|
RE: Why not transport your fully assembled aircraft to the field?
Thane has stumbled on the bigger issue here...Do you really want to drive down the highway and all around town advertising that you play with toy airplanes? Maybe get your bluebox pilot collection and pose them hanging onto the wings so they don't rip off...to complete the effect. Personally, there's nothing worse than having your toy plane in the back seat when you pull up next to some hot chick at an intersection...and you don't have a 12 year old son in your passenger seat. [;)]
Posted on: 6/16/2012 5:15 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11120008
RE: Shaft Coupler - Good/Bad Idea ?
One last comment on "adjustability" of control surfaces: You see lots of people here (myself included) who get anal about precision - slop in linkages, angle of deflection of the control surfaces, washout in the wings, etc. etc. Since you have a split elevator I am speculating that your concern for adjustability relates to being able to independently adjust each half to perfection via independent servo trim. I used to think that way myself...til I started flying real planes (including a recent opportunity to pilot a fullscale P51C- it was awesome). What I realized was that the wind and airflow is such a larger and more dynamically variable force in the equation (even at full scale) that it is ridiculous to worry too much about a degree or two of differential between elevator halfs, control surfaces, etc....the surface itself will distort to a greater degree in flight in completely unpredictable ways and the airframe probably has some twist and distortion. Even if you built your airframe with laser precision...it is a dynamically adjustable entity in the airstream. That's why there IS trim. And that's why ARF's from China fly just fine...haha. I don't think the issue here is so much scale look over reliable functionality...at 29% both should be possible using fullscale like hardware. But concerning the use of clamping shaft couplers I'd rather join the elevator halves and weld a steel bellcrank to a piece of steel rod and eliminate the possibility of a failure. Even standard servo horns and the servo pinion have teeth to prevent spinning...the smooth inside surface of that clamp and the fact that you'd probably be clamping it on some solid (or worse tubular) aluminum rod scares me. If you ran with independent servos for each elevator half and one servo stripped or the setup stretched...you would be all fouled up and from the ground won't know what really happened. The failure would induce roll, and instinctively you would think you had an aileron failure and yet pitch control would be introducing more roll...you might be hard pressed to correct with aileron, and simultaneouly retrim the elevators, if it even occurs to you in time...If I was your scale pilot figure I'd be hoping you packed me a parachute...and installed a sliding canopy. [;)] Rick
Posted on: 4/8/2012 7:17 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11032912
RE: Shaft Coupler - Good/Bad Idea ?
JeffH and DaddySam have the right idea...solid rod or welded horns...double the servos if need be...the elevator is the easiest control horn to hide. As long as you have clearance for the horn to move inside the fuse. Don't worry about adjustment...set the horn 90 degrees to the L bend in the rod and make your adjustments at the servo end using threaded couplings if you must...you'll be more likely to be looking inside the fuse there for inspection and service of other things. I think everyone is saying the same thing though... stay away from a friction fit clamp especially in an area that may be hard to inspect...if those bolts loosen from vibration or the clamp spins from too much torque or because the material under the clamp compresses, you will have zero elevator control...and while any control surface failure can put you into the ground...the elevator would put you there the fastest IMHO. Rick
Posted on: 4/7/2012 4:41 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11032250
RE: ANOTHER COMP ARF SPITFIRE
Awesome spitfire. I especially like your tail wheel setup since it operates like the full scale. Wondering why you didn't use an adjustable oil damped shock from the RC car guys instead of the rubber plug? Your setup looks like it would be a drop in fit. Those car shocks are incredible and seem to come in all sizes and are very adjustable. I would think a coil over shock would be more responsive during taxi-ing (to rid the silly tail bounce you see on so many taildragger models), but still give the stiff dampening needed for landing. I'm curious if you considered it. Perhaps they travel too far? Anyway awesome work...I bought the Yellow Aircraft spit...but someday will get one of these Comp Arf Spits. Your thread will be my assembly manual. [:D] Rick
