RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best! Everything is now sugar coated... Bob
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:13 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516370

RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:10 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11515391

RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:10 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11514813

RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:09 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513460

RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:08 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513343

RE: Correcting incidence
Zor is the best!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 11:08 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513012

RE: Tip Stall
[quote]ORIGINAL: Hossfly [quote]ORIGINAL: essyou35 ?? G force doesn't make you maintain level flight. As for the rest of your post no idea what you are saying. [/quote] Nothing ''makes'' one maintain level flight. OTOH, should one (pilot) decide to maintain level flight then that someone has to follow the laws of nature such as [b]lift equal to weight.[/b] To produce lift in subsonic convergence airflow, one has to provide the airflow with needed pressure variations to attain the needed forces. Given a wing in a 60° bank relative to earth, at I G loading will be 1 G short of the required aerodynamic force required to maintain level flight. Should you not understand these basic lift/drag/etc. aerodynamic truths, I certainly agree that you would have absolutely NO IDEA of what I was/am saying. [/quote] This is why I preach so much about the greatness of light weight airframes, the lower the wing loading is, the less one must worry about those nasty tip stalls, on the stuff I build and fly for the most part there is no tip stall characteristics to think about at all; so I am left to just play and have fun, but many times when ever I fly somebody else’s airplane especially warbirds; I must manage my available energy throughout the flight envelope to keep things on the ball. For this very reason I believe warbird pilots are better pilots than most 3D pilots, warbird guys deal with these issues due to higher wing loadings all the time, and the ones that don't manage the energy very well... Crash and burn. Bob
Posted on: 5/20/2013 4:10 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516853

RE: Correcting incidence
[quote]ORIGINAL: EJWash1 I came into this thread because the subject title interested me. I am always ready to learn something more about model building, and R/C Universe and a couple of other model building sites are a wealth of information and full of talented and experienced modelers sharing their skills. I was following this thread in particular because I am in the midst of building a classic Dave Platt Waco 1/6-scale YMF-3 biplane. The rights to this particular kit was sold to Pica, which subsequently became a part of Cox. Pica/Cox enlarged this very model to a 1/5-scale version, which is very popular in the building community.   In reading through build threads on the Pica/Cox YMF, many builders put a lot of emphasis on the horizontal stab incidence setting. My kit's plan sheets did not depict any stab incidence nor did the instruction manual mention it. A fellow modeler and forum member sent me a copy of the 1/5-scale plans, and low and behold, +2.0 degrees of positive stab incidence is depicted on the plan sheet. So, +2.0 became the target for my model. My fuselage was built, and I was at the stage where I could measure the incidence of the platform that the horizontal stab is mounted on. I build on a magnetic building board system and it was very easy to secure the fuselage solidly in place. I added a 5-pound shot bag to the top of the fuselage to make it as solid as possible.   Using my Hanger 9 Angle Pro inclinometer, I measured +0.7 degrees of positive incidence. Now I needed to increase that +1.3 degrees to +2.0. I back-burnered this task for the last two weeks because I find that if I chew on something too much I end-up with tunnel vision that is as tight as looking through a swizzle stick. Last week I came across this thread and got excited that the subject may yield some ideas and methods and would hopefully spark-off some ideas on how I should handle my situation. This thread came through for me, and I appreciate the input from the experienced modelers that genuinely try to help others. Thank you.   So, here's my Waco needing that extra stab incidence. How do I get from A to B, B being the mounting of the stab with the needed +1.3 degrees to bring it to +2.0? Obviously raising the leading edge of the stab was going to create a triangular-shaped void between the top of the mounting surface and the bottom of the stab. I needed a balsa wedge. Okay. What dimensions? I positioned the stab on it's mount and placed the incidence meter on top of the stab. I increased the stab incidence to +2.0 and pinned the stab in place. I inserted two T-pins under the stab to establish a reference line. I removed the stab and the T-pins and drew a line between the two holes. Now I had the measurement of one of the sides of the wedge I needed to make. The second line of the triangle was easy - the chord of the bottom of the stab. The third line, the hypotenuse, would take care of itself. Having the dimensions of the trianglular-shaped wedge is obviously required, but it is asinine to think that is all that is required. I still need the wedge, right? The stab still needs to be mounted, right? The ultimate goal is to get this model into the air, right? Dwelling on being able to calculate the angle needed to establish X-degrees of incidence, or staring at a picture of such does not complete this task, right?   Beyond tools like X-Acto knives, block/razor planes, etc., there are many peripheral aids needed to build a model. One thing I enjoy is making jigs and doodads to accomplish a task or make a part, so I made a jig to shape the wedge for the horizontal stab mount (see pics). The wedge was dry-fitted on the stab mount and I placed the incidence meter on top of the wedge. I measured +2.1 degrees of positive incidence. The wedge was bonded to the stab mount using West System epoxy, clamped into place, and left overnight to cure. This morning I unclamped the set-up and measured +2.0 degrees of positive incidence. Job done.   Of course, the above worked in my case. I'm not sure if what I've presented is of any value to anyone, but there it is. If anything, understand that keeping things simple is the best, and a more pleasurable approach than constantly reinventing the wheel. Enjoy. [/quote] Looks like you are doing a fantastic job on your build, very nice indeed! Bob
Posted on: 5/20/2013 3:39 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516831

