The Worlds Model Spitfire 80" Build Help!!!!!
06-18-2015, 04:45 AM
#26
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Easley,
SC
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can tell you from experience that the HS75BB will not last long as the retract servo. Built and flew the GS Mustang, after having a few of those fail I switched to the JR 791. Not sure if the HS75BB is not meant for GS use but they caused more than a couple gear up landings. Good luck on your build, the Spitfire like the P47 which have about the same wings flies very nice and is a great first warbird.
06-18-2015, 05:09 AM
#27
I can tell you from experience that the HS75BB will not last long as the retract servo. Built and flew the GS Mustang, after having a few of those fail I switched to the JR 791. Not sure if the HS75BB is not meant for GS use but they caused more than a couple gear up landings. Good luck on your build, the Spitfire like the P47 which have about the same wings flies very nice and is a great first warbird.
Roger
06-18-2015, 06:10 AM
#28
You know a little humility goes a long way. Screwing together a helicopter or car isnt the same as building an airplane.
These guys are only trying to help you and your coming across like a know it all. We Dont know your history and can only judge it by what is presented to us, which comes across as someone with very little knowledge on building rc airplanes. Granted we all have to start from somewhere, but an 80" spitfire fresh from a trainer or even a coulle of sport models typically isnt the smartest way to go with any amount and be successful
The reason these guys are telling you to build a smaller model Is because it is very similar. The difference is Most of the smaller models have much better directions in explaining how to build and setup the model. Giant scale modelers are expected to know more and have their own established methods, so the directions are typically a little more vague in certain areas.
These guys are only trying to help you and your coming across like a know it all. We Dont know your history and can only judge it by what is presented to us, which comes across as someone with very little knowledge on building rc airplanes. Granted we all have to start from somewhere, but an 80" spitfire fresh from a trainer or even a coulle of sport models typically isnt the smartest way to go with any amount and be successful
The reason these guys are telling you to build a smaller model Is because it is very similar. The difference is Most of the smaller models have much better directions in explaining how to build and setup the model. Giant scale modelers are expected to know more and have their own established methods, so the directions are typically a little more vague in certain areas.
06-18-2015, 08:41 AM
#29
What I said in post 6 "I would look for them in the top of the wing close to where the 2 halves meet. Hold the wing up to a very strong light source" Since you did say it was your 1st build, only making a suggestion it was a big project for a first build. Happy Flying.
GD2012; servo extension access holes/slots never exit at the bottom of the wing. They exit on the top of the wing where the fuselage sits so the leads can be connected to the receiver that is installed in the fuselage. Check in the area on top of the wing in roughly the same location you have your arrow marked on the bottom, you will eventually find the holes/slots on the upper wing panels.
Roger
Roger
06-18-2015, 01:38 PM
#30
This spit is not hard to fly IMHO, my son flew mine after he soloed on a trainer 40 , he said the trainer would not roll or fly inverted well and was boring he asked to fly my spit with a ST3250 and loved it , grease landings every time, and before that day he only had sim stick time.
06-18-2015, 05:43 PM
#33
My Feedback: (1)
Hay dude, looks like the Spitfire is coming right along. To your question about the servo arms: yes, you can use the longer arm that is the "aileron" arm but be aware that with the longer arm you may or may not be able to get the desired amount of control surface travel because the longer arm will move the linkage more than using a hole in the shorter arm. You may be able to compensate for the extra travel on the other end of the linkage (at the flap) by also using one of the outer (longer) holes or a longer control horn. If you are using a TX with programable end stops that may also work at set up time. Its a trial and error deal. Put it together, measure the control surface movement and make changes to get what you need. Another different way to overcome the problem of the servo arm not protruding out of the wing enough, is to put a 45 degree bend in the linkage arm about 1/2"-3/4" before the spot where the linkage goes thru the servo arm hole. This is not "ideal", a straight linkage with no bends is "ideal", but guess what sometimes a compromise is needed to make things work. What you have there with the arm not sticking out enough is also not "ideal". When you do put a bend in the linkage rod it is extra important to size the arm holes very accurately to the linkage wire size. A "number drill index" set is needed to drill the arm holes just a couple of thousandths larger than the wire diameter size. This will keep the side, and fore and aft slop to a minimum. If done carefully to keep the linkage slop under control, this works! As you have found out, there is a great deal of different opinions in the R/C world on how to do things, so some will come back and tell you I'am all wet and to never bend a linkage rod. BS, I say... I have done a number of linkages this way and IT WORKS! Also, sometimes you also have to elongate the precut slots in the servo cover to keep things working with out binding. Cheers.
