Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

View Poll Results: A poll

Voters
119. You may not vote on this poll
  • Foam 2 piece wing.

    16 13.45%
  • Built up 2 piece wing.

    29 24.37%
  • Foam 3 piece wing.

    21 17.65%
  • Built up 3 piece wing.

    53 44.54%
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 286

  1. #1
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    Fliteskin Ta-152 H1


    Here we go again with another poll [X(]
    This time we already know the subject and the scale, I would like to know what is the preferred choice of building.
    According to Wikipedia, the full size had a wingspan of 14.44m or 568.5 in. at 1/5 scale will make a 2.88m or 113.7 inches span!!

    The fuselage has to be a one piece fiberglass with all the panel lines and screws molded in. It saves months of work and head scratching for the average builder.
    The wing could be built up and sheeted with .010" skins as the stabilizer.
    or maybe foam wing? they are a bit stronger but when you need to install splits flaps, and landing gear, it can become hard and messy to work with.
    Also, should it be a 2 or 3 piece with alu tubes?

    General specs:
    span: 113.7"
    length: 82"
    airfoil NACA 23016/23012
    Incidence 2.5ΒΊ washout 3ΒΊ (per full size) should make a very forgiving warbird
    Weight: 27-30 lbs
    Engine: ?
    Release time, early 2011.

    Thanks for the input!

    JoseG
    fliteskin.com

    JG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Pn36696.jpg 
Views:	1885 
Size:	315.0 KB 
ID:	1478207  
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!

  2. #2
    vertical grimmace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    ft collins , CO
    Posts
    5,924
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Oh yes! What an amazing aircraft. I love using foam. The ease and accuracy. They just seem to fly better. For ease of transport, make it a 3 piece. I think that is stronger and the center section can be left installed on the fuselage.
    \"let\'\'\'\'s just say, they will be satisfied with less\" Ming the Merciless

  3. #3
    dvs1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Kanab, UT
    Posts
    1,027
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    I currently have plans for Dave Andersons 1/5 scale, but if you release one with a fiberglass fuse I WANT IT!
    My only requests are, built up 3 piece wing with the break outside the gear so it can sit on its gear, and that the wing
    accepts sierra retracts. A fuse with all panel lines and hatches built in would be the best too!

    After building a Ziroli Stuka with a 3 piece wing, Ive decided it is the nicest way to go so i can store and transport it on its legs!
    Keeps hangar rash down for me!

  4. #4
    All Day Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    MANHATTAN BEACH, CA
    Posts
    3,512

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Jose, What's the wing area of the model? Dan.
    Dan

  5. #5
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Dan,

    1438 sq. inch.

    JG
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!

  6. #6
    glazier808's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Honolulu , HI
    Posts
    3,983

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Sorry I missed your call Jose, took my little girl to the pool. WOW...


    guess the cats outta the bag lol...

    I think I would perfer the 3 piece wing. I'm not opposed to the foam, but I would perfer a built up wing I think. What about a 3 piece wing with the outer sections being foam?

    Either way, you know that I'll have to have one of these too.

    I would'nt want the ME109 or SpitfireMkVIII kits I bought from you to be getting lonely lol.

    Casey
    Fliteskin, Sierra, Nelson Hobby, MICKO aircraft, Getstencils, Holman Plans, VicRC, Castle Creations, Addicted to Luft, BestPilots.com

  7. #7
    Dash7ATP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Smithfield,, VA
    Posts
    978
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1


    Jose,

    Apparently you have done several scale kits before, but I have to admit I'm not familiar with them.

    The subject you are discussing should make a nice flying model. I like the relatively high aspect wing, but as you are aware they have their issues. You have already mentioned the problems caused by flaps; less structure for strength. 

    One area I have started to look closely at is the gear mounting system or structure. The gear mounts very far forward on this plane and the trunion would be almost at the leading edge.  While this seems to be common on many WWII aircraft, it does cause strength issues. HOw to moung it being the biggest question. I just completed an old Yellow Aircraft kit (I'm not bad mouthing them here) of the P-47 and decided that the plywood mounting plate installed in the precovered foam core wing was too small for the landing stresses I felt the model would see. It was barely 1 1/2 inches wide on either side of the cutout for the gear. Not Much support for gear with nine inch struts and a 24 pound model. If you go with foam, don't skimp on the gear mounting structure.

    I like the idea of all skin detail molded in. That has to take a lot of mold making time.. Of course we end up paying for it.

    Best of luck on this model.

    Dash
    "When you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

    AMA # 8870, Member since 1978.
    Waco Brotherhood # 219.
    P-40 Brotherhood #8.

