WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight

WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/index.php)
-   Scratch and Kit Built Aircraft (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   1/10-1/6 scale WW1 kit (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73137)

thepiper92 02-03-2014 09:36 PM

1/10-1/6 scale WW1 kit
 
I am planning to build another plane, although a WW1 biplane, maybe triplane, a little larger than the P51 I just built, which has a ~38" wing span. I want to go to a 40-50" wingspan Albatros, or a Sopwith, but I am having trouble finding complete kits. I have found one site: http://www.hobbyhangar.com/hhbaseline_007.htm , but I know nothing about them. I have also looked at Balsa USA, but they seem strictly fuel, not electric. There are short kits out there, but I rather have a complete kit, especially when the short kits I find are the same pricing as the complete kits of others.

fhhuber 02-03-2014 10:01 PM

Proctor.

They have a few assorted kits available.
Not cheap. It costs almost as much for the stuff to finish the kit (covering, glue, gun kits...) as it costs to buy an ARF.

I have the 1/6 sopwith at about 95% complete (needs flying wires and mounting of the cowl) and the Fokker Dr1 in box.

These kits are all based on expecting glow/gasoline. You can make the changes if you can handle the kit build... not for beginning builders.

thepiper92 02-03-2014 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhhuber (Post 939090)
Proctor.

They have a few assorted kits available.
Not cheap. It costs almost as much for the stuff to finish the kit (covering, glue, gun kits...) as it costs to buy an ARF.

I have the 1/6 sopwith at about 95% complete (needs flying wires and mounting of the cowl) and the Fokker Dr1 in box.

These kits are all based on expecting glow/gasoline. You can make the changes if you can handle the kit build... not for beginning builders.

I was looking at them, but they are far too expensive I feel, even if they are good plane. I want around $100-150, of course plus shipping.

hillbille 02-04-2014 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhhuber (Post 939090)
Proctor.

They have a few assorted kits available.
Not cheap. It costs almost as much for the stuff to finish the kit (covering, glue, gun kits...) as it costs to buy an ARF.

I have the 1/6 sopwith at about 95% complete (needs flying wires and mounting of the cowl) and the Fokker Dr1 in box.

These kits are all based on expecting glow/gasoline. You can make the changes if you can handle the kit build... not for beginning builders.


LOL!

If you are seriously wanting to "BUILD" an airplane from the word go - with absolutely NO prefabrication and totally built up parts, I'm afraid all you will ever find are kits designed originally with nitro power in mind.

I wouldn't let that dissuade you in the least. The plane won't know that you've swapped out the power plant.

But, you will need to alter the internal design to accommodate your battery - instead of the fuel tank AND where usually the fuel tank was built INTO the fuse, you will want to make a hatch that opens between those formers to allow changing out that battery. Almost everything else will remain the same - CAN - remain the same. You will need to pay attention to the CG point while you are building and most especially if changing anything from the original plan - fuel tanks were shorter and much fatter than modern batteries!! LOL!!

There are numerous "KITS" still out there yet to be built. Motor mounts might need to be built or altered, but that's just part of the build. The THRUST LINE will remain true and that won't change.

Top Flight, Midwest, Carl Goldberg, Sig, Dynaflight, Andrews, FLite Line, Guillows, House of Balsa, and many other "KIT" manufacturers wares are still around and can be had fairly reasonably. Find one and get started if that is what you really want.

Hillbille

thepiper92 02-04-2014 12:17 AM

I don't mind modding a little bit...but I don't want a plane that needs a complete redesign to work with an electric setup. How are the Guillows planes, they look very weak to me, a lot suggesting the use of tissue paper? I just want to find the best plane, in terms of price and ease of converting to electric (not necessarily ease of building in general.

hillbille 02-04-2014 08:09 AM

Because most all of the planes designed to be powered with nitro have a fixed firewall and thrust line already built into the "plan" it is a fairly simple matter to substitute an electric motor setup instead of the nitro engine. The real problem is usually a matter of the CG as a nitro motor has far more weight forward than a comparable electric motor.

