RE: sig 4* 40
Make sure the rudder and tailwheel aren't fighting each other.
Posted on: 11/14/2007 2:45 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6624652

RE: Kit Building Forum Activity
This is a great thread. It does feel like we're seeing a resurgence in kit-building. As previous posters said, building and flying are seperate hobbies, but one often leads to the other. ARFs bring in more flyers, and more flyers means more potential builders. I don't have a problem with ARFs, especially trainers, if they bring more people out to the field.
Posted on: 11/12/2007 3:44 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6615160

RE: I need help
IMO, if you're just getting back in, I wouldn't worry too much about dual rates or expo on the planes you'll start out with. One thing I noticed after being out for many years is the increase in radically areobatic aircraft--stubby wings, monster engines, huge throws. No doubt expo and DR come in handy with planes like that. For a standard sport or scale plane, and certainly for a trainer, ordinary proportional controls work fine.
Posted on: 11/12/2007 3:23 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6615066

RE: Who has taught themself?
I taught myself the first time around, 20 years ago. The next two times I started back up I made sure I had an instructor.
Posted on: 11/11/2007 12:42 AM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6607968

RE: Is anyone interested in a GP Supersportster build?
Build threads are always welcome, especially when they have lots of pictures. I've built all the Super Sportsters at one time or another. I've always been a big fan, and I'd bet most people who've flown one are fans as well. I agree in part with the previous poster, but I think by far the biggest cause of problems with the Super Sportsters is the tendency to overpower them. My 40-sized SS flew beautifully on a bushed .40. I think a BB .46 is as much power as the plane will ever need. It's got a big, thick wing, and will have a stable, slow stall speed as long as you keep the plane down to a reasonable weight. I have seen a SS snap and spin into the ground, and the plane will never be as forgiving as CG Tiger or Sig 4*, but it shouldn't be a handful if built as designed.
Posted on: 11/8/2007 3:34 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6597631

RE: Why join a club
Who I fly with is more important than all the other factors combined. They don't all have to be good friends, but it's much more pleasant to fly at a field where everyone's considerate, helpful, and friendly.
Posted on: 11/8/2007 3:21 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6597584

RE: TF Elder 40
I'm not glassing the center, either. On the other hand I didn't like cutting into a perfectly good wing. I decided to line the cockpit with scrap balsa to reinforce the cockpit ridge. Looks better, too, and I can paint and seal it with thinned epoxy after the wing is covered. Top Flite calls the plane an areobatic sport model, so I expect to be able to do at least a few maneuvers without worrying about the wing folding up. But I agree it's going to be mostly a slow, lazy performer--exactly what I'm looking for. BTW, as you can see from the picture, the kingpost isn't yet glued to the wing. Although it's certainly not beyond my meager building skills to do something dumb like that.
Posted on: 11/4/2007 9:28 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6581462

RE: TF Elder 40
Great idea about the cowl--wish I'd thought of it. Guess I'll live with the sharp edge. I went with the tailwheel also. The skid looks cool, but I'm too lazy to chase after the plane every flight. Anyway, here's a few pictures of the completed airframe. I just realized I still have to cut out the cockpit, but other than that it's ready to cover. Not sure about a covering scheme yet, but I bought creme and blue 21st Century fabric for the job.
Posted on: 11/4/2007 12:19 AM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6577822

RE: Help, I can't seem to get my plane over the runway.
MinnFlyer's exactly right--landmarks. That's how full-scale VFR pilots do it. A final approach from 100 yards away looks as if the plane's headed directly for you, so there's a natural tendency to approach too far out. Turning final using landmarks will help cure that tendency. Of course you still have to hit your marks, not a sure thing while you're still learning, but if you miss you can at least prepare for a go-around.
Posted on: 11/2/2007 3:46 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6572101

RE: TF Elder 40
I'm not quite at the rigging stage, but I'll be sure to post pictures of my progress. I just completed the forward wing fairing and soldered up the MLG last night, so the frame is rolling and ready to cover. I was thinking about rigging the wires before covering and snapping a few photos, but that seems like an excessive amount of work so I think I'll just start covering this weekend.
Posted on: 11/1/2007 3:37 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6567868

