RE: Super Skybolt build from Italy
Looks great!
Posted on: 5/20/2013 2:21 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11517461

RE: Name that plane
[quote]ORIGINAL: Chad Veich [quote]ORIGINAL: smithcreek Sold by Circus Hobbies, actually manufactured by MK kits in Japan (I think). [/quote] And one of the hardest kits to build accurately that I've ever built! [/quote] I watched a couple on ebay a couple years ago. They did not go for much, $100 at most. I like those old Japanese kits, they are usually so well put together
Posted on: 5/16/2013 7:01 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513766

RE: Name that plane
Sold by Circus Hobbies, actually manufactured by MK kits in Japan (I think).
Posted on: 5/16/2013 9:07 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513221

RE: phaeton 90
Any of those engines would work great. The plane likes to fly slow and can handle a lot of weight without a problem. I have mine set up as a float plane. Weighs 16 lbs. and flies well on an old Enya 120. That Enya is the original 120 they made that was a bored out 90, not very powerful. A larger engine would work great also. You don't need any real fancy servos. I used Futaba 3152 for everything and they are more than enough. You can get them very cheap here: [link=http://www.gonitrohobbies.com/FUTABA_S3152_SERVO_DIGITAL_HI_TORQUE_3152_p/s3152.htm]Go Nitro Hobbies - Futaba 3152[/link] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXMUR8s49XE[/youtube]
Posted on: 9/18/2012 6:17 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - General"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232228

RE: Sig Dope/Paint thinner
You can buy Randolph dope thinner from Aircraft Spruce in gallons. Just buying one gallon you will save more than enough money for shipping. You can buy both butyrate and nitrate thinners if you want, but I've used the butyrate thinner with nitrate and it works fine. I've never tried nitrate thinner with butyrate, but my guess is that works fine also. The dope thinners are just mixtures of various chemicals like actetone, mek, etc., and the two thinners are probably very similar, just different ratios that work better with one or the other.
Posted on: 9/11/2012 6:36 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11224897

RE: Top Flite Mini-Contender
[quote]ORIGINAL: WacoNut I did build the optional upswept wing tips. This is supposed to help with the adverse roll/yaw coupling. When you look at the rudder on the plans it is clear as can be why the plane has this issue. The majority of the rudder surface area is above the thrust line so when you add left rudder the top of the rudder rolls the plane right. It is almost like just having an elevator on one side of the plane which would make the plane roll a bit as well. [/quote] It's got to be a combination of the two because me and two other guys in my club built them last year, all without the upturned wingtips and with the stock rudder but 1" added to the length. All of them had horrible adverse yaw. The other two guys modified their rudders like yours and it helped but did not solve the problem. I'm going to go back and change my wingtips and rudder because I just don't enjoy flying the plane the way it is. I use a lot of rudder for normal flying and aerobatics and the adverse yaw screws it all up.
Posted on: 9/8/2012 1:41 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221982

RE: Top Flite Mini-Contender
[quote]ORIGINAL: WacoNut I did build the optional upswept wing tips. This is supposed to help with the adverse roll/yaw coupling. When you look at the rudder on the plans it is clear as can be why the plane has this issue. The majority of the rudder surface area is above the thrust line so when you add left rudder the top of the rudder rolls the plane right. It is almost like just having an elevator on one side of the plane which would make the plane roll a bit as well. [/quote] It's got to be a combination of the two because me and two other guys in my club built them last year, all without the upturned wingtips and with the stock rudder but 1" added to the length. All of them had horrible adverse yaw. The other two guys modified their rudders like yours and it helped but did not solve the problem. I'm going to go back and change my wingtips and rudder because I just don't enjoy flying the plane the way it is. I use a lot of rudder for normal flying and aerobatics and the adverse yaw screws it all up.
Posted on: 9/8/2012 1:40 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221981

RE: Sheber Pitts S1S build
Looking forward to this.
Posted on: 9/6/2012 7:40 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220226