Posted on: 4/7/2012 4:17 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11032233
RE: ESM 50cc Spitfire rework
I'm just now finding this thread. Great mods. Really like the solartex tailplane details... wish you showed step by step pictures on that one. I assume you found a solution to lock your canopy...and it would be too late to do on this build since your rails are in place already) but if you are going to leave the canopy a manual open close affair, a simple method for locking is to use a sharp centering punch to deform the back of the brass square stock just behind or right at the center of the front most screw. This creates a "detent" that makes a positive friction lock against the head of the screw in the closed position...the same can be at the rear to hold the canopy open using the rear most screw. Practice first on a piece of scrap to get the right amount of dimple for the screw size you have and the amount of locking force you want to employ. Properly done it can be reliable and there is nothing simpler. oops..posted before I noticed you have a servo operated linkage...well...maybe the tip will help others. [:)]
Posted on: 1/22/2012 6:27 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10922233
RE: Sculpting a 1/4 scale WWI Lothar Von Richthofen
Transatlanticflight could not be here to receive his award due to a previous engagement nitpicking another thread... However, he did ask me to read a prepared statement, and I quote, "I'd like to thank Best Pilots, all of my fans, the hecklers, my publicist, RCU, The World 1/4 scale Model Pilots Association, The RCU Hyper-critical Critics Commission...and most of all...early winter
Posted on: 11/14/2011 4:19 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10812158
RE: Sculpting a 1/4 scale WWI Lothar Von Richthofen
Yes....really. [:D] Really coming along...and thanks Fly4real for taking my comments in the spirit they were meant. I agree whole heartedly that modeling a real person faithfully is 1000% better than a generic contrived human. This last series of photos are really looking good. Mouth is spot on now and the bridge of the nose and the eye shape is perfect - glad you captured that indentation and the slight web. You have great talent. Looks like you trimmed some of the nostril that was a bit big in the set of photos just before these. The nose is looking much better...it's funny his face in the photos is rather long and narrow and it is only the relatively small size of his nose and the "baby fat" of the bottom of his cheeks that give him a fullish look at all. Still think the chin is a tad too square...in the full length photo with trench coat and flying cap the shadow under the mouth forms an upside down arc indicative of a bit of a smooth round protusion or nob...if his chin was an apple I would say more Macintosh and less Red Delicious. So funny trying to describe with words what is best shown in the form. Of course as has been said it is subjective...and my comments remain humbly submitted. Although, I have dabbled in sculpture and other art forms...have neither the time nor desire to defend to the peanut gallery my already admitted "opinion" as just that...one man's opinion. You have my respect for both your artistry and your appreciation of the feedback offered from another man's eye. The goal of your art, as you have stated, is accuracy...and clearly you recognize, as most artists do that, after a while, the process breeds a familiarity with the subject that can often blind the artist. The hope is to achieve a high percentage before you lose interest...as all art is abandoned - never finished. [;)] So now... at the risk of drawing more flak from the great unwashed...here's the big challenge...how do you take these obviously posed photos and interpret their static expression enough to generate facial expressions that would more appropriately convey the concentration and intensity of flying a combat aircraft? Since that is where these guys end up...at the controls. [;)] Even as I post I'm thinking I would rather PM...I guess other than ooohs and ahhhhs...and the photos of your awesome progress...maybe I'm adding something to the thread for your customer to consider about how painstaking the process really is...every nuance, every detail, every decision...and the value of the end result...well beyond the price. I've seen Sailor Malan...incredible. Watching your transformative process rather than just seeing the end result is the best entertainment on RCU and the best advertisement you could ever produce. Bravo!
