DVM100

Hey David,

can you confirm your CofG for me? Is it measured at the inboard LE (radiators) or outboard of the nacelles? Many thanks, Dave

david polley

Dear DVM100

Yes you are right, at the inboard leading edge....

The CG point is 110 mm measured INSIDE between the nacelles and the fuselage.

I balanced my model right side up and NOT upside down as you would do with most models. I used the Great Planes CG balance machine (photo enclosed). It WILL balance but because the model is right side up, it will be very touchy until you get it on the spot. Once it is on the spot the model will stay balanced in the air on it's own. Most folks have had to add about a pound weight in the nose to get it to balance at that point. This will mostly depend on your choice engines, and if you have retracts. If you do use retracts, make sure they are retracted inside of the nacells before you balance the model. I had fixed gear so I balanced mine of course with the wheels down. The model is balanced with empty fuel tanks as well....

I emptied out my Dad's tackel fishing box full of lead sinkers and placed them in an electrical tape container (photo enclosed). I then filled the container with epoxy, then snaped the lid back on the container. When the epoxy finally cured, I then mounted it flush with the nose of the Mossie. This Tape container ( Scotch 33 electrical tape) fits perfectly behind the firewall of the mossie. I used double sided tape to secure the container to the firewall, then mounted my battery pack with double sided tape to the container. I then stuffed the whole nose of the fuselage with foam so the battery and the lead container stay put and do not move. If they slipped out of position at all, it could be very difficult to fly, since the CG is already so sensitive.

Hope this helped...

Good Luck
David

Neo gold

Well i'm just starting this build!..i'll take my time though....as in the past few weeks i have assembled & flown a Seagull dual ace, a seagull Dewoitine...& a Kyosho Ta152.
I'm still very undecided over which engines to fit in this...defo no 2-strokes!!! .
So as an alternative?...anyone have thoughts on a pair of OS Wankels? the 49-PI inparticular.

Neo gold

Ok ok....i'm settled on the saito 56's & sticking with std tanks , as they are quite easy on fuel....i think cmpro made quite abit of money out of this one, thousands sold worldwide!...most are trashed!.
I'm keeping this one simple..i'e no pilots...fancy detailing etc etc, but i did buy some retracts, mechs...though i noticed the left side mount in the fuse is off to the left???...other one / mount is in the middle.
One thing i am using is a digital corless high torque Hi-tek on the elev & one quality digital high torque on the Rudd..the latest range are very impressive servos....i want full smooth control on the tail group.
I'll upgrade the rudder rod too whilst i'm there.
Come on!... more mossie chat please!.

DVM100

I'm about to maiden mine with Turnigy electrics and a Benedini sound system. Sounds awesomne and should fly great....

Sandmann_AU

I'm very close to the first start on mine... I need to plumb the air lines for the landing gear, do a little work fitting fillers to the fuel lines, and finish the shrouds that go over the landing gear bays and then I'm all done other than minor things like fitting canopies and balancing. Like you I went with the Saito 56's but I used Sullivan 10oz tanks as I couldn't see the standard 6oz ones lasting too long in the air.

I had all sorts of fun trying to get 3 1/4" spinners on those Saitos with their damn metric prop shaft threads, ended up having to get spinner adapters from Hong Kong.

I have to say, this is the most difficult ARF I've ever built... it seems like nothing in it is strong enough to survive a flight, the landing gear mounts (like yours) weren't straight and I had to fiddle with them to get the gear right. I don't mind kit-bashing (I prefer building kits to ARFs anyway), but the poor engineering on this model is really starting to make me regret my purchase. I've stuck with the standard rudder/tail-wheel control but I used two bolts with a pull-pull system. I'm hoping that'll halve the load on each bolt and allow it to work.

I've used Spektrum DS821 digital servos on all the control surfaces (except flaps) which have a fairly high torque rating.

I have to say though that at this point I'm completing it more out of stubbornness than any sense of excitement about flying it. I have a feeling this'll be a one-shot wonder and I'll soon be looking for another plane to take twin Saito 56's. Who knows though, maybe it'll be amazing and end up being my favourite. Stranger things have happened.