RE: Best Kits
[quote]ORIGINAL: BillinIndiana ...but its not really that challenging to put together.. There again I've only built one wing...haha. [/quote] I just took a look at the building instructions for the Kadet Mark II and although it's not the most difficult build it's also not the most simple. The wing is the same as just about any other trainer, but the fuse is more difficult than the typical light ply or balsa sheet box. I'm pretty sure you will find it more challenging than the wing panel. If you finish it and are still looking for something significantly more challenging to build you will not be happy with a lot of the recommendations so far. This would include the Kougar, Astro-Hog, Ultra-Sport, Contender and others. These are all excellent recommendations for the average builder for his second plane as they are a bit more challenging than the typical first build and great fliers, but they are no more difficult to build than the MK II. So from a purely "building" point of view you will need to look more towards a scale plane like the Top Flight for WWII, Balsa USA for WW I, etc. Both these companies make kits that will be a big jump in skills you'll need to learn, but give great instructions on how to do it. Of course, you may find building the fuse for the MK II more challenging than you anticipate.
Posted on: 9/2/2012 5:14 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11214250

RE: Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro by Whirlybird Aviation
You want to be able to sand the stab LE easily, so I used elmer's carpenter glue, any yellow glue would be fine, watered down a bit. I used epoxy to laminate the blades, I didn't have any gorilla glue around so I put it on very thin and it worked fine.
Posted on: 9/1/2012 1:17 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11213670

RE: Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro by Whirlybird Aviation
Sounds good! Earlier you said you were going to go simple with some scale detail and I think that is the best way to go. The PCA-2 is so much fun to fly you don't want to ground it because you are worried about all the work you put into detailing it. It flies very well in gusty bumpy wind, much better than any plane twice it's size, so using it for your everyday flier works great. I like the Ford Fliver idea, that will look very nice, and like my RCA Victor scheme it might not be real, but it is period appropriate. If you do a build thread please update this thread also with a picture now and then.
Posted on: 8/31/2012 8:07 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11212472

RE: P-40E Warhawk - Advice
[quote]ORIGINAL: jaka Hi! I been doing this for decades and glssing sure ads more weight than a plastic film covering. [/quote] If you do it wrong.
Posted on: 8/28/2012 12:28 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11209281

RE: Sig Ryan STA
Will a DLE-20 fit in the cowl? Would be a real shame to hack it up. The plastic parts with the sig kits are high quality, actually usable compared to other kit makers.
Posted on: 8/28/2012 11:02 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11209173

RE: 1/6 Scale Hellcat
I'm seeing everything as far as I know. I'm on firefox.
Posted on: 8/27/2012 6:45 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207448

RE: 1/6 Scale Hellcat
Very nice!
Posted on: 8/27/2012 4:17 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207326

RE: Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro by Whirlybird Aviation
Hey Joe P., I'll be watching for some pictures as you build, looking forward to it! It really does turn some heads when people see it fly. 1/4 scale would be pretty large, 90" wingspan and 110" rotor diameter. A 1/5 scale would be 72" wingspan and about 90" rotor. That would be a nice size, might also require a lot less re-engineering.
Posted on: 8/26/2012 8:34 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11206425

RE: Balsa USA Phaeton II Need Help
[quote]ORIGINAL: optech Use an IRON.... NOT a gun. [/quote] So a gun like the 300 watt Weller won't heat up as much as an iron? All I know is I never like using anything but a flame, probably for that reason.
Posted on: 8/25/2012 5:51 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11205338

RE: Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro by Whirlybird Aviation
Had a nice calm evening so videoed a quick flight. Flying this plane has been a blast, I hope more people consider building one, I can't say enough good things about it. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIdC4wNix-o[/youtube]
Posted on: 8/24/2012 7:40 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11205063

RE: Balsa USA Phaeton II Need Help
I have a Phaeton 90, so not sure if they are the same. The Phaeton 90 has small tabs at the end of the cabane and N-struts that need to be soldered in place and must be at the right angle to support the wing and line up with the hole for the screw. The best way to solder them is while they are screwed to the wing, before covering. Use a gun not a torch and do your best not to scorch the wood. I have had a couple come loose and with fabric and paint on the wing I had to solder them off the plane. It's a real pain to solder them in the right place without them moving.
Posted on: 8/24/2012 5:07 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11204279