Posted on: 11/11/2011 11:10 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10807317
RE: Sculpting a 1/4 scale WWI Lothar Von Richthofen
You are a fantastic sculptor...and I've enjoyed watching your work on these forums. Amazing what you've got in just 7 hours. I hope you can take some constructive criticism from someone who could never begin to accomplish what you do...seems silly in fact to offer it. But here ya go anyway. The likeness is good but to my eye, the jaw seems slightly short and a bit broader at the chin than in the photos and lacks the uniquely rounded apple (dudley dorightedness) of the photos. In the photos, the jaw is square at the hinge but slightly round underneath as it tapers to the chin I also think the chin juts out more closer to the plane of the tip of the nose...again like a "Dudley Do right" The dimple in the chin on the photos also seems to have a unique angle not captured yet in the clay. The net affect of these things makes him look fuller in the face in the clay from the front and less noble and romanesque from the profile. You've done a great job with the mouth with the exception of the corners of his mouth which are also unique...there is none of the upturn (joker smile) you have but more of a sardonic slightly sad look caused by the deep crease that begins at the edge of the lip and angles downward, set at an angle that is not yet seen in the clay. Lastly, the nose is very prominent in the photos but you've made it slightly larger and broader in the clay than it appears in the photos. In my humble opinion, the bridge should be a bit narrower beginning between the eyes and carried right to the tip. The bridge should not flatten to the cheek so gradually but rather cut more sharply back and then taper into the cheek....especially about mid way to the nostrils. You have the slight verticle cleft in the end of the nose which is good but there is also a bit of a horizontal valley where the bridge meets the brow, between the eyes, perhaps affected by the way the brow ridge extends thinly between the eyebrows. There is also a slight web of skin at the inner corner of his eye that if represented would help the likeness as it too is a unique feature. Also, the shadows on the forehead of the 3/4 profile photo you seem to be using most for reference indicates a less sloped forehead and some unique bone structure just over the nose and eyes. Take another look...tell me what you think? Great subject.... and as usual...incredible workmanship. So much easier to be a talentless critic. [;)]
Posted on: 11/6/2011 8:33 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10800260
RE: My pet peeve in scale
[quote]ORIGINAL: hellcat56 I STARTED THIS THREAD BUT some of you are taking it a little tooooo seriously it is for pet peeves- not the world is ending NEW RULE FOR THIS THREAD YOUR PET PEEVE POST CAN BE NO LONGER THAN 5 WORDS dont want to hear how you have been mistreated put down lost your dog your wife doesnt love you warbirds are not scale-give me a break the word WARBIRD means scale just your pet peeve if you dont like the thread -DONT READ IT- and save us all your reasons WE DONT CARE 5 words and get out of the thread and guys one one pet peave (or post) to a customer [/quote] Too funny...the starter of the thread broke his own rules...posting the rules. I've heard scale was an old man's hobby...when did they let the old women in? [;)]
Posted on: 11/5/2011 12:48 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10798160
RE: The complete YELLOW AIRCRAFT SPITFIRE thread.
Peter, who's selling those?
Posted on: 11/2/2011 7:25 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10793365
RE: The complete YELLOW AIRCRAFT SPITFIRE thread.
I'll take a closer look when I have a minute and report back.
Posted on: 11/2/2011 7:22 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10793359
RE: My pet peeve in scale
My pet peeve is threads about pet peeves.
Posted on: 11/2/2011 7:09 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10793341
RE: The complete YELLOW AIRCRAFT SPITFIRE thread.
For what it is worth I own a yellow spit and a p40...The springs in the p40 gear have two different compression stages. The first 3/4 of the travel is easy and for the last 1/4 there is a second, stiffer compression spring that prevents bottoming out on tough landings. The p40 is a more recent offering than the Spit and may have benefitted from the trials and tribulations of earlier models like the Spit. I had some dialogue with Charles when I bought the two kits (since I picked them up personally from the warehouse). I seem to remember discussion about the challenge of single spring setups being either too much or too little compression and recoil. I can't speak to the gear you have except to say that mine came with far more scale wheels with four wedge-shaped cut outs...not round holes, which leads me to believe you have an earlier version. The spit gear on my kit are somewhat stiffly sprung...which makes them less forgiving on taxi over a grass field but unlikely to bottom out in a tough landing. I'm guessing the early ones may have been lightly sprung favoring taxi performance but more prone to bottom out. Though not an overtly rough landing, (better than most of mine), a close inspection of the slow mo in your video reveals the gear do completely bottom out, hard enough to deflect the entire strut rearwards from the mount. Then it appears the link pivot point snaps just like a skiers kneecap when he's hit a bad mogul, and on the rebound all hell breaks loose. I have to defend Yellow aircraft here though because, as you point out, you acquired the gear second hand. I'm sure he would warrantee anything he sold to you...but the last guy might have had the same experience, bought the newer gear, and let you acquire his problem. I would say buy another set of the newer Yellow Spit gear or get a set of Sierra gear...no complaints about those except $$. Rick
Posted on: 10/30/2011 2:33 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10789653
RE: Do ARF's Belong in Warbirds?