Last edited by 52larry52; 06-19-2015 at 07:28 AM. Reason: fact correction on number drills
06-18-2015, 06:43 PM
#34
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: augusta, GA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hay dude, looks like the Spitfire is coming right along. To your question about the servo arms: yes, you can use the longer arm that is the "aileron" arm but be aware that with the longer arm you may or may not be able to get the desired amount of control surface travel because the longer arm will move the linkage more than using a hole in the shorter arm. You may be able to compensate for the extra travel on the other end of the linkage (at the flap) by also using one of the outer (longer) holes or a longer control horn. If you are using a TX with programable end stops that may also work at set up time. Its a trial and error deal. Put it together, measure the control surface movement and make changes to get what you need. Another different way to overcome the problem of the servo arm not protruding out of the wing enough, is to put a 45 degree bend in the linkage arm about 1/2"-3/4" before the spot where the linkage goes thru the servo arm hole. This is not "ideal", a straight linkage with no bends is "ideal", but guess what sometimes a compromise is needed to make things work. What you have there with the arm not sticking out enough is also not "ideal". When you do put a bend in the linkage rod it is extra important to size the arm holes very accurately to the linkage wire size. A "letter drill index" set is needed to drill the arm holes just a couple of thousandths larger than the wire diameter size. This will keep the side, and fore and aft slop to a minimum. If done carefully to keep the linkage slop under control, this works! As you have found out, there is a great deal of different opinions in the R/C world on how to do things, so some will come back and tell you I'am all wet and to never bend a linkage rod. BS, I say... I have done a number of linkages this way and IT WORKS! Also, sometimes you also have to elongate the precut slots in the servo cover to keep things working with out binding. Cheers.
1. What do you guys think about replacing the 4x futaba 3004's for the 4x hitec 645's? I was going to put the futaba 3004's on 2x flaps and 2x ruder/elevator. The hitec 645's would also solve the short servo arm problem on the flaps... Thanks
06-18-2015, 07:04 PM
#35
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: augusta, GA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YB; I was going to mention that fact to GD but I didn't want to be critical. I had mentioned several years ago to RC flyers that the HS75BB was a poor choice for a retract servo due to it's high failure rate but my advise fell on deaf ears, so I gave up trying to convince people that the better choice was the JR 791. I have a JR 791 installed in one of my Spitfires and it has worked without any failures since being installed in 2009.
Roger
Roger
06-18-2015, 07:38 PM
#36
GD; do a google search for "HS75BB retract servo failures", then your question will be answered. Here is a link to an excellent tool for selecting flight control servos that have the correct torque values. In the past, a lot of RC flyers, including myself have bought servos that have torque values well above what is actually required for RC aircraft types. Since I have been using this program, I have saved countless dollars in selecting servos that have the correct torque values for the types of aircraft I have.
http://www.mnbigbirds.com/Servo%20To...0Caculator.htm
http://www.mnbigbirds.com/Servo%20To...0Caculator.htm
06-18-2015, 07:57 PM
#37
My Feedback: (1)
Dude, Also on servo torques, remember that you will get more out of any servo using a 6.0 volt on board battery than the 4.8 volt you likely have in your trainer. This plane should have a 6.0 volt system. You will see torque values stated for 4.8 and 6.0 volts in the servo specs information.