Neo gold

Hey Matt....don't be negative!....optimistic all the way!!....its strange about the offset landing mount & we have know this for years now!?....why have Cmpro not rectified this...i wonder.
Did you use the "floppy" tanks?..i cannot find them over here, i'm sure by the time i get to that point..i will have found something witha little more capacity.
This bird is not really for rough uneven fields...my local clubs are not too bad, i can only imagine that access to an asphalt strip is heaven!!.

Hot Rod Todd

My Feedback: (1)

For the money this is a good kit. Obviously there are some things that must be done, but in the end it flys good and looks fantastic in the air. I would bet most problems are due to using the recommended CG and not using reliable enough engines. I had a glow plug fall out right after climb out once and was still able to land with no problem. It can be a handful to take off without a head wind, but once in the air it is fun to fly. For those two-stroke haters out there, no four strokes that fits under the cowls will compare to the performance of my two OS .46AX's. The sound of twin two strokes may not be the most realistic, but it seems to put a smile on everyones face.

david polley

Dear Hot Rod Todd,

Amen to the 2 strokes Todd. [8D]

Neo gold

Superb photo's guys!!...esp that middle one of Dave's...with the Mac in the distance it looks a picture perfect day!!...what great runway... your club ?!!....days like that are so few in the UK, but i fly @ every opportunity.

Neo gold

Ok guys...today i put the boot in!, totally diff perspective & adopted a 'KISS' system for building...ahem
I decided against buying any engines...& thought a better idea would to be to de-commission a couple of my favourite Kyosho fighters for awhile...P40 50 series & a Bf109...they both had almost new saito 62's fitted...
I only had one saito 56 in a spitfire....so i think this is a logical step...if the plane is binned...back go my engines!! lol .
So with that in mind the original tanks had to go....i found one sullivan 'Flexi-tank' @ my local model shop, its 14 ounce/414cc plenty of juice now & fits like a glove in there...just had to remove the old fuel tank mount...i ordered the other tank...should be next tues.
I fitted both engines today minus one tank...even one cowl is completed, i have not recessed the firewall & was simply going to build up the cowls etc, when it hit me howeasy it was to solve the gap....i re-engineered the spinners & now have a 2mm gap from spinner to cowl!!....so so simple...these are the original JP spinners for this plane...part no: 5507360...so easy when you think about it .
The plane should balance with less lead too...i also decided not to use the retracts ...but stock gear for now...i want this in the air asap.
Then if successful...many flights etc...maybe then.
Right,.. i opted for super smooth quality servos where it counts...ie the rudder got a Hitek HS-5625-MG, & the Elevator got a HS-7985-MG Super smooth Coreless digital servo...i'm sure i did my best here for smooth control.., as a couple of my larger spits have these & take-off is made smoother & precise.
5mins with the spinners lost me the 20mm gap...i'm smitten with that..i'm very optimistic here with my set-up & knowledge gained here.
Meanwhile My seagull dual ace with twin Os 52's gets a beating!!...great great easy plane to fly...entry level twin for me too.
I did not want to use the 52's on this plane...esp after flying the dual ace, this plane is much heavier...OS 52's i feel are minimum & a little dated now...& certainly no-where nearthe engine the saito 56 is , let alone the new 62'a.
My 52's stay with the duelist....eventually they will be sold off,.....tomorrow i'll be flying, as its zero wind & 18deg+....about time the gales calmed down!.

mike early

14oz on a ,62 will be 20 minute flights, easy.

DVM100

Maiden flight this morning. 6 degrees and light winds. Mossie performed magnificently and the crowd was impressed. Landing was smooth although very HOT. I'll get used to it after a few more fl;ights, hopefully.

Hot Rod Todd

My Feedback: (1)

Full flaps (about 50 degrees for mine) does little to slow the mossy for landing. Get used to a fairly long and flat approach. Any time the nose is pointed down, the mossy will use it's considerable weight to pick up speed. Once you get used to it you can bring it in at a relatively slow speed (never too slow due to the fairly heavy wing loading).