RE: P-40E Warhawk - Advice
If you used the method I described the glass won't add any appreciable weight, but the paint is where you need to be careful. A four stroke glow will fit completely inside the P-40 cowl, will a gas engine? Lots of planes just look like crap with their cowl hacked to pieces and a big gas engine ruining the scale shape. The Acroduster above is going to have a big ugly gas engine sticking out the bottom. Don't write off glow just because the trend is towards gas. For a 60 size plane like a P-40 that will not be your everyday flier glow still makes lots of sense. Smaller, fits in cowls better, and sounds much better than gas. If it's a plane that might get 10-20 flights a year does the cost of gas really matter?
Posted on: 8/23/2012 9:46 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11203473

RE: P-40E Warhawk - Advice
Glassing adds weight when done poorly. There were pictures of a guy assembling an RTC mustang on here a couple years ago and he was pouring the epoxy on heavy glass. The close ups showed puddles of resin which he leveled using 80 grit on a random orbital sander. If done correctly, 80 grit sandpaper on an electric sander would eat through the resin, glass and balsa in under 5 seconds. It was a larger plane, so the weight might not have been a big deal, but put that much glass on TF 60 size kit and you are toast. Learn how to do it lightly and you will add little to no weight with glass compared to mono. Use 1/2 or 3/4 oz cloth, thin your epoxy 50-50 with alcohol and brush it on using as little as possible, fill the weave with a 50-50 mix of red bondo spot putty and acetone, sand that back to the cloth leaving just enough to fill the weave and any spots where two layers of glass meet. Spray your primer and sand that back taking almost all of it off, then paint your colors. It is easy and tempting to use too much paint which will add weight, but if you do it right it won't. Be especially careful behind the cg. This is an Acroduster Too biplane I am building. It's ready for primer. It will get one coat, most of it will be removed, then color coats. At this point the glass and spot putty weigh almost nothing, by the time I'm done painting it will weigh about the same as monokote.
Posted on: 8/23/2012 5:52 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11203160

RE: Acroduster Too Design/Build
Hey, I'm here and just got back to work on it. I spent the winter finishing the [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9346949/mpage_4/key_/tm.htm]P-26 Peashooter[/link], building a [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_11104363/tm.htm]Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro[/link], and now it's time to finish the Acroduster. Just made new struts, I really did not like the old ones, in fact the last time I put the Acroduster aside was because I did not like the struts. The new struts are much simple and will just be held on by an aluminum tab screwed to the wing. I will build the strut up with some balsa for looks. After I fly it, if it flies well there are a couple changes I would like to make to the plans, then I will give them to anyone interested in building one.
Posted on: 8/21/2012 10:32 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200958

RE: 120 decreasing rpm
Is this with the cowl on? My first thought is overheating.
Posted on: 8/14/2012 8:04 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "YS Engines Support"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11192982

RE: Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro by Whirlybird Aviation
I was going to wait to post some video since I feel I'm really just beginning to tap into what this model is capable of doing, and this video is not the easiest to watch due to shaky camera and no clouds to use for reference, but it looks like it might be a while until I get a chance again, so here's a bit of flying. The wind was gusty and about 15+mph, but the PCA-2 handled it just fine. There is a wing over at about 1:18 and spins at about 2:25. The spins are much tighter than they look on video and drop very slowly. Also exit from the spins is immediate and I'm sure once I have the courage I'll be able to exit them less than 10 ft from the ground. The plane is hovering at around 3 minutes, but without clouds it's impossible to tell. The video is available in HD if you click on the youtube link: [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nquRo-3IO34[/youtube]
Posted on: 8/12/2012 11:53 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11190531

RE: Getting Sick of this!
[quote]ORIGINAL: wickedpissa So to the OP's rant you will have to get better at searching or get used to weed through all the crap that you don't want. [/quote] In the OPs defense, when a seller lists an item he/she must put it in a "category". One category that falls under radio control airplanes is for "almost ready" while another category is for "unassembled kit". It used to be if you search just using the categories regular old kits are the majority of items in "unassembled kit". Now that ebay is being flooded with Chinese people selling directly from businesses or apartments in China the number of ARFs that show up in the "unassembled kit" category has skyrocketed making the category almost useless. Whether it's a language thing or a marketing strategy to just flood ebay with items in every category that remotely resembles the product I don't know, but it is annoying. I don't do much surfing on ebay since I've started scratch building most planes, but I have noticed it.
Posted on: 8/10/2012 10:24 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11188285