Arf-flyer or kit-builder...the real question is...should we bitch or gripe? lol I say...let's get back to the flying field or the shop and leave this sewing circle for the wives.
Posted on: 10/18/2011 12:36 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10771564
RE: Do ARF's Belong in Warbirds?
I can't believe this is a thread. I think a Forum titled "RCwarbirds and Warplanes" is pretty self-explanatory. If it was titled "ScratchBuilt Warbirds" I might understand the premise of the discussion. As far as I'm concerned if you put 50 cals on a Piper Cub arf, and paint it camo...it's a warbird.[:D] Now I'm just embarrassed I added to it...lol.
Posted on: 10/16/2011 7:06 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10768730
RE: Darryl from Sierra Giant Scale retracts in Road accident
Terrible news...talented contributor to the industry and hobby...both in my thoughts and prayers. Best wishes for a full recovery.
Posted on: 10/16/2011 4:16 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10768430
RE: New Nitro AirField RC P-51 Marie 1450MM?
Asanders, Yes I'm interested in the charger...and others might like to know too. I'm also looking for a good multi-battery (4 at a time) charger. Looked at the T6? (I think it's called) by thunder power...know of any others?
Posted on: 7/19/2011 6:02 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10628332
RE: New Nitro AirField RC P-51 Marie 1450MM?
Mustang, Yes the cowl comes off and the entire esc can be pulled out of the fusealage to solder whatever connector you want, with or without removing the motor. But honestly, I think the existing plugs are fine. The batteries are sized specifically for the plane, esc, motor, balance, etc. Among the three Airfield models I purchased all are the same cell count (4) but no two batteries are the same physical size, amperage or c rating (yet are nicely marked with v, a, and c specs BTW). So I would be reluctant to interchange them. I guess if you have existing batteries, and know more than I do about the consequences of over or undersizing a battery in the world of watts, and/or are one of those guys who just likes to standardize on deans plugs...you certainly could. And if you've got no use for all those connectors you cut off...send em to me. [:)] I found my little charge adapter to be a simple solution (cost two connectors and four solder joints, easily accessible). And I considered making a flying adapter or two if I wanted to mate an ec3 connectered battery to an airfield plane, or an airfield battery to an ec3 connectored esc...for the odd chance I had such a desire to interchange...then I realized all my eflight batteries were 3 cell and the airfields were 4 cell...so why bother. By and large I find that electric planes are spec'd with a certain size battery, esc and motor, and fiddling with these, has rarely been beneficial and in one case, for me, a beefier battery (which I thought would give me more fuel in the tank), might have been responsible for burning up the esc or the motor windings or both, turning my greatplanes SeA5 into a burning balsa bottle rocket. So I stick with stock set ups...due to my ignorance and the k.i.s.s. principle.
Posted on: 7/19/2011 5:57 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10628322
RE: New Nitro AirField RC P-51 Marie 1450MM?
Sanders, I agree they are awesome planes, and durable...best flown off pavement as you say because the wheels are too small for all but a putting green quality grass field. But let me ask you, flying the next day, how did you charge the batteries? and Solve the lack of charge plugs? Do you have a charger that charges through the balance plug? If so, can you share the make and model number.
Posted on: 7/16/2011 5:21 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10623588
RE: New Nitro AirField RC P-51 Marie 1450MM?