06-18-2015, 10:27 PM
#38
Senior Member
GD you really need to read what people are saying when they are trying to help you!
Post#2 I told you there were circular cut outs close to the wing root. (which you later found)
Post #4 Invermast said they may be hidden by the covering and to feel around for them.
At this point neither of us even thought to tell you that the holes would be on the upper side of the wing, why? Because it's second nature to someone who has been building a while.
Thats why others suggested a less tricky path with a beginners plane which has more detailed instructions.
Post #6 Raptureboy said to look ON TOP of the wing close to where the two halves meet.
Post #9 I even posted a picture WITH BIG RED ARROWS POINTING TO THE HOLES, AND STATED IT WAS A PIC OF THE TOP, but hey you still didn't take any notice of the help that was offered!
In future don't get so hot headed, just listen and learn.
I'm out of here, good luck you will need it.
Post#2 I told you there were circular cut outs close to the wing root. (which you later found)
Post #4 Invermast said they may be hidden by the covering and to feel around for them.
At this point neither of us even thought to tell you that the holes would be on the upper side of the wing, why? Because it's second nature to someone who has been building a while.
Thats why others suggested a less tricky path with a beginners plane which has more detailed instructions.
Post #6 Raptureboy said to look ON TOP of the wing close to where the two halves meet.
Post #9 I even posted a picture WITH BIG RED ARROWS POINTING TO THE HOLES, AND STATED IT WAS A PIC OF THE TOP, but hey you still didn't take any notice of the help that was offered!
In future don't get so hot headed, just listen and learn.
I'm out of here, good luck you will need it.
06-19-2015, 01:54 AM
#39
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: augusta, GA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GD you really need to read what people are saying when they are trying to help you!
Post#2 I told you there were circular cut outs close to the wing root. (which you later found)
Post #4 Invermast said they may be hidden by the covering and to feel around for them.
At this point neither of us even thought to tell you that the holes would be on the upper side of the wing, why? Because it's second nature to someone who has been building a while.
Thats why others suggested a less tricky path with a beginners plane which has more detailed instructions.
Post #6 Raptureboy said to look ON TOP of the wing close to where the two halves meet.
Post #9 I even posted a picture WITH BIG RED ARROWS POINTING TO THE HOLES, AND STATED IT WAS A PIC OF THE TOP, but hey you still didn't take any notice of the help that was offered!
In future don't get so hot headed, just listen and learn.
I'm out of here, good luck you will need it.
Post#2 I told you there were circular cut outs close to the wing root. (which you later found)
Post #4 Invermast said they may be hidden by the covering and to feel around for them.
At this point neither of us even thought to tell you that the holes would be on the upper side of the wing, why? Because it's second nature to someone who has been building a while.
Thats why others suggested a less tricky path with a beginners plane which has more detailed instructions.
Post #6 Raptureboy said to look ON TOP of the wing close to where the two halves meet.
Post #9 I even posted a picture WITH BIG RED ARROWS POINTING TO THE HOLES, AND STATED IT WAS A PIC OF THE TOP, but hey you still didn't take any notice of the help that was offered!
In future don't get so hot headed, just listen and learn.
I'm out of here, good luck you will need it.
I started this post with this statement "This is my first build and was wondering if anyone has built this model" Now from that statement what words made you assume as you stated "At this point neither of us even thought to tell you that the holes would be on the upper side of the wing, why? Because it's second nature to someone who hasbeen building a while. That's why others suggested a less tricky path with a beginners plane which has more detailed instructions".
If some people would read the post first and stop automatically giving suggestions/ bias advice on their chosen path, instead of just answering the questions asked on the thread, this would be a great source for information....Dude this is my first build, small plane/ "less tricky" or large plane I would have look exactly where the instruction told me as stated on page 3 of my instruction booklet.
Once again I did not ask for advice on choosing a plane or a less tricky build. But thanks anyway for your helpful pics.......