RE: Royal P-26 Group Build
[quote]ORIGINAL: Starmer Smitty, Thanks for the feedback.  Just curious.  I'm always on the lookout for good scale plans.  How hard would it be to scale your Royal CAD drawings to 1/4 scale?  Admittedly, I know very little about CAD. Jason [/quote] All the notches are cut for specific sized wood. Notches on the formers are for 1/8" ply, when you scale up or down that won't fit, maybe you could scale it up to the next size ply, not sure. Then you would have the problem of finding fiberglass parts, although making all those parts including the wheel pants/spats out of balsa and ply yourself would not be difficult, just time consuming, but nothing on this build is not time consuming so...
Posted on: 8/10/2012 5:14 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11187963

RE: Royal P-26 Group Build
[quote]ORIGINAL: Gray Beard Smitty, I don't know about you but that was the first time in a long time I broke out a sweat and my knees were shaking on a maiden and I was only watching you!!! I knew from the first day this was going to be something special. Been a long 3 years! It was worth the wait though. I saw where you liked pulling the masking tape, that's when I lift off my base coat and get pissed!! Gene [/quote] Thanks Gene. I didn't feel nervous, but you can tell how anxious I was by my non-stop chatting through the whole video!
Posted on: 8/9/2012 5:12 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11186714

RE: Royal P-26 Group Build
[quote]ORIGINAL: Starmer ....Edit.... Nevermind, I read back through the early pages and I see that FGS offers FG parts.  I tried the link to the .pdf parts you posted but it must have gotten wiped with the other pics when you changed servers.  Any chance of getting it reposted.  Also any pics of the rudder and elevator linkage would be appreciated.  Hope the other flights go well.  [/quote] Yeah, even though they are expensive I just could not do the fiberglass any cheaper than FGS and he would do a far superior job. I'll repost the pdf, but I would also be happy to send the CAD drawings to a laser cutter if you have one near you. That would save on shipping at least. You asked if I would build bigger and my answer is I'm perfectly happy with this size. In general I'm not a fan of .40 size planes, they just don't fly that well, .60 is much better, but a plane this size, which I would call a .90, flies almost as well as planes twice the size. If I was to go larger I would still use the Royal plans and blow them up, they are the closest to scale I have seen. The other plans I've seen are just not right. I think the one on [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCSKsqKlMX4]THIS VIDEO[/link] was built with the Peppino plans and if you look at the fuse ahead of the cockpit it has a weird "honeypot" shape to it that is just wrong and ugly. The Royal plans are not exactly correct in that area either. They are near perfect when looking at a profile, but the top of the fuse is too round, it should be more "egg" shaped and pointy at the top. I think that's the kind of thing only someone who has been staring at pictures for three years would notice though.[8|]
Posted on: 8/9/2012 5:10 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11186693

RE: Royal Kits
Here's the other plane's maiden. I apologize for my poor video skills and constant chatting, I was a bit hyped up after my maiden. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiOh_NN5Q[/youtube]
Posted on: 8/8/2012 5:05 AM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11185307

RE: Royal Kits
Thanks guys! We did a lot of "pre-game" youtube video analysis of other P-26 maidens and decided, "don't pour on the coals too fast for takeoff" was the key, and it worked. Taxi tests proved you could get in trouble if you hit the throttle too fast, but if you recognized what was happening and aborted early it was no problem. If you slowly rolled on the throttle, especially the first half, by the time you got to full it was more than ready to fly and did not exhibit any bad behaviors. Flying is excellent. Before the first turn was done I knew it was rock solid. I needed some left and up trim, but after that it flew straight as an arrow. Landing on the other hand is going to be tricky. I had one decent landing on the third flight. I need to go to high rates and see if I can hold it off a bit longer and bleed off more speed. Any bounce is magnified quickly. My second landing was actually very good until I hit a decent sized bump. The plane tilted to one side, then the other and ended up nosing over. No way I would ever try to land this on pavement. I have a pilot, from Aces of Iron. I need to paint him. I put him on the "if I don't crash on the maiden" list of things to do. Lots of small detail items that add up to 40-50 hours of work, easily.
Posted on: 8/7/2012 10:12 PM by Author "smithcreek" in the forum "RC Scale Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11185145