Jeffp51, I was getting tired of building and ordered three 1400mm Airfield RC RTF planes...to have some stress free summer fun. I have the p40, the blue nose p51 (1450mm), and the Spitfire. I have opened them all up and checked them out. They are truly amazing as far as foam planes go, in detail, ease of assembly, and quality of construction. The electric retracts are a hoot and for anywhere from $170-$250 bucks for a 2.5 ghz RTF I have seen nothing that compares in wow factor or can be completely assembled in an hour (no joke). But there’s some things you need to know and I’ve included it here for you, but I am thinking about creating a separate post called “tips for airfield rc newbies.� I have only assembled and flown the Spitty so far. It flies awesome. I was a little rusty when I was flying it and I had a couple rough landings on pavement and the worst that’s happened was a scuffed spinner and a little rash on the wing tips. Eventually on another run I snapped a tip off the propeller…but man I was shocked that my botched take-off/ nose-in didn’t do more damage. Completely pilot error I assure you. I have not flown the p51 but it is bigger, has a larger capacity battery, retractable tailwheel and is impressive looking. I’ve seen video of the p51 flying and think it is probably just as good as the spit if not better. It has an option for flaps but the Spitty lands well without them…the planes have really light wing loading…kind of float in. So that’s the good news. Now the bad news: spare parts and charge plugs. Spare parts are copiously listed on the Nitro site...but almost everything is back ordered/ out of stock. I snapped a tip on the 3 blade prop and have found that the spare blades for the Spitty were available, but noticed just about everything else including spare blades for the p51 are not available. Spare batteries are also not available though I assume comparable battery sizes are sold by nitro and others...which brings me to the subject of the power plugs. Nitro does not sell them. If your charger charges through the balance plug than maybe you’re alright…mine does not. Not sure that any 4 cell and larger charger will. And these planes all have 4 cell lipos. But read on because I found a source. The Airfield RC models’ esc and batteries come with special, large, bullet style connectors that have a red plastic case with different diameter, round barrels. They are pretty good plugs, similar to the blue EC3 plugs used by eflight but different in several ways. First they are longer and larger…easier to grip and plug and unplug. Some people have complained they may unplug or come loose in flight...I dont see that happening except if the battery got thrown in a crash. I think they mate nicely. Second they are polarity restricted but only by the proper assembly of the plug. THE BAD NEWS: As I said, Nitro does not sell the plugs at all! THE GOOD NEWS: I did find a source by Googling “Airfield RC power plugs.� A guy selling them for $3.99 for a pair of mating plugs on Ebay...bought 4 sets...received them in a matter of days to East coast. If you can’t find the link through Google let me know and I’ll dig it up and post it. THE POWER PLUG: TIPS YOU NEED TO KNOW. General: Here's how the design works: The casing has two different sized barrels and they can only mate one way. Male and female bullets are installed in the plug casing identically such that the male bullet is always in the smaller diameter plug barrel, the female in the larger diameter plug barrel. HERE'S THE TRICKY PART: The red and black leads are soldered to different sex brass barrels depending on whether it is the battery or the esc (or a charge jack, if you make one). Look carefully before soldering and assembling battery packs or charge cords. The battery plug has the red wire soldered to female brass plug, black to male brass plug. The Esc and charge jack are opposite: Red wire to male brass and black to female. Get this wrong and assemble them and you've ruined the plugs because you will never get them apart in one piece easily. Tip 1: Unlike the EC3 connectors which are pressed into the back of the plastic plug housing, the red plastic plug casing on the airfield plugs needs to be slipped onto the wires first before soldering the connectors. The connectors are then pressed (not pounded) into the casing with some substantial force using some sort of driver or nail set punch (watch your fingers). They absolutely will not be forced in from the other direction. Tip 2: The Plastic plug is thin walled and softer than the EC3 Blue connectors. Be careful to let soldered plugs cool before assembly as they will deform and become loose if assembled hot. Also don’t bother with heat shrink tubing, a heat gun will melt the housing in seconds and the plug cavities are deep enough to protect the wire and solder cup even if the wire jacket shrunk during soldering. Tip 3: The solder cup has an unfortunate hole in the side and solder may spill out all over the outside of the barrel filling the recess and obliterating the detents that hold it in the plastic housing...NOT GOOD. If you take care to heat the side opposite the hole it will be less likely that solder will be drawn out. But if it does get on the outside of the barrel you will need to clean it up. I had one that outflowed and had to use my solder iron and a rag to wipe the bulk off and had to use a small file to bring it all back. If the detents are not clean the plugs will not seat in the housing correctly and will come apart when you plug and unplug. Tip 4: I made a small jig out of a block of wood rather than use a vise or clamp. I drilled appropriate sized holes in a small block of wood and jammed the brass connectors, cup upward into the holes. I tinned the end of the wires and then heated the cups, filling the cup with solder, pushed in the wire, set for a second remove iron, hold until cool. Done. This worked better than metal vise, clamp or locking pliers since the wood did not suck up any heat letting me work fast and minimize heat on the battery leads or esc leads. Tip 5: By buying a few extra sets of EC3 and the airfield plugs, I was able to make an adapter for my charger. Since most of my other batteries use the EC3 connector, I had a cable that was banana plug(out of the charger) to EC3 already. I just made a short adapter cable, with an EC3 battery plug to Airfield ESC plug and maintained polarity throughout. Easier than carrying a whole separate charge cable, and unplugging and plugging it each time, since polarity is kind of hard to see on the charger and the banana plugs have no polarity insert protection. BALANCE PLUGS: The batteries have balance plugs that are compatible with my Thunder Power charger adapter board (listed for many Chinese battery packs). It is a similar balance plug as are used by Parkzone, and eflight. I don’t think they stock these things at Nitro either, so I offer the compatibility reference so you can check your charger or other charger manufacturers for adapters. I was a while getting this info and was kind of peeved that my airfield RTF plane took two weeks to get airborn because of it all. All I can say is the plane is worth it…and more so now that this info is posted. Enjoy Rick
Posted on: 7/15/2011 3:22 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10622856
RE: After your trainer, how long did it take you to fly a war bird?