Last edited by Georgiadude2012; 06-19-2015 at 03:23 AM.
06-19-2015, 03:45 AM
#42
Once again guys keep your opinions to yourself. I currently have a high wing trainer now and a club and a trainer and I fly at least 3 times a week. So please if you cant answer the questions I ask please don't reply to this build thread..... Guys I am just building an rc airplane not the Golden Gate Bridge, you have to start some where. I didn't say I was flying this plane the day I finish the build but I would like to learn how and why things work ie servos, engines, etc....
I am not a genus but I think the mechanics ie servos, ailerons, flaps, rudder etc works basically the same in a 40 size plane vs a larger plane..... So why would you suggest I build a smaller plane first?
I don't feel like explaining my life history ever few post this is getting ridiculous... Just help if you can, if not please don't post with useless comments on how it took 10 years before you built your first plane and that I am wrong for taking 3 years to build mine......
I am not a genus but I think the mechanics ie servos, ailerons, flaps, rudder etc works basically the same in a 40 size plane vs a larger plane..... So why would you suggest I build a smaller plane first?
I don't feel like explaining my life history ever few post this is getting ridiculous... Just help if you can, if not please don't post with useless comments on how it took 10 years before you built your first plane and that I am wrong for taking 3 years to build mine......
06-19-2015, 06:42 AM
#43
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: augusta, GA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop hijacking my "The Worlds Model Spitfire 80" Build Help!!!!!" thread with this silly nonsense ever few post. There are actually good people with good honest advice on here sharing useful information on my spitfire build. You Flying Rc aircraft geniuses/Gods just go over to the newbie threads and give your expert opinionated advice on what size, type, color, style, and brand of plane to purchase and fly and in your strict suggested order.
Please... We all get what you are saying- buy a 28" park trainer, then after 2 years and 20 solos move up to a 32" low wing park trainer then after 3 years and 90 days buy a mid size 40" trainer. After 5 years and 250hrs of flight time on the 40" trainer, advance to a low wing acrobatic 40" trainer after 10 solos its time to build. Get a 18" ARF 4 channel electric warbird, build it, fly it for 2 years. Now its time to build a 40" warbird etc. etc.........
You get my point right!!!!!!! And if we break that particular order we are doomed by the Rc airplane world..... This is the vibe and concept we get being a newbie in this hobby.. Its terrible almost takes the fun out of it!!!!!!
Last edited by Georgiadude2012; 06-19-2015 at 06:45 AM.
06-19-2015, 06:44 AM
#44
GD,
Please take this in the helpful spirit it's meant: This is a public forum, and your post was asking for help. If you're only willing to accept certain types of responses, maybe indicate it in the title so that guys who have significant experience and talent (like Invertmast) won't waste their time. Frankly, you're fortunate to have modelers like him here to help, even if you don't realize it. Being kind, your questions indicate 'extreme newbie' to experienced modelers. You don't have to agree with what people reply with, but instead of telling them to shut up... maybe just ignore it or even give a polite 'thanks.' It's perfectly OK to come off 'green' but green AND rude leave an aftertaste. It kind of sounds like "Hey, could you please loan me five bucks? Oh, and make sure it's a new, crisp bill you SOB!"
Each of those comments you growled at were from people genuinely interested in helping. A little graciousness wouldn't kill you.
Please take this in the helpful spirit it's meant: This is a public forum, and your post was asking for help. If you're only willing to accept certain types of responses, maybe indicate it in the title so that guys who have significant experience and talent (like Invertmast) won't waste their time. Frankly, you're fortunate to have modelers like him here to help, even if you don't realize it. Being kind, your questions indicate 'extreme newbie' to experienced modelers. You don't have to agree with what people reply with, but instead of telling them to shut up... maybe just ignore it or even give a polite 'thanks.' It's perfectly OK to come off 'green' but green AND rude leave an aftertaste. It kind of sounds like "Hey, could you please loan me five bucks? Oh, and make sure it's a new, crisp bill you SOB!"