RE: Need User's Advice on Sig Mini Plane Bipe
Such a great little plane, but yes, Sig doesn't go into a lot of detail on the build. Still, it's a very straightforward design with nothing to really trip you up. I put dural gear on mine to avoid problems I'd read about the wire gear, so I con't comment on how the wire gear works. The dural gear is great. Take-offs and landings are a walk in the park. Everything else I built per the plans, including the N-struts, which were quite a job. I like the 1/6" wire in the struts soldered to the mounting brackets, although I burned a little wing sheeting in the process. I'm not sure replacing the struts with plywood would look as nice. Your plane will scream with the O.S. 50SX. Mine came out only slightly tail heavy with a SuperTiger .45. An ounce of weight on the nose balanced it out. It flies beautifully, and doesn't balloon with throttle nearly as bad as I was told, certainly not as bad as most trainers. It rolls very realistically, and flies both fast and slow with ease.
Posted on: 11/1/2007 3:27 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6567834

RE: tank trouble
In the two Sky Raiders I've built, the nose of the tank wouldn't quite fit through the hole in the firewall, and I felt it should, so I increased the hole diameter slightly. I don't like the tank design much, either, but it seems to work okay.
Posted on: 11/1/2007 3:04 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6567729

RE: TF Elder 40
I'm just about ready to cover my Elder 40. Years ago I built an Elder 20, and wired the fuselage with black thread by epoxying 1/4" lengths of 1/16" brass tubing in the corners. The thread was barely visible. I've ordered some Proctor rigging cable this time.
Posted on: 10/31/2007 4:16 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6563708

RE: the crash!
I'd give electro-mechanical failure a higher percentage, esp. for intermediate or better flyers. My last two crashes I was distracted/interrupted by another flyer during my normal pre-flight routine. In the first crash I didn't tighten the wing bolts, in the second I didn't connect the alieron servo. In both cases I allowed myself to get rushed into the air by others, a mistake I won't make again soon.
Posted on: 10/31/2007 3:49 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6563599

RE: 2nd high wing
+1 on the Sky Raider. A very well-engineered plane, goes together in a few hours and you can't beat the price.
Posted on: 10/2/2007 4:01 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6440838

RE: SSE Mods - Opinions/Suggestions Wanted
I built mine pretty much stock and it flew great--very light, plenty of vertical on a .46. I added wing bolts but they were a pain to attach--no way to get a screwdriver into the fuselage so I had to tighten them with bent piano wire. The stock landing gear was more than strong enough for such a light plane.
Posted on: 10/2/2007 12:50 AM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6438678

RE: Fuel tank access
The pre-cut hatch sounds like a great idea. I'd think the covering would hold it place, as long as you iron the covering to the sheeting. If you like to iron covering only at the edges, maybe you could just tape the hatch on underneath the covering. I like fuel tank access, too, but I have to admit that in the several dozen planes I've owned over the years, I've only had to replace a tank twice. Naturally both were planes that had no fuel tank access.
Posted on: 9/27/2007 4:59 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6421538

RE: 2.4Ghz
I'm also a very satisfied 2.4GHz user. I'm no expert, but I figure if the guy standing next to me with a 2.4GHz transmitter can't interfere with me, no one can.
Posted on: 9/27/2007 4:39 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6421462

RE: Better Off-the-shelf Cleaner Than Windex?
I like alcohol, too, but I usually start with Windex (or any blue liquid I run across in the kitchen) to get most of the gunk, and then finish with alcohol. Paper towels might clean slightly better, but paper contains hard fibers that can leave tiny scratches on a painted or plastic surface. Cloth doesn't. Or so I've been told. I think the dangers of Windex are overrated. They've been backing off on the ammonia content for years, leaving in only enough to smell, and that doesn't take much. As a test, soak a square of Monokote in a cup of pure Windex. The glue won't even begin to get tacky, even if you leave it there overnight. OTOH, if you applied your Monokote-on-Monokote graphics with Windex and didn't seal the edges with something like Monokote solvent, then I could see where excess Windex might lift the graphics.
Posted on: 9/25/2007 11:26 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6414558