  8. #8
    All Day Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    MANHATTAN BEACH, CA
    Posts
    3,512

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Like Dash said, that wing has a very high aspect ratio. You wont have room for much structure so you will be soley dependent on the foam and sheeting. By the time you get done making the cut outs for the gear, flaps and ailerons there will be little left to work with. Maybe you can do it if you have the experience. That 30 pounds is awfull light for a plane that size with a foam wing and fiberglass fuselage. The wing area is a nice round 10 square feet. At 30 pounds the wing loading will be 48oz. square foot. Mighty light. What have your planes this size weighed in the past? Dan.
    Dan

  9. #9
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Casey, you're right the cat's out and there is no turn back ! It's interesting to get views and ideas....

    Dash, yes the gear mounting is an issue on the 190. Having built 3 helps figuring out the weak points. The built up wing will be easier to build and re-enforcing the spar and ribs connecting the gear plate will solve the problem. I also built the Holman fw190 in the past with a foam wing and works well if reinforcing the gear plate with 2 semi ribs connected to a ply 1/8" semi-spar.

    Dan, 30lbs is not unrealistic, specially if built up. My heavy glass fuse Fw190 weighs 23lbs with 83" built up wing
    My DhHornet weighs 36lbs but and 100" span but 5lbs are lead on the nose. The Ta152 will not need any lead in the nose.
    I think I will have both options, 2 piece foam and 3 piece balsa and ply with a alu tube.

    JG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Ki20416.jpg 
Views:	72 
Size:	63.5 KB 
ID:	1478448   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Ze87493.jpg 
Views:	79 
Size:	38.0 KB 
ID:	1478449  
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Medford, MA
    Posts
    3,756
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    A three piece wing would be decent. Either foam or built up. A three piece wing allows for VERY easy transport.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Taylorsville, KY
    Posts
    2,271
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Never built anything that big but I'd go 3-pc built up. I like foam for simple wings but hate making templates et al to know where to dig foam out and insert mechanisms. I'd rather build internal workings as wing progresses on bench. My Judy, for example, has retracts, flaps, dive brakes, bomb drop, nav lights and ailerons. I contemplated foam but am glad I didn't for making this stuff fit into a 69" wing was 'testy' to say the least! My $0.02 That will be a neat airplane!

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Drammen, NORWAY
    Posts
    366
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    ORIGINAL: JGrc

    Dan, 30lbs is not unrealistic, specially if built up. My heavy glass fuse Fw190 weighs 23lbs with 83'' built up wing
    My DhHornet weighs 36lbs but and 100'' span but 5lbs are lead on the nose. The Ta152 will not need any lead in the nose.
    I think I will have both options, 2 piece foam and 3 piece balsa and ply with a alu tube.

    JG
    Hi Jose!

    I have buildt a Ta152C from a modified Dave Platt FW190A8 kit. But had to add weight in the nose. Because the wing was moved forward on the Ta152, the fuselage back of the wing is very long.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ6PutcawaU

    Have used a Laser200V and it weights 1250gr. With homemade scale-exaust I had to add 300gr of lead in the nose.
    Looking forward to see your Ta152H!

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Qo40196.jpg 
Views:	148 
Size:	31.5 KB 
ID:	1478527   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Kf14246.jpg 
Views:	70 
Size:	25.2 KB 
ID:	1478528  

  13. #13
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    It seems a 3 piece break-away wing is the most popular choice. It adds extra weight though, because of the tubes, etc. ta152 your 152 looks reaaly great in the air! yes the wing is about 2.5" forward from the fw190 model.

    JG
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Apple Valley, MN
    Posts
    3,077
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Jose, a glass fuse for this plane would be great. Since you didn;t include my favorite, the one piece wing, I voted 3 piece.

    Nice Vid TA152....Question:

    Did the C model use the basic FW190 wing in some fashion, or was it a whole new wing? I realize the TA152H was an all new long wing.

    Jeff
    Where's my glue....I gotta build!
    Spitfire Bro #108

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Medford, MA
    Posts
    3,756
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    The Ta 152C used a slightly modified D9 wing.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Drammen, NORWAY
    Posts
    366
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Hi Jeff!

    The C wing was made from a basic A8/D9 wing with a new structure. It also had a insert of 500mm in the center, so the span increased to 11,00mtr. The H wing was also from the same wing as the C, but with the tips stretched out.
    A big difference from the A wing, was that the wing on the Ta152 models was made in two pieces, connected with a large flange in the middle.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    241
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    I have a 100 inch TA152 with a built up wing and Sierra retracts, i have a 3w 85 in the nose and it is about 48 Pounds.and flys ok not balistic. I think for that size aircraft at least an 85cc or the an inline 100cc would be great, i did not haver to add weight to the nose.
    If you can keep it under 40 pounds amazing.

  18. #18
    Ramstein44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Aurora, CO
    Posts
    1,977
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    I have the Anderson TA152 but would welcome a glass fuse with a built up wing and being three parts for simple ease of transport.
    "IF" I'd stop staring at them, I'd get more done to them.
    Platt FW190, Holman FW190, Meister FW190, SIST FW190, TF FW190.