I'm going to agree with tmaucher...the best thing ...actually the ONLY good thing that came with the foamy cessna's that the LHS and big web guys tout as trainers was the free flight sim software. While never quite like the real thing, it was invaluable at teaching basic control, and coordinating stick movements to the visual cues of the plane at different attitudes and coming from different directions. Man the first time your plane is coming at you and your lateral control movements (rudder and aileron) are reversed...sheer panic. That cheesy free software saved me hundreds..if not thousands of dollars. I did not have the advantage of buddy box flying..the field I fly at is a loose bunch and schedules and equipment never lined up. Plus what do you say when your "buddy" crashes your baby... everybody does. [:D]
Posted on: 5/24/2011 6:15 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10537761
RE: After your trainer, how long did it take you to fly a war bird?
On the question of spinners for the PTS Mustang...True-Turn has a mustang series that will fit the evo engine...but if i remember correctly you toss the big weighted washer and maybe have to move the engine forward a smidge on the mount? Someone else chime in here, it's been a while since I've even looked at these planes. I also forget the diameter...measure the red plastic backplate of the stock spinner. True-Turn makes a two blade in that diameter and it's close to the right shape. I know...this hasn't been THAT much help...asked more questions than I answered lol..
Posted on: 5/21/2011 7:19 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10532507
RE: ESM warbird, who to buy from???
Shipping and handling...the great nemesis of internet shoppers and a wonderful place for distributors to hide profit. It's part of the landscape...especially in the internet age. You have to recognize and accept that most of the retail "webstores" are a virtual storefront...they have the cache, through understanding how search engines and chat sites like this one work, to grab your attention and be your point of purchase...a portal...nothing more. The stocking distributor does not care...it's an outsourced sales and marketing department...costs simply passed on to the consumer. Often those inflated shipping costs...largely the nebulous "handling" part is actually the profit of the point of purchase retailer. In the end, the great challenge for the consumer is going through the shipping calculator before they click purchase when they are comparing prices between websites. Internet shopping became possible thanks to UPS and fedex...and relatively cheap gas. As gasoline prices get inflated and "real" shipping charges escalate...we will see consolidation among e-tailers and a return to traditional geographically determined distribution models... and yes....less choices. The internet makes purchasing by price easy for consumers...a nightmare for non-exclusive distributors...and capitalism in general. Shipping charges that approach a third of the entire purchase price of the product give the consumer pause...reducing demand...reducing sales. Many of these etailers are banking on making money on volume....$20 per purchase....multiplied by a lot of volume...not bad for a little web savvy. However, increase the cost of gasoline and these businesses dry up and blow away....leaving the big guys....uh-oh. Welcome to the marketplace. [:)] What's my point you ask? Well, maybe nothing...haha. Maybe I'm saying that if all other things are equal..run the shipping calculator and click as you see fit, because in many cases the "etailer" offers little value added. But this is not the case with VQ Warbirds...Thomas is obviously a Warbird enthusiast more than an RC etailer...we are all enthusiasts of warbirds... a specific aspect of the enormous world of RC...how could you buy better from anyone else but an enthusiast? When it comes to meeting your expectations...Thomas gets it...he adds companion product like Ty's cockpit kits that add value...not just products that he can find a margin on and get in front of you. I've got too many unfinished kits now..but I've got my eye on an ESM warbird It's a toss up between the Fairey Swordfish and a 50cc Spit...when I'm ready...Thomas will get the call.
