work. Right now I’m engineering the various engine cooling air exit ducts (at scale positions) none of which are shown on the plan or in the manual. Then I’ll make a dummy engine and it’s on to finishing and preparation for flight. The finish is Silkspan, sanding sealer, hand brushed polyurethane paint, and satin clear. Kit decals used everywhere. I wish I could spray the finish but have no suitable place or equipment for doing it. BTW I made the L.E.Xs from a 1/32� ply base and then 1/4� and 1/8� soft sheets on top and bottom, for a light and easily shaped structure. I know there are other techniques but I usually seem to get better results with basic wood construction. The gear is fixed. At ~12 Lb. this 79� span model needs proper (i.e. mega-$$$) retracts that after shipping and Customs in my corner of the world simply bring them beyond my budget. But, since I hate bare wire gear, I did attempt to cover them a bit and install all the doors around them. It’s a nice traditional kit, not the most accurate to scale you can find, but I enjoy building it very much and see no reason it should not fly well.
Posted on: 7/9/2012 8:31 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11148664

RE: Dave Platt T-28B Trojan 1/7 Scale 65-inch
I'm at the final stages of building the 1/5 79" span version of this model. I too noticed the deviations from scale you mention, but after some thought decided not to worry too much. After all it is a 'sport-scale' model and provided the color scheme is correct and some of the more important features are included, it will look like a T-28 and that's the whole point in sport-scale. I did not shorten the fuselage or do much about the canopy for example, but certainly I did build the wing L.E. root extensions that are so typical of this aircraft (yet no hint of them is shown on the plan or in the manual). BTW, mine is painted yellow, for good visibility, but then I discovered there's an ARF of nearly the same size and color scheme and so now everyone will think I did not actually build it myself [&o]
Posted on: 7/6/2012 8:22 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11145267

RE: Manufacturer of 1980's Cessna 150 kit?
Pilot made a kit for the 150. I beleive it was around 54-56" span. Being made mostly of ply, they were very heavy. I doubt a .20 would realy fly it, more likely a .40. A friend built one (I still have a spare cowl he bought for it), it looked good, but didn't fly well at all, but if it were lightened significantly with a Dremel and some ply parts replaced with balsa it would probably fly OK. BTW I did just that to their 48" span P-51 and it flew very well with an OS four stroke 40 (non-Surpass), but I did reduce its weight very much.
Posted on: 4/9/2012 1:17 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11034068

RE: Cutting own parts vs. Laser cut parts
Having tried all options, I today definitely prefer cutting my own parts. Have seen too many Laser cut parts that did not quite match due to errors on the plans. Also, cutting your own allows selecting the wood density for the purpose, and save$ money. My Ziroli B-25 was 100% cut by myself, using a cheap saw. The notches for the stringers were cut by a little invention of mine [8D]: Simply clamp a razor saw blade to another complete razor saw at the correct distance, and in one action you get two cuts very parallel and very accurate. Was amazing how quickly I got it all done.
Posted on: 3/14/2012 11:27 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10999922

RE: Hangar 9 40 Size Piper Pawnee!!!
Very very nice BH! Is it a complete re-cover or did you peel off all that wasn't white and add your own trim? (I'm not too familiar with the model and have no idea if/what can be peeled off and what is an actual covering).
Posted on: 3/7/2012 8:44 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10989992

RE: Need help with some Cub details please
Yes, for bonding the Skyloft, but once bonded you apply to the whole area for sealing it.
Posted on: 2/17/2012 11:33 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10964145

RE: Need help with some Cub details please
You wet it before application, let it expand a few minutes and only then apply it. When it dries it shrinks back to its original size. It is all detailed on the instruction sheet.
Posted on: 2/16/2012 7:25 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10961502

RE: PHOENIX MODELS STINSON VOYAGER 46?
Thanks! so I understand a .40 two stroke would probably be more suitable. Please keep me informed if you are successful with a 40 FS. How did you find the quality of the kit?
Posted on: 12/25/2011 7:50 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10875490

RE: PHOENIX MODELS STINSON VOYAGER 46?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Kostas1 Who sells it; [/quote] LHS, mail order, etc. I'm surprised, no one has heard of this model?
Posted on: 12/24/2011 12:18 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10874021

