TF 1/5 Scale P-51 ARF Assembly (1ST MISHAP!!!)
#3901
My Feedback: (53)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: milwaukee, WI
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#3902
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW- Interesting article taken from Pacific Scale Aircraft http://www.pacific-scaled-aircraft.c...provements.htm
Dihedral – the Top Flite GS kit has a little over 1/2 what the full scale Mustang has and it's very apparent once you’ve seen a full scale Mustang. Specifically the full scale wing panels have 5° dihedral measured at the center of the 25% chord line. Putting 5° in the trailing edge would be very close. Although the effect of this change hasn't been reported to my knowledge, theory and other Mustang kits with the right dihedral suggests it will not affect normal flight, that it will improve stability slightly in landing mode and that it may be slightly detrimental to high G inverted maneuvers. A consideration is the retract installation often will have to be modified.
I made the dihedral 6 degrees and the Struts/ retract installation is vertical and did not have to be modified-except wing mod to beef up the structure to hold the retracts
Dihedral – the Top Flite GS kit has a little over 1/2 what the full scale Mustang has and it's very apparent once you’ve seen a full scale Mustang. Specifically the full scale wing panels have 5° dihedral measured at the center of the 25% chord line. Putting 5° in the trailing edge would be very close. Although the effect of this change hasn't been reported to my knowledge, theory and other Mustang kits with the right dihedral suggests it will not affect normal flight, that it will improve stability slightly in landing mode and that it may be slightly detrimental to high G inverted maneuvers. A consideration is the retract installation often will have to be modified.
I made the dihedral 6 degrees and the Struts/ retract installation is vertical and did not have to be modified-except wing mod to beef up the structure to hold the retracts
#3903
Top Flite is known for producing aircraft models without the correct wing dihedral, that's one of the gripes I have with TF. I changed the wing dihedral on the TF FW-190 from TF's stock 2 degrees to the correct 5 degrees for the FW-190. This is how I did my dihedral modification.
Last edited by ForcesR; 05-15-2016 at 11:06 AM. Reason: word correction
#3905
My Feedback: (3)
The Kit P-51 with the correct dihedral flies very well all around. There should be no question if your thinking about buying the ARF or building the kit that this update or correction should be considered a must.
I have the ARF sitting in its box and when I get to it that's the first step I'm taking. I've flown the kit with the right dihedral and it flies like a pattern plane without bad habits.
Also from flying and testing this plane likes the DLE 55 & Xoar 22x10 Carbon combo and gentle throttle curve program 0/10/25/75/100 or similar.
I can set the power set the flaps and fly it to the ground and touchdown gently.
Also, very important I think, I changed out the Robart strut springs to allow them to compress instead of being so stiff stock. I made them two stage so they extend unloaded but compress to about 1/4 inch of the full stroke. During taxiing the struts absorb the bounces on grass. When landing the plane settles in very nicely and doesn't bounce up excessively the moment the tires touch. The stiff springs combined with holding up while on approach means even a light touch at a steep angle and the plane jumps up. You'd have to time unloading the elevator with touching down to help prevent this bounce. With the two stage springs the struts just give you more compliance and less critical landings.
You can find springs and cut them to length at the hardware store. I went to North 40 but you just need to find a compression spring selection.
I have the ARF sitting in its box and when I get to it that's the first step I'm taking. I've flown the kit with the right dihedral and it flies like a pattern plane without bad habits.
Also from flying and testing this plane likes the DLE 55 & Xoar 22x10 Carbon combo and gentle throttle curve program 0/10/25/75/100 or similar.
I can set the power set the flaps and fly it to the ground and touchdown gently.
Also, very important I think, I changed out the Robart strut springs to allow them to compress instead of being so stiff stock. I made them two stage so they extend unloaded but compress to about 1/4 inch of the full stroke. During taxiing the struts absorb the bounces on grass. When landing the plane settles in very nicely and doesn't bounce up excessively the moment the tires touch. The stiff springs combined with holding up while on approach means even a light touch at a steep angle and the plane jumps up. You'd have to time unloading the elevator with touching down to help prevent this bounce. With the two stage springs the struts just give you more compliance and less critical landings.
You can find springs and cut them to length at the hardware store. I went to North 40 but you just need to find a compression spring selection.
#3907
My Feedback: (3)
I have built and flown 2 TF GS P 51 model with the scale dihedral and currently own 2 H 9 60cc P 51 models, I haven't measure the H 9 wings but they look like scale dihedral. My TF GS P 51 B (built from the ARF) has a replacement wing kit that has the factory dihedral. I can tell you that the appearance of the planes with scale dihedral is much better than non-scale but after 12 years of flying big Mustangs, and more than 1600 landings i have not been able to tell any difference in flying qualities between the 2 dihedral angles. I have 3 TF P 51 models (1 ARF and 2 kits) , 2 H 9 P 51 D ARFs and a TF GS P 47 in the shop now.