  19. #19
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Dubs, 48 lbs for a 100" airplane is too heavy even though anything will fly with enough power. WIng loading makes a difference in the handling, also the heavier the more damage when they crash land! The landing gear and the mounting ribs, etc will have to support 3 times the weight of the airplane in a hard landing, so do the numbers.
    I'm shooting for 30lbs. and will be about that.
    Ramstein, most people seem to want a 3 piece wing. I prefer 2 piece, with one wing tube or a ply plug (Meister style) because it saves weight. I think most people prefer 3 piece wing so they can keep the center section attached to the fuse while transporting. If you have to remove the wing from the fuse, then 3 piece wing is not worth the trouble.
    I'm not sure which airfoil D. Anderson used, so don't know if it will fit the glass fuse.

    JG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Fd90989.jpg 
Views:	100 
Size:	81.0 KB 
ID:	1478924   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Qo41145.jpg 
Views:	82 
Size:	292.2 KB 
ID:	1478925  
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!

  20. #20
    vertical grimmace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    ft collins , CO
    Posts
    5,924
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    Keep in mind this is just a 1/5 scale FW 190 with a stretched wing. Just because the span is long, does not mean it should be a heavy airplane. It is not the same as say a 114" Thunderbolt or Corsair.
    I have the Andersen plans and I see no reason why an aircraft of this size should not be much over 25lbs. The wingspan seems to thrwo some people on this design. It is not that big really, just long wings. The prototype Andersen is flying with (and designed for) a 50cc engine.

    I cannot wait to see this become available. Any time line?
    \"let\'\'\'\'s just say, they will be satisfied with less\" Ming the Merciless

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Drammen, NORWAY
    Posts
    366
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    My Ta152C have a span of 211cm and weights 9500gr. With the Laser 200V, it have plenty of power. With a H wing I guess it would ended up in about 10kg.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Burbank, CA,
    Posts
    1,300
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    IMHO, foam 2 piece wing. Don't like seeing separation on outer panels for the sake of having a model sit on its gears, plus the fit will start to look bad after a few season of flying. With the gear being wide as is it on the 190 you will need to remove the wing to put inside your car anyways. Why foam? anyone can put it together and build a perfect wing, that's what foam wings do for a lot of folks, a built up being this long (glider type wing) care must be taken to prevent any kind of unwanted twist, as it will show greatly on this bird when its in the air. Its easy to work with foam once you have it prepared to accept what you need in it, not to mention its a perfect combination for fliteskin wing sheeting. I have built two Holman 190s and foam wings are definitely stronger than built up, I have broken a d9 fuse on a very hard landing but the wing and retract mounts was unaffected, typically in this condition I would have to rebuild a wing. If this is generally the same scale as the Holman or Sist D9 it will not weigh that much more, i can bet it will be lighter than a Sist D9 composite kit as they tend to reach 30lbs
    Happy Flying!

  23. #23
    Ramstein44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Aurora, CO
    Posts
    1,977
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    I have two Holman Doras, one with foam wing and the other is a new style offered as a complete built up wing. I can say from the builds that I've done that the foam wing is much heavier then the wood. Incorporating a jig type system into the wing will prevent the twist complications in the build. On the newer wing design of wood, I can say the build went much faster than the foam wing! I have a forum on the wood wing also and if you check out the dates, you can verify this.
    "IF" I'd stop staring at them, I'd get more done to them.
    Platt FW190, Holman FW190, Meister FW190, SIST FW190, TF FW190.

  24. #24
    vertical grimmace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    ft collins , CO
    Posts
    5,924
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    If laser cut and well engineered, with modern building techniques, I would be fine with a built up wing. Warps would not scare me. I am sure a foam version would be heavier.
    \"let\'\'\'\'s just say, they will be satisfied with less\" Ming the Merciless

  25. #25
    JGrc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,248
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Fliteskin Ta-152 H1

    ORIGINAL: vertical grimmace

    Keep in mind this is just a 1/5 scale FW 190 with a stretched wing. Just because the span is long, does not mean it should be a heavy airplane. It is not the same as say a 114'' Thunderbolt or Corsair.
    I have the Andersen plans and I see no reason why an aircraft of this size should not be much over 25lbs. The wingspan seems to thrwo some people on this design. It is not that big really, just long wings. The prototype Andersen is flying with (and designed for) a 50cc engine.

    I cannot wait to see this become available. Any time line?
    I Agree with that VG, will have the laser cut wing parts available regardless. TIme frame, shooting for Spring 2011, right Vic?

    JG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Ca81503.jpg 
Views:	108 
Size:	24.6 KB 
ID:	1479089  
    Fliteskin is tougher than you think!


Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:20 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.