Each of those comments you growled at were from people genuinely interested in helping. A little graciousness wouldn't kill you.
The following users liked this post:
ChrisKnee (10-29-2022)
06-19-2015, 08:55 AM
#45
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: augusta, GA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GD,
Please take this in the helpful spirit it's meant: This is a public forum, and your post was asking for help. If you're only willing to accept certain types of responses, maybe indicate it in the title so that guys who have significant experience and talent (like Invertmast) won't waste their time. Frankly, you're fortunate to have modelers like him here to help, even if you don't realize it. Being kind, your questions indicate 'extreme newbie' to experienced modelers. You don't have to agree with what people reply with, but instead of telling them to shut up... maybe just ignore it or even give a polite 'thanks.' It's perfectly OK to come off 'green' but green AND rude leave an aftertaste. It kind of sounds like "Hey, could you please loan me five bucks? Oh, and make sure it's a new, crisp bill you SOB!"
Each of those comments you growled at were from people genuinely interested in helping. A little graciousness wouldn't kill you.
Please take this in the helpful spirit it's meant: This is a public forum, and your post was asking for help. If you're only willing to accept certain types of responses, maybe indicate it in the title so that guys who have significant experience and talent (like Invertmast) won't waste their time. Frankly, you're fortunate to have modelers like him here to help, even if you don't realize it. Being kind, your questions indicate 'extreme newbie' to experienced modelers. You don't have to agree with what people reply with, but instead of telling them to shut up... maybe just ignore it or even give a polite 'thanks.' It's perfectly OK to come off 'green' but green AND rude leave an aftertaste. It kind of sounds like "Hey, could you please loan me five bucks? Oh, and make sure it's a new, crisp bill you SOB!"
Each of those comments you growled at were from people genuinely interested in helping. A little graciousness wouldn't kill you.
Sir, what's more specific than "The Worlds Model Spitfire 80" Build Help"!!!!!? I never told anyone to "Shut Up" but I asked for people to stop giving me there opinions on size and learning stages and approaches they took to this hobby and stick to the specific questions I ask... Is something wrong with that? There are several people who commented in this form on the specific help question and didn't criticize me for building a warbird so early.
Trying to belittle or knock down a person by saying there going to fail/crash is not help..... You are totally missing the point.... I never asked for help in deciding what plane to buy or what approach to take toward flying.. If a person truly want to help just answer the questions ask... Each one of those comments I "Growled at" were either " you cant build a spitfire on your first build" "You cant skip the steps I had to take" " That's not the way I did it, so it wont work" sorry but I didn't ask anyone's life story or how they came about being an rc expert/master flyer.
My initial question was "Where do the servo leads exit the wing at" just that simple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I asked no one what plane I should consider after my trainer or what steps should I take after my trainer.....
06-19-2015, 09:38 AM
#46
GD; I am a little late in responding to the issue of retract servos. You have already purchased two HS75BB retract servos, so I see no need for you to go and spend extra $$$ for the more expensive JR 791's. You will be using the light wire LG that came with the Spitfire, therefore there will be one HS 75BB retract servo per LG, so I think the servos will be sufficient in this case. If this Spitfire was designed to use just one servo to retract and extend both LG then I would recommend the purchase of the JR 791. If later on you decide to change out the wire LG for strut LG, then I would highly recommend the purchase of the JR 791.
Roger
Roger
Last edited by ForcesR; 06-19-2015 at 09:43 AM. Reason: correct initials
06-19-2015, 02:15 PM
#49
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Winchester,
VA
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the model and love it, have flown it electric and gas. there are openings that have to be punched out for the wires. Can post pics if you need , biggest issue I ever had was solved when I put the right retract servo in it. You can find the openings by just rubbing your fingers over the covering about 1.5 -2 inches in from the root, and aft of center. email [email protected]
+
+