The big difference I notice is that the TF P 51 lands better if it is lighter than 24 lbs and the H9 Mustang lands better and slower no matter what it weighs. I'm not criticizing the TF plane's flying and landing, 2 of my TF P 51 models weighed almost 30 lbs. and I could grease them in on the mains easily just like the lighter planes. I just had to use a faster approach speed with the stock wing flaps and the run-out lasted longer. My current TF P 51 B has slotted flaps and can land slower than the same plane with the stock wing flaps. If I ever build another TF GS P 51 I will modify the dihedral to scale but I like the better handling and more scale appearance of the H 9 plane so getting another TF P 51 is not likely.
The big difference I notice is that the TF P 51 lands better if it is lighter than 24 lbs and the H9 Mustang lands better and slower no matter what it weighs. I'm not criticizing the TF plane's flying and landing, 2 of my TF P 51 models weighed almost 30 lbs. and I could grease them in on the mains easily just like the lighter planes. I just had to use a faster approach speed with the stock wing flaps and the run-out lasted longer. My current TF P 51 B has slotted flaps and can land slower than the same plane with the stock wing flaps. If I ever build another TF GS P 51 I will modify the dihedral to scale but I like the better handling and more scale appearance of the H 9 plane so getting another TF P 51 is not likely.
#3908
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have built and flown 2 TF GS P 51 model with the scale dihedral and currently own 2 H 9 60cc P 51 models, I haven't measure the H 9 wings but they look like scale dihedral. My TF GS P 51 B (built from the ARF) has a replacement wing kit that has the factory dihedral. I can tell you that the appearance of the planes with scale dihedral is much better than non-scale but after 12 years of flying big Mustangs, and more than 1600 landings i have not been able to tell any difference in flying qualities between the 2 dihedral angles. I have 3 TF P 51 models (1 ARF and 2 kits) , 2 H 9 P 51 D ARFs and a TF GS P 47 in the shop now.
The big difference I notice is that the TF P 51 lands better if it is lighter than 24 lbs and the H9 Mustang lands better and slower no matter what it weighs. I'm not criticizing the TF plane's flying and landing, 2 of my TF P 51 models weighed almost 30 lbs. and I could grease them in on the mains easily just like the lighter planes. I just had to use a faster approach speed with the stock wing flaps and the run-out lasted longer. My current TF P 51 B has slotted flaps and can land slower than the same plane with the stock wing flaps. If I ever build another TF GS P 51 I will modify the dihedral to scale but I like the better handling and more scale appearance of the H 9 plane so getting another TF P 51 is not likely.
The big difference I notice is that the TF P 51 lands better if it is lighter than 24 lbs and the H9 Mustang lands better and slower no matter what it weighs. I'm not criticizing the TF plane's flying and landing, 2 of my TF P 51 models weighed almost 30 lbs. and I could grease them in on the mains easily just like the lighter planes. I just had to use a faster approach speed with the stock wing flaps and the run-out lasted longer. My current TF P 51 B has slotted flaps and can land slower than the same plane with the stock wing flaps. If I ever build another TF GS P 51 I will modify the dihedral to scale but I like the better handling and more scale appearance of the H 9 plane so getting another TF P 51 is not likely.
#3910
My Feedback: (53)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: milwaukee, WI
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never had a firewall issue with the TF P51. I have lost several and never have had the firewall separate from the fuse. Beef it up if you want, but there are so many other things the NEED to be fixed, I would focus on them.
#3911
I epoxied about 1 x 1 1/2 inches pieces of 6 oz fiberglass cloth in my TF 1st P-51 (firewall to balsa sides between the stringers). I used 30 minute epoxy to do it. I don't know if it's needed but it is so easy to do before any equipment is installed. I have see a couple firewalls come loose on the P-51 after a year or more of flying.
#3913
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: , AZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the reply Ralph. Mine is coming along, but work will get slow now that tomorrow is suppose to bring 118 degree temperatures. Ouch. I have the DA 60 mounted, tail wheel (Robart Electric) mounted, and will add a little cloth to the inside of the firewall, and then mount the servos inside the fuse will be next steps.
#3914
Chris, The Red Nose II looks nice. Is that a Leo Spychalla cowl for the 5 1/2' spinner?
Jeff, Your welcome. Sounds like your coming right along on your TF P-51. How about some pictures.
Jeff, Your welcome. Sounds like your coming right along on your TF P-51. How about some pictures.
#3916
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: , AZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here ya go Ralph
So here is the wing after all the internal work has been performed. I just thought it would look cool to try a little aluminum Monokote. Kinda fun. I was happy with my work. I hadn't done any real building in a long time. I rather enjoyed it. With your guidance of course. More to come stand by.