RE: a lesson to all
I think mistakes will continue to happen because we don't live in a perfect world. All anyone can do is learn from their mistakes so they may apply that experience later down the road. The best reasons I can personally give for the use of 2.4 is I have lost 2 airplanes due to a transmitter being turned on in the pits on my frequency while I was flying, the last one was one of my 3.3 Comp Arf Yaks and that one stung just a little. I was also witness to a transmitter that was left turned on in the impound at the IMAA event in WACO TX. in 2007 that I was attending. This accident caused a crash right after takeoff of that unfortunate pilots airplane. So for at least me, 2.4 is a cheap insurance policy and I would not even consider flying any of my birds with on 72 or 75 anymore. Bob
Posted on: 5/17/2013 4:32 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11514001

RE: Why do people keep calling it TURBIN as in trashbin instead of BINE?
[quote]ORIGINAL: DiscoWings [b]Turbin[/b]: [image]http://www.women-cloth.net/pic/12/maharaji-sultan-sheik-turban-headdress-bollywood-hat-costume-accessory-gold-bead.jpg[/image] [b]Turbine[/b]: [image]http://www.kingtechturbines.com/store/images/K180G_front.jpg[/image] [&:] [/quote] Who gives a rats a#$. Go to your room! Bob
Posted on: 5/17/2013 3:55 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513989

RE: Correcting incidence
+3 Bob
Posted on: 5/17/2013 3:49 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513984

RE: a lesson to all
Mistakes do happen and it doesn't matter what you are flying with, 72 or 2.4. One day around 12 years ago I was flying my plane when one of the very contentious and long time flyers at our field fired up his .25 powered Sig Little Wonder and called launching on the flight line, sounds normal right; he had pulled out the antenna but for whatever reason forgot to turn on the transmitter and check his surfaces prior to the launch... The airplane took about 2 seconds to get above 100 mph in a rather tight loop and crashed about 36" in front of me. People make mistakes and it doesn't matter why, it just happens. I have been flying 2.4 since 2007 for a couple of reasons. 1. I don't have to impound my transmitter at flying events anymore. 2. I have no use for the frequency pins or worries of somebody turning on their stuff on my frequency while I am in the air anymore. 3. I fly gas and ignition issues are a thing of the past for the most part. 4. Pulling out the antenna is just one more thing I don't need to think about anymore. 2.4 IMO is just a better way to go these days. Bob
Posted on: 5/16/2013 4:31 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11512972

RE: Sig Mustang 450 build
[quote]ORIGINAL: McLeodAviation [/quote] Would you be interested in selling that kit? Bob [/quote] Sorry but I really look forward to building my kit. I will keep an eye open for another one. [/quote] Thanks, I have been looking several years for one. Bob
Posted on: 10/25/2011 4:14 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10781386