Posted on: 2/21/2011 1:06 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10353269
RE: Working scale P-47 instrument panel????
G-pete is right...most instruments move only in flight. The other comments about the questionable benefit/ purpose of making miniature moving gauges is also well taken... Still, the fascination of modeling in miniature...and then making it work is a big part of this hobby (otherwise we would be building Revell not Topflight). So here are some quick thoughts on , low cost, gauge operation..if you really must go there. Miniature working compass is a piece of cake...and readilly available from existing toys...fill it with mineral oil to take out the bounce. Rpm indicator could be accomplished by gathering prop wash from an air scoop and passing it by a well ballanced and appropriately weighted vane on the back of a modified gauge. Attitude indicator...just a simple balancing act for roll and pitch... yaw indicator is a weighted ball in a curved, liquid filled tube...this might be able to be produced in miniature as well...though even if it worked you'd never see it without onboard cameras...but then...you probably want those too! [:D] And when I say take out the bounce out with oil filled gauges...I'm assuming you're running electric, not gas or glow, cause nothing's going to take the bounce out of those engine induced vibrations....or for that matter what about the jostling of your plane as it taxis over the grass....maybe we could genetically engineer some miniature grass... lol
Posted on: 1/2/2011 2:21 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10234633
RE: When someone says mustang what do you first think of
Sally? [:D]
Posted on: 1/2/2011 1:35 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10234547
RE: Wren 160 explodes
Don't forget the "Anti-Shill"...the guy who has a close association with the competition and disparages the company in public...LOL. Honestly...whats more entertaining than we "Peanuts of the Gallery"? The original post was asking to find out if others have had the experience of this particular failure. I think this is a good use of internet forums...without them only the manufacturer would know of multiple product failures that should warrant a recall...in my experience even the best companies mask these things to preserve profits...Ask me about my iphone. Sadly I think only one response was from anyone with experience with the product and the failure....making it the only valuable post...um...including mine.
Posted on: 1/2/2011 5:42 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10233570
RE: YT (ESM) 50cc Spitfire
Wayne, I have PM'd Nudger about his pilot. Want at least one for a yellow spit. What is the scale of the ESM and in what way does he not fit the cockpit kit? Rick
Posted on: 8/31/2010 3:11 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9972065
RE: The complete YELLOW AIRCRAFT SPITFIRE thread.
Len, Wrong tools on the fairing. If you have access to a small lathe, and a little skill, you can turn an entire cannon fairing and all. If not, dowel is the right material to start with...but think sanding drum, round files, dremel tool, etc. Cutting a circular pattern into hardwood endgrain with a saw....not gonna happen. Find a file or sanding drum approx. the right diameter of the leading edge, clamp the work piece and slowly burn your way in..trial fit as you go. If no drum available, you can clamp the dowel (firmly) and use a forstner bit in a drill press at right angle to your work piece to cut the rough shape then wrap sandpaper around a piece of dowel the right size...or several varying sizes if the LE is not a perfect radius... and hand sand final. Should get better result. Rick
Posted on: 8/22/2010 11:09 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9951547
RE: Comp ARF Spitfire build
What is the scale of the comp arf spitfire? Anyone know of hand?
Posted on: 8/19/2010 4:39 PM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9945645
RE: Comp ARF Spitfire build
Phil, Your pilot looks good but too small for his seat. If I'm not mistaken, that is the 1/6 scale BBI or Dragon figure. You may want to check out a thread on RCU started by "P4Patti" regarding 1/4, 1/5 scale pilot figures that she is starting to produce. These figures will have the same level of detail as BBI but in larger scales...they are also offering custom heads and historical figures to fit different planes, theaters, era's. They also will offer a 1/6 scale "light weight" posable body to fit BBI clothing and accessories (the BBI figures are heavy). Rick
Posted on: 8/19/2010 10:09 AM by Author "transatlanticflight"
in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9944769
|