PHOENIX MODELS STINSON VOYAGER 46?
Looking for some inputs from anyone who has put one together and flown it. Would a 70 FS suit it?
Posted on: 12/22/2011 6:36 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10871286

A little Hawker Swiss Hind
I wanted to “get back to basics� and build a model of the type that got me into this great hobby in the first place, so I scratch-built this one from Gordon Whitehead’s excellent sport scale plan (obtained from RCM’s plans service). It spans 47�, powered by an OS .20 FP, and although not quite finished it is very close to test flight readiness. Thanks to modern light R/C equipment, I managed to keep the AUW to less than Gordon’s 64 oz prototype, mine being ready for fuel at under 50 oz. I kept construction exactly per plan apart from changing to bolt-on wings in place of the original’s rubber bands, and used separate “baby servos� for the ailerons in place of a standard servo and bellcranks (this gave a more compact and lighter set up). Covering is Silkspan and sanding sealer, brushed polyurethane paint (the insignia too) and chrome Solarfilm on the nose. Aluminum foil was used on the wheels and gear struts. The color scheme is a 1935 Swiss Government one that I chose for its simplicity and since it is a little different from the more common RAF schemes. Test flights will probably have to wait for Spring weather… Not quite as big and high powered as many of today’s models, I nevertheless enjoyed building it very much. No special materials or cowl or plastic/glass parts were required, just some bits of wood, wire, and simple hand tools. Actually, that’s the exact concept that attracted me in the first place quite a few years ago…
Posted on: 11/15/2011 7:25 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10813056

RE: Old Cub
The Bob Nelitz Cub is built that way. It is exactly 1/3 scale and as far as I know was not kitted. Plans still available from M.A.N.
Posted on: 10/19/2011 9:26 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10773076

CAP 21 – from an old Model Tech kit
I’ve had some great first flights today with this simple model. It’s a pleasure to fly. Very smooth and stable. OS 45 FSR, 2390 gr. AUW. Here are the mods that I made, some of which probably contributed to the relatively low weight: I used Kevlar pull-pull for the large rudder in place of a heavy single pushrod. The tail-wheel assembly provided is nice, but more suitable for use on a 1/5-1/4 scale Cub from the weight and design aspects, so it will be used for that in future, while for the CAP I installed a simple 40-size t/w assembly instead. This saved a ‘ton’ of weight at the back end. For the wing attachment, some strange and questionable H/W was provided. I changed that into a laminated ply plate across the fuselage above the T.E. position, drilled and tapped for ¼-20 nylon bolts. That always works well. The kit provided canopy was not very clear, heavy, and rather ugly. Here is where I was happy the LHS carries so many ARFs – for they also carry many replacement cowls and canopies too, so I easily found a cheap alternative canopy that could be made to work reasonably well. The engine per the instructions should be installed inverted or side mounted. I don’t particularly like inverted two strokes, and didn’t have a Pitts muffler for the other option, so opted for the funny angle you see in the pics. It is almost upright, allows use of the standard muffler, and actually the muffler is more or less in the position of the ‘scale’ cheek cowl, so the model’s silhouette should be acceptable I think. The kit also includes wheel pants. They are very heavy so they were left off. I may add lighter ones in future. The foam wheels I used are not the prettiest wheels I could find but weigh next to nothing, and on a sport model of this size I think they do the job. Finally – the l/g is shown attached to its mounting blocks with tiny self-tapping screws. That may be OK for attaching a small plastic fairing etc. but it’s not the way to attach an u/c to a model IMO, so I installed heli-coils into the hardwood blocks and then bolted the gears on with proper 6-32 Allen bolts (4 for each leg). I set up the controls with ~40% exponential on the ailerons and elevators, and about half of the rudder throw shown in the instructions. This adds to the control smoothness I believe. I also set up the strip ailerons to have a significant differential, and such that the dual rate selection affects only the amount of “up� travel of the ailerons and not the “down� travel. It really does fly as if “on rails� and far better than what I expected. In summary, a very nice and simple model that was quick and fun to put together, and is a lot of fun to fly. If you can still find one, I recommend it, but do keep it light and avoid any temptation to over-power it and “beef it up�.
Posted on: 10/13/2011 10:11 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10763324