DVM100

I agree. Mine didn't slow down at all with flaps deployed but I did get a better approach today and she pulled up on the runway quite nicely. We have a synthetic surface and she runs out nicely. Shame the photos are a bit blurred.

Walter D

My Feedback: (16)

Hey guys is the Mosquito model you've being talking about (and flying and crashing) the same one that is advertised on the For Sale Market page for $ 189.00, seems like the same one to me (although the paint job looks very shiny), some of the pictures posted on this thread show different aircraft numbers and some are the same, so maybe there are two different versions of this model or perhaps two different manufacturers.
Question for the ones that have had it for a while, was this model worth it? seems that there are a lot of poor designs in this little airframe. Would love to hear back from some of you, thanks to all.

Walter D

My Feedback: (16)

This is the one I'm talking about.

Neo gold

Walter....that plane looks very very similar...albeit the engine nacelles look to be separate?...that mid section could be built up..if so...maybe a lighter plane..then.
For that kind of money you cannot really argue pal, dive on in!!....just key & hit it with some matt fuel proofer & join the mossie madness!.
Btw....Hot rod Todd...that plane looks a stunning example!...great oleo's & gotta love the pitts exhausts...top stuff!!.

mike early

where's the link to that plane, Walter D ?

Walter D

My Feedback: (16)

This is the one: http://www.rcuniverse.com/market/item.cfm?itemId=653943

Hot Rod Todd

My Feedback: (1)

That plane looks quite different from the CMP version, but the fuse, canopy, and even the dumb "god of death" decal appear to be the same. Looks like they may be sharing some parts over in China. In any case, the wing is built different so I would say it may or may not be like the CMP plane talked about in this post. If you want the same plane, it looks like they have them in stock at Nitro Models for $199. Some of the planes in this post have different numbers because the builder did not use the decals provided. That's the case with mine.

Walter D

My Feedback: (16)

I believe you're right, I've just noticed that the fairing of the nacelles on top of the wing is different, specs state this wing to be foam sheeted with balsa, fuse seems to be pretty much the same though, good observations Hot Rod! Thanks.

CarreraGTSCS

My Feedback: (2)

I saw that Mossie on ebay a week or so back. The fuse looks to be the same but maybe someone over there got their hands on a fuse splashed a mold and started selling it as their own. The nacelles look like they are either vacuformed or maybe fg. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a fuse and cutting my own wings. Could save a.lot of weight that way since I'm strictly electric.

In any event, I bet its a copy and not CMP. I have the CMP 54" Spitfire and it is a thing of beauty. I have a friend who invented and manufactures a certain very popular electronic device. He has the components made in different Asian factories and it's assembled here. Less chance of being pirated.

david polley

Walter D.

Like Hot Rod said, that plane looks similar, but it looks to me like the wings are longer on this one. It could just be the photo, but if they extended the wings a little I believe it will improve landing approaches, and limit stalling symptons. Also I think the owner of this model has sprayed it with some kind of "clear coat" and that is why it is so shiny. I too hated that God of Death decal. When I got my first kit in 2006, you could put the decals on that you wanted. When I got my third in 2008, it was already on there and I had to remove it. If it was sprayed, it did add weight to the model, and most of the models here are going from 12.5 to 14 pounds if they are not electric. I would wonder why he is selling it to begin with.[sm=red_smile.gif]

Hot Rod Todd

My Feedback: (1)

I'm guessing they have the same decal sheet and a copy fuse. Wings and nacelles are totally different. Wingspan is reported as 73", the same as the CMP model. Paint scheme does not look good to me, and has too much gloss. I would guess that's the way you get it, not a case of "somebody" painting it. Not much doubt in my mind that it is a cheap (cheaper?) CMP knock off. There are other models like the Zero and Hellcat that have knock-offs, and in all cases people report that they are not as good as the CMP and have a glossier finish. For $20 more I would by the "real" thing from Nitro models, at least you can read the posts and know what adjustments to make.