Keep in mind that electric motors are smooth in comparison to nitro motors. There is far less vibration. This translates directly to the airframe integrity as far less structural integrity - read plywood - need be used. Thinner formers and in the rear sections light balsa ply might be totally acceptable instead of spruce for formers as there will be far less stress, but you suit yourself.

A lot of people tend to want to build their own planes so that they can strengthen them against crashes.

Others build their own planes as lightly as possible figuring on NOT crashing it.

Differing points of view.

Even the most extreme multi part build kit can be built if it is done a little at a time and not rushed. The selection of YOUR kit really depends upon what TYPE of plane you want to have when you are finished building.

Do you want a Warbird, a smooth pattern plane, a Golden Era plane, biplane, quickie 500 racer, sport plane, trainer, slow flyer, fun flyer or what?

Yes it WILL be far more expensive than almost any comparable ARF of equal size. The reason for that is mostly when YOU build a plane YOU will choose fairly top notch hardware, the best you can afford in everything you put into YOUR model. That adds to the finished price albeit just a little at a time instead of all at once, but it does all add up!

You probably won't use the cheapest Chinese servos you can find but will put in what you TRUST and KNOW will do the job. Adds to the overall cost too.

But in the end it isn't the materials you use that forms the value of the model. It's the TIME and EFFORT you personally put into building it that make it valuable.

If you want something simple - try the Carl Goldberg kits, see if you can find an Anniversary Cub kit and put that together. If you think it might be too big then build the clipped wing version. I think a E-Flight Power 25 or even a 32 would work well in that plane on a 4 cell battery.

Hillbille

fhhuber 02-04-2014 08:56 AM

Proctor's Sopwith needs very little modification for e-power.
Main fuselage structure is very open, allowing easy battery placement as far forward as possible.
The gun "hump" makes a great battery hatch.
The motor mounting is very simple.
Hard part is getting the CG, but due to the lighter weight of e-power (sticking in roughly equal to AXi 4120/18 which is overkill to spin a scale prop) vs the recommended glow engine you can afford some lead weight being bolted to the firewall.

I expect similar ease of conversion for the Fokker DR1.

*********

Thee won't be many (if any) low cost 1/6 scale kits for WWI planes. There might be some smaller... I'd check at StevensAero.com first.

thepiper92 02-04-2014 03:50 PM

I don't mind smaller, around 40" wing span, but I do not want to drop under 35". No one seems to have what I like, other than possibly Hobby Hangar. I do not like the selection at StevensAero, and a lot of the others have cub/trainer style planes, which I have absolutely no interest in. I can't find Andrews and Flite Line, and Guillows are too small of planes.

BroncoSquid 02-04-2014 05:31 PM

Do you have a LHS(local hobby shop) near you? A short kit isn't as bad as it sounds if you have access to some balsa. If not there are lots of places to order sheets of balsa.
Theese are short kits, but they meet your other specifications.
http://www.manzanolaser.com/html/peter_rake.html

thepiper92 02-04-2014 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoSquid (Post 939178)
Do you have a LHS(local hobby shop) near you? A short kit isn't as bad as it sounds if you have access to some balsa. If not there are lots of places to order sheets of balsa.
Theese are short kits, but they meet your other specifications.
http://www.manzanolaser.com/html/peter_rake.html

I'm guessing that the places to put the sticks for reinforcement and shape are on the planes themselves. I do have a Hobby Shop somewhat close, and I believe they have balsa.

How is the 40" Sopwith Pup, or perhaps the 36"

BroncoSquid 02-04-2014 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepiper92 (Post 939181)
I'm guessing that the places to put the sticks for reinforcement and shape are on the planes themselves.