RE: Fleet Finch
[quote]ORIGINAL: smithcreek Looks great! How did you copy the cylinder? [/quote] Thanks! I carefully "reverse engineered" the exterior of the real engine and then produced cardboard templates of the various cooling fins. Next I made the dummies from balsa, ply, and dowel. Fuel proofed and painted, and used some aluminum tape on the "rods".
Posted on: 7/8/2011 11:53 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10612937

Fleet Finch
I flew my new sport-scale Fleet Finch for the first time today. Scratch-built from a plan I got from Traplet. Spans 67", weighs 7.7 Lb less fuel, powered by a Magnum .91 RFS. Dummy engine was made by copying the real engine's cylinder, since adding plastic dummy cyls just didn't give the right effect I was looking for. It's a dream to fly...
Posted on: 7/8/2011 7:54 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10611704

RE: Sig 1/6 Cub Build
I don't see any provision in your wing for the jury struts - I hope you are not ommiting them, as they add a lot to the efficiency of the main struts. Without them, the flexible wing has less structural support. Under load, the main struts will be able to bend towards the wing (under postive load) or away from the wing (under negative load) and so will do little to support the wings.
Posted on: 5/6/2011 3:49 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10504463

RE: BERKELEY NAVION SUPER 260 PLAN
Thanks, the problem is that the rib shown is somewhere in the middle of the span and there is no tip rib shown. The fuselage side view can give the root rib but the tip is missing. Still if there's no other way I can plot my own 12 or 15% slightly undercambered rib and work from there. I noticed the mods necessary, e.g. the H tail is set with quite some negative incidence that I believe should reduce to zero, however I plan to make the least changes possible since I find some satisfaction in actually trying to use the same materials and design as much as possible when building from such vintage plans. I think the cowl and canopy intended for the RCM Navion should fit, as the models both span nearly the same.
Posted on: 1/8/2011 9:22 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10248045

RE: BERKELEY NAVION SUPER 260 PLAN
I saw the plan on the other forum and yes, the bulkheads can be prepared from the cross sections on the plan however, as for the wing ribs I'm not too sure. I thought about scaling up/down the one rib shown but as far as I know the outer ribs have an undercamber (scale), so therefore I was hoping to actually find the correct shapes of each specific rib.
Posted on: 1/8/2011 8:37 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10247953

BERKELEY NAVION SUPER 260 PLAN
I have the plan for this model but no patterns for the parts. Can anyone help?
Posted on: 1/7/2011 11:48 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10247431

RE: BH T-28 Assembly
[quote]ORIGINAL: maukaonyx ...but mine would not stay on without breaking the covering due to the vibration during ground handling. I've yet to figure a way to attach them to just the LG/Robart covers, so that they are not connected at all to the wing. ...[/quote] Concerning the gear doors' attachment I may be able to suggest an idea though I have not yet proven it in flight (the model is not yet finished) however, it does involve two doors and NO attachment to the wing itself. I have done this on my T-28 (I'm building it from a very old Pica 79" span wood kit). I hope the pics will clarify my explanation as well. I made two doors for each leg from thin ply, and glassed both sides. I then attached each door to the strut covers, with two screws only. The central screw is common to the top of the bottom door and bottom of the top door. This way there is flexibility – a door can rotate relative to the wing surface, if the leg bends fore or aft. Note also the top of the top door has the edge cut at angles – to allow very good clearance to the wing surface, when the leg bends backwards, and also if I need to bend it forwards in order to straighten it (e.g. after a "heavy arrival"…). I'm sorry it's not the exact same model but it still is a T-28! and the principle may be the same? Just an idea.
Posted on: 10/16/2010 10:22 AM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10072156

RE: BH T-28 Assembly
Thinking of getting this one and bashing it a little...so wanted to ask a few questions please: - Are the hinges already glued in place? asking in order to see how easy it would be to remove some of the covering and re-cover with a different color (rudder and vertical tail for example) - Also, is the whole plane covered in white with the other colors stuck on to it, or is it a printed covering? (again - trying to undestand if I remove some color areas, is it a simple peeling job or will I have uncovered areas now.) Thanks! this is one great informative thread with some really nice work!
Posted on: 10/9/2010 1:28 PM by Author "EF" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10057785