RE: New Builder /Input on Kit and buying framing materials
I've always bought stock for scratch builds on an as-needed basis. That way you can never be sure how much you've spent on the thing. You want a hobby shop with a big selection of balsa, so you can get a proper weight for each application.
Posted on: 9/25/2007 3:44 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6412661

RE: I recommend the Great Planes RV-4
I'm such a sucker for these recommendations. I'm ordering one now.
Posted on: 9/25/2007 3:33 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6412622

RE: Elder 40 landing gear
I'm building an Elder 40 now. I've heard it can be hard to get the tail up on take-off with the mains so far forward. I built an Elder 20 many years ago and don't remember that problem, but I do remember the very slow landings.
Posted on: 9/23/2007 8:52 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6405346

RE: Finding your place in the hobby
I like building planes. Seeing them fly is just a bonus. I did free-flight and control line when I was younger, moved up to RC when the radios got better and I could afford them. But my place in the hobby has always been the building. I've built from kits, from plans, and my own designs. Watching a plane fly that you drew up and built yourself is probably the most fun. Scale builds are a close second, whether from a kit or plans.
Posted on: 9/13/2007 1:02 AM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6361494

RE: Which one is less forgiving?
If I'm not mistaken, both the Fourstar 40 and the Tiger were introduced when engines came in .40 and .60 and not much in between. No doubt thousands of these planes were flown for years on bushed .40-sized two-strokes. My own Tiger II flew just fine with an old O.S. .40. That said, the modest power of the .40 does require the pilot to pay more attention to things like flying speed, angle of attack, and control response. For those reasons I think you're getting a great education with the Cessna--it's making you a better pilot--although I wouldn't wish all those repairs on anyone.
Posted on: 9/12/2007 9:42 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6360733

RE: SIG SE Build - Poor Wing Fit
I wouldn't cut the aluminum tube. Faced with the same situation, I'd cut a root rib from 1/4" balsa and sand it into a wedge shape. The wing is more than likely straight. I'd think it's only the root rib that's off kilter.
Posted on: 9/10/2007 6:16 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6351261

RE: Sig Giant Four-Star 120
I agree with your instructor. My Fourstar .60 is a very docile plane--the 1.20 should only be better. I can't advise you on the Magnum 1.20--it would be more than enough for me.
Posted on: 9/10/2007 6:02 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6351190

RE: Wheel pants or no wheel pants?
It's a personal preference thing, but I see wheeelpants as one more thing to break. On my planes they're good for maybe half a dozen flights, and if I'm lucky they depart the aircraft without taking parts of the airframe with them. They do look good, though.
Posted on: 8/17/2007 9:01 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6252062

RE: got the fuse scemed up
Classic. Simplest designs are often the best.
Posted on: 8/17/2007 8:49 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6252010

RE: Sig four star 60 question - kit parts wrong?
Sorry about the crashes, but those photos are just excellent--a textbook on stress areas in the fuselage. Thanks very much for taking the time to document the crash. This is the biggest plane I've built in awhile. When I opened the box I took one look at the supplied landing gear and put it on a shelf. I found something at my LHS that's much more heavy duty. I'm a little concerned about the tailwheel though, most of the stress seems to be trasmitted through the rudder hinges. Other than that I thought the kit looked pretty strong, but I'm definitely going to beef up the fuse now. Looking forward to getting this thing in the air.
Posted on: 8/13/2007 11:45 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6235429

RE: Sig four star 60 question - kit parts wrong?
I'm building this kit now. That's a shocker on the rear webs--mine were the correct length, a kit ordered just last week from Tower. Maybe Sig is thinking about adding a rear dihedral brace. In any case, adding your own webs will work. I've also built a lot of Sig kits, and other than missing cabanes in a Smith Miniplane, never had a problem. I'm trying to make sense of exactly where the 4* fuselage needs reinforcement. My fuse is built but not covered, so now's the time. Just add doublers to the sides at the stab LE?
Posted on: 8/13/2007 3:42 PM by Author "nickj" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6233149