Last edited by jeffmarx; 06-02-2016 at 08:04 PM.
#3918
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: , AZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More Pics Ralph
So here is the DA 60 mounted last week, I was going to add a header and a RE2 tune pipe down the side of the fuse, but I am starting to change my mind after seeing that a Jtec muffler will sit completely under the cowl.
Last edited by jeffmarx; 06-02-2016 at 08:05 PM.
#3919
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: , AZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ralph!
Here is what my friend's plane looks like with the header in place. Thoughts on a header and tune pipe running down the side of it?
Last edited by jeffmarx; 06-02-2016 at 08:07 PM.
#3921
Jeff, Thanks for the pics. Looks like you are getting things done. I'm to much of a scale person to have a tuned pipe running along the side of the fuse. My P-51 flies just fine with a regular muffler on a DLE 55 RA. My muffler is a rear exhaust one but the pipes stick out same as yours. I cut them off about half an inch outside the fuse. Didn't like them sticking down so much. Didn't seem to affect the way the engine ran at all.
A note about landing gear. A friend of mine flew his TF p-51D today. Make a very hard landing. We had modified the landing gear mounts and spar box as I showed. The wing held together great. However one LG struct broke off and the other landing gear pulled the 1/4 ply wood that the unit screws into out. If we had not reinforced the wing and spar box the wing would have been destroyed.
Thanks again for the pics, Ralph
A note about landing gear. A friend of mine flew his TF p-51D today. Make a very hard landing. We had modified the landing gear mounts and spar box as I showed. The wing held together great. However one LG struct broke off and the other landing gear pulled the 1/4 ply wood that the unit screws into out. If we had not reinforced the wing and spar box the wing would have been destroyed.
Thanks again for the pics, Ralph
#3922
My Feedback: (53)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: milwaukee, WI
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeff, Thanks for the pics. Looks like you are getting things done. I'm to much of a scale person to have a tuned pipe running along the side of the fuse. My P-51 flies just fine with a regular muffler on a DLE 55 RA. My muffler is a rear exhaust one but the pipes stick out same as yours. I cut them off about half an inch outside the fuse. Didn't like them sticking down so much. Didn't seem to affect the way the engine ran at all.
A note about landing gear. A friend of mine flew his TF p-51D today. Make a very hard landing. We had modified the landing gear mounts and spar box as I showed. The wing held together great. However one LG struct broke off and the other landing gear pulled the 1/4 ply wood that the unit screws into out. If we had not reinforced the wing and spar box the wing would have been destroyed.
Thanks again for the pics, Ralph
A note about landing gear. A friend of mine flew his TF p-51D today. Make a very hard landing. We had modified the landing gear mounts and spar box as I showed. The wing held together great. However one LG struct broke off and the other landing gear pulled the 1/4 ply wood that the unit screws into out. If we had not reinforced the wing and spar box the wing would have been destroyed.
Thanks again for the pics, Ralph
#3923
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: , AZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ralph- Landing Gear Mounts
So I made a doubler on one side that ties in the Leading Edge, on the other side I fastened with Tee Nuts so the plywood can't delaminate. All was tied together with I think 8oz Fiberglass. I know that the two weakest points on these P-51's are the firewall and the gear mounts. I'm telling ya I can stand/ jump up and down on this surfboard of a wing, thanks to all the great pointers.
#3924
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Porirua, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking for a wing bag for my Topflite P51 mustang giant ARF
does anyone know where to purchase one that is not hugely expensive
im not sure what's going on at Redbaronhobbies as I've tried to contact Tim for about 3 weeks now with no replies
Does anyone know what's going on with Redbaronhobbies?
does anyone know where to purchase one that is not hugely expensive
im not sure what's going on at Redbaronhobbies as I've tried to contact Tim for about 3 weeks now with no replies
Does anyone know what's going on with Redbaronhobbies?
#3925
I am just getting down to the last few steps in finishing my Mustang. I have made the wing modifications discussed through out the thread. Lots of other info has been helpful as well.
I am installing a DLE61 and ran into an issue. Installed the motor using the template from the technical bulletin.
As I got the cowl cut up and fitted around the motor the checkers do not quite line up. It look like the engine needs to be raised about 1/8" or so for the cowl to line up.
I realize this is an ARF and never really expected it to line up perfectly.
Just curious if anybody else has run into this?
Thanks
Kevin
I am installing a DLE61 and ran into an issue. Installed the motor using the template from the technical bulletin.
As I got the cowl cut up and fitted around the motor the checkers do not quite line up. It look like the engine needs to be raised about 1/8" or so for the cowl to line up.
I realize this is an ARF and never really expected it to line up perfectly.
Just curious if anybody else has run into this?
Thanks
Kevin