Most of the time you get a short kit it was developed from scratchbuilding plans. The laser cutter has done all of the hard cutting for you. Cutting ribs, fuse formers, tail sections. The rest is just flat stock that needs to be cut to length and then maybe some minor shaping. Just about every set of plans I have gives the size balsa you need. Remember, plans are real size, just measure when in doubt.

thepiper92 02-05-2014 07:33 AM

I'm still deciding whether I should go to a bigger plane.

fhhuber 02-05-2014 08:06 AM

Any biplane with complex rigging wires, you want to stick small enough that you don't have to take the wings off for transport. That makes the 1/6 Sopwith pretty close to max without a SUV, Van or trailer.
Spending an hour re-installing rigging and ensuring the wings are aligned every time you take the plane to the field gets old fast.

rreid7 02-05-2014 01:35 PM

Note that the Manzano Laser/ Peter Rake 36" Sopwith Camel is offered in both short and full kit versions. Also, in the case of short kits there will always be a lot of leftover balsa from the parts sheets. Much of the strip wood and small bits needed can usually be gotten out of this. A balsa stripper makes it easy, or a straight edge and X-acto or razor blade work fine. You don't have to buy as much additional wood as you might think.

thepiper92 02-05-2014 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fhhuber (Post 939234)
Any biplane with complex rigging wires, you want to stick small enough that you don't have to take the wings off for transport. That makes the 1/6 Sopwith pretty close to max without a SUV, Van or trailer.
Spending an hour re-installing rigging and ensuring the wings are aligned every time you take the plane to the field gets old fast.

I never thought of how the wings are more complex. If I went for larger, a ww2 plane would be easier to take off wings.

thepiper92 02-05-2014 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rreid7 (Post 939239)
Note that the Manzano Laser/ Peter Rake 36" Sopwith Camel is offered in both short and full kit versions. Also, in the case of short kits there will always be a lot of leftover balsa from the parts sheets. Much of the strip wood and small bits needed can usually be gotten out of this. A balsa stripper makes it easy, or a straight edge and X-acto or razor blade work fine. You don't have to buy as much additional wood as you might think.

Well that's a good thing, maybe the short kit is better if it will have enough scrap to make parts.

BroncoSquid 02-05-2014 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepiper92 (Post 939241)
Well that's a good thing, maybe the short kit is better if it will have enough scrap to make parts.

Did you keep any of the scrap from your MM P-51?

thepiper92 02-05-2014 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoSquid (Post 939243)
Did you keep any of the scrap from your MM P-51?

I did, although a lot of it was used remaking some parts that I broke/weren't strong enough. I added an extra layer of balsa to some area, and the trailing edge of the wings, the balsa strips were far too thin and warped as soon as the solite started shrinking. While I am still looking for a WW1 plane, I just ordered the P-47 Razorback http://www.manzanolaser.com/html/other_designers.html, which I feel is much better looking than the bubble canopy. I am still looking for a WW1 plane in the future though, just would like to get maybe one more build of a simpler plane (I assume that a single wing is easier to build that a biplane or triplane). I may go for the SPAD XIII when I get a WW1 plane, but I feel I should stick to 36" for a biplane, as it will be bulkier that a single wing and the Mazda 3 doesn't have much room to fit anything when I take it down to the cabin. There is a club about 3 minutes from where our cabin is. I am not technically part of the club, as I am down there only maybe 2 weeks in the summer, but I am hoping they will let me fly, and take off and land on their new runway, even if I have to pay a few bucks. I think they'll be in for quite the surprise, as last time I went there, I had not flown a plane yet.

BroncoSquid 02-05-2014 09:44 PM

Awesome, I am looking forward to the p47 write up.
[popcorn]
I have been drooling at the MiG-3 myself. Being in the navy and out to sea quite a bit I have followed just about all of the build threads on the site. Most threads are old, 2004-2010, but have pointers from the builders and designers.

thepiper92 02-05-2014 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoSquid (Post 939267)
Awesome, I am looking forward to the p47 write up.
[popcorn]
I have been drooling at the MiG-3 myself. Being in the navy and out to sea quite a bit I have followed just about all of the build threads on the site. Most threads are old, 2004-2010, but have pointers from the builders and designers.

A number of threads have helped me with the P51 build, although mainly the covering area, which is my main concern. I ditched the pull pull system in the p51, and I am hoping the p47 is easier in fitting control wires. The P51 looks good, even though my first build...just don't look at the bottom of the plane :/ , and hopefully it helped me learn so the P47 will be a better overall build. I will definitely go for a WW1 plane soon though, after I get more comfortable with everything.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 WattfFlyer.com
RCU Eflight HQ

Page generated in 0.09458 seconds with 13 queries