RE: Sig Mustang 450 build
[quote]ORIGINAL: McLeodAviation I just found and subscribed to your build thread. It will be interesting to see how this kit goes together. I have the same kit which I look forward to building someday. [/quote] Would you be interested in selling that kit? Bob
Posted on: 10/24/2011 4:59 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10779802

RE: Best Overall Robart Hinge Point Glue
I have also never worn one out, but I have had to recover two and three year old airplanes with upwards of 3000 flights and it was time to go through the airframe. So there is only one way I know of to remove the hinges and I already stated what that was. I never just throw away my giant scale airplanes. Bob
Posted on: 10/11/2011 7:43 PM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10760775

RE: Best Overall Robart Hinge Point Glue
[quote]ORIGINAL: LargeScale88 I just recently did some testing for the different glues. Glues:  1. Sig Weld: I poured some sig weld into the hinge hole, and coated the hinge. Let is dry for awhile. It came out, but still took great force. 2. Elmers wood glue: Same result as Sig Weld 3. RC 56 canopy glue: Held much better than numbers 1 and 2! Took pliers to get the darn hinge out! 4. 5 Minute Loctite Epoxy: I still haven't got the hinge out yet..... I think its epoxy or gorilla glue for me, just to be safe. Except..... [b]What happens when the hinge is worn and needs to be replaced?? Jason[/b] [/quote] Cut the hinges with a razor saw, then you get yourself a piece of 3/16" ID tubing and sharpen one end, place the dull end in a drill motor, then position the sharp end over the hinge and slice your way through and remove the hinge. Next take 1/4"x1/4" balsa and cut into 1.5" strips, place them in a bowl of water for about 15 minutes. Now you place a little GG in the holes and shove those wet sticks in place. Allow to dry overnight, long block sand and your ready to go again. It's that simple, I have done it many times. Bob
Posted on: 10/11/2011 4:30 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10759383

RE: Best Overall Robart Hinge Point Glue
I have been using GG to install Robart's for years now, it works great and I have not experienced a single hinge failure to date. Bob
Posted on: 10/10/2011 8:46 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10757943

RE: CA: Thin then Thick or Thick then Thin?
when I am building a balsa stick fuse on a board, then I use thin CA and glue the entire side together. After I remove the fuse sides from the building board and spline sand both sides of the each fuse half; I always go back and use a single drop of medium CA in every corner of the verticals and diagnals. I generally don't design my fuse structures with sheeting because there is just too much weight in sheeting and glue, and its just not needed. On my motor boxes I always use 3/32" bass plywood with balsa medium density tri stock in all corners, I first thin CA glue all the plywood components together, then I use medium CA and glue in all the tri stock followed by sweating in thin CA at every corner until it does not take anymore without pooling. This works very good on giant models, I would think it would work just as well on the smaller stuff. Bob
Posted on: 10/10/2011 4:48 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10757565

RE: Your average / longest build
3 to 6 months average on 40%-55% scratch builds, and 18 to 24 months on 70% scratch built - full scale builds. Bob
Posted on: 10/4/2011 6:49 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10747851

RE: Giles 202 (again)
I built 3 of them years ago. Here is a picture of the last one I built, if you are interested, PM me your phone number and I will talk you through it. Bob
Posted on: 10/4/2011 5:14 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10747734

RE: Pre paint cleaning.
[quote]ORIGINAL: TCraft Lover Yeah, sometimes the pure facts are difficult to cull but generally [b]BS is pretty easy to read.[/b] [/quote] From my vantage point, it doesn't appear to be so far... Bob
Posted on: 10/2/2011 6:26 PM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10745555

RE: Pre paint cleaning.
Go to any quality body and paint shop and ask the professionals what they would recommend to clean a surface with just prior to paint, they will tell you (Pre-Kleano). So why screw around. Never start vast projects with half vast ideas... Just saying. Bob
Posted on: 10/2/2011 6:22 PM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10744824

RE: Pre paint cleaning.
[quote]ORIGINAL: TCraft Lover If projects were never started because of an uncertain outcome  we'd still be riding horses. [/quote] These are not the times of the horse and buggy my friend. LOL. There is plenty of very good and sound information available before starting projects. All you need to do is your home work and weed out the BS from pure facts that are both available in these threads, take the time to check out credentials of folks posting information before following someones advice and making a mess out of your own project. Bob
Posted on: 10/2/2011 11:09 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10745027

RE: Pre paint cleaning.
Always clean the surface with Pre-Kleano, then tack and spray, it's that simple... Bob
Posted on: 9/30/2011 4:54 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10741696

RE: How Reliable are Ball Links?
[quote]ORIGINAL: smithcreek [quote]ORIGINAL: sensei Slop in any type control sysytem is the # 1 cause of flutter, damaged servos, and the all around lack of precision control of your model. Ball links are the best at keeping slop to a minumum, in fact, giant scale guys use ball link systems almost exclusively for this very reason. Bob [/quote] What about the specific kind he linked to? My only
Posted on: 9/28/2011 4:21 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10738030

RE: How Reliable are Ball Links?
Slop in any type control sysytem is the # 1 cause of flutter, damaged servos, and the all around lack of precision control of your model. Ball links are the best at keeping slop to a minumum, in fact, giant scale guys use ball link systems almost exclusively for this very reason. Bob
Posted on: 9/27/2011 11:14 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10736726

RE: Craziest thing you have done in this hobby
A couple of years ago a buddy had a well worn out U-can-do .60 slated for the trash can, so we decided to place two receivers in it on different channels. We then placed rudder and aileron on one receiver and elevator and throttle on the other. When we took off, I had control of roll and yaw with my transmitter, and he had control of pitch and throttle with his. After a few minutes arguing while flying we were able to torque roll, high alpha roll and a slew of other 3D garbage. After several flights, we decided we would put this worn out airplane to rest, so we fueled up for it's final voyage and with cameras rolling, we lined up on center stage of the runway and knife edged into the ground at full power, the whole thing turned into bunch of splinters and everyone got great video at the field that day and had a great laugh too. Bob
Posted on: 9/21/2011 5:04 PM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10728013

RE: RotoFlow clunkless fuel tank
[quote]ORIGINAL: ivyspoppy THe guy that invented it is in my club, and he has been flying the for several years and no problems. I see him at the flying field for 2 years and the work w gas glow and smoke w no problems. [/quote] We know how much they cost, how much do they weigh? Bob
Posted on: 9/13/2011 8:09 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10714432

RE: Fabric covering options?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Azcat59 This'll date me, but you guys might like to consider old-fashioned silk and dope! Once on, it never comes loose, and can't get much more authentic on a full scale look-a-like. Takes a lot of painting though to fill the weave, and it can be punctured if you drop something like a screwdriver onto it. You can buy it from Thai Silks at www.thaisilks.com. I like the ''Paj'' 5mm, 45'' wide, latest price I have is $4.70 per yard. And ''5mm'' does not refer to millimeters, but it is a measurement of silk thread size. Apply wet with nitrate dope, fill the weave to the extent necessary with nitrate, then paint it with whatever kind of paint you choose. Clair [/quote] Besides the silk, that what Stits covering system is all about, I have also used it on silk as well. If you enjoy covering with silk and dope, then you will love Stits because the system is made up of poly tack, poly dope, and the silver poly spray, I have used the poly colors as topcoat and urethane as well, in fact I spayed Dupont urethane primer on several Stits covered airplanes and sprayed Dupont base coat/clear coat on top and it has held up like new for over 15 years now. Just saying. Bob
Posted on: 9/10/2011 10:13 PM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10710966

RE: RotoFlow clunkless fuel tank
Here is one of my soda pop bottle tanks, I think the whole thing weighs 1.5 ozs. http://images.rcuniverse.com/forum/upfiles/32639/Ql33302.jpg You can see more pics in this thread http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_5153525/tm.htm Bob
Posted on: 9/10/2011 9:57 AM by Author "sensei" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10710108