Hi all,

This is my first post. I am building a 1/6 scale sopwith camel from a set of plans I got hold of. It is my first plane I have built from scratch.

The plans recomend a .25-.40 engine. I have bought an OS 40 LA to suite, but looking on the net, people use much large engines on this plane.

Why is this so? Is the engine I bought ok for the job?

Thanks in advance

Nat

Nat
The rule of thumb is to use the larges motor given in plans. The 40 fs will fly it but will be on border line. A 46fx or a 60 sise 4 stroke would give you more power,And better performance.

Yes it will, but we're talking about a Sopwith Camel here, not a Pitts Special.

The 40 will be plenty of power.

Thanks for your replies guys,

As long as the 40 will do the job I am happy

Nat

I would suggest a 70 or so 4 stroke at least.A 1/6 scale camel is going to have a 7.5 inch dia.cowl. A 10 inch prop is only giving you 1.5 incnes outside that radius to do the work of over coming the considerable drag of that airframe.Considering that a true scale prop would be about 18 inches,you can see the advantages of the larger prop diameter afforded by the 4stroke.

1/6 scale camel = VK Camel? If so, then it's a light model even detailed. I think a .52 FS would be plenty for that plane. I agree that a four stroke is the way to go. WWI planes sound pretty stupid with a 2 stroke screaming under the cowl. You might want to consider a diesel as well.

You are certainly right about the appropriate sound of the 4 stroke for the Camel,or any other WWI model.Some years ago I had the rare pleasure of observing some rotary powered planes in action,a Pup,DRI,and an original Tommy Morse scout.They were all equipped with LeRhones,and the sound was completely different from what I had always imagined.Far from being the Blatting monsters I had imagined,they purred in such a manner that I actually believe I was hearing prop noise more than the exhaust.There was a fellow there with a 1/4 scale working model of a rotary.It was really quiet;and so was I when I learned the price of one.

I see this is an old thread and this may be too late. I have a 1/6th Nieuport 17 in the air now and have just started a 1/6th Camel kit. They are both by VK. I am using a Saito .56 in the Nieuport and plan for the same engine in the Camel. I use a flex pipe exauste py Saito to keep it in the cowl and I am swinging a 13x5 wood prop that originally had square tips and I resanded to a more antique look. (Requires ballance, revarnish and high power test prior to use) It is way more power than is needed to fly realisticly so I spend most of the flight at 1/2 throttle. The 13x5 was a recommendation from Proctor enterprises who advised me on WW I types to keep the RPM at around 7500. They originally flew the Camel with .60's swinging 14x4 props to get the speed down and get the prop tips out past the cowl.

I mounted this Saito inverted without a glow driver after setting the engine up on a bench and adjusting it out to a good idle and run. Then mounted it inverted and have never had it fail to run and idle properly. I also use an OS type F plug.

I will try to load a few photos

The throttle servo and battery are mounted forward of the firewall which by the way has to be recessed to get the prop close enough to the cowl.

Thanks for the responses. I didn't think I would get any more.

I had already purchased the .40 engine and mounted it in the airframe. What prop would be recommended, and will it have enough power? What I can't understand is why do the plans specify .25-.40 two-stroke engines. (I thought I was going to the more powerful end). At this stage I can only fit a 4oz tank (that is what the plans recommended).

I am still building the wings (have just bought a house which took up a bit of my time).

I have flown r/c before but class myself in the beginner category. I do however have experience with full scale aircraft (PPL) and I have spent a lot of time on simulators. I know this plane is going to be a challenge to fly.

Is there any benifit with fixing the wheels to the axle, to help with any yawing affects on take-off?

thanks

Nat

Ok a couple of things.
the LA 40 is probably the lowest power 40 on the market so you may be pushing it but as youve already bought it??? how much does the plane weigh and what is the wing area?

a 4oz tank is probably the minimum I would fit remember fuel = air time, at 4oz youll probably get 4 - 5 minutes but a lot depends on throttle settings.

if the wheels aren't fixed to the axel they will fall off? not realy sure what you mean here.

as for props i'd start with a 9x7, 10x5 or there abouts

i've just had a look round and 1/6 scale camels typicaly weigh over 8lb and use a 100ish 4 stroke or a 70ish 2 stroke or bigger

the smallest engines i came across in a 1/6 camel was a satio 72fs
i'm sorry but i just cant see a 40LA hauling a Sopwith camel around unless the weight is under about 5lb

1st. I do agree that you would be well advised to get a replace ment for the LA .40. I have built the VK Nieuport and am just starting the VK Camel. The Nieuport required a set back of about 1 inch on the firewall to fit a .56 Saito (4 cycle) and I am going to mount the same engine in the Camel. This one will also require a setback in the firewall. It just means you have to cutout a hole in the removable firewall piece to build a recessed box into. I am using a 4 oz tank also and am having no problem getting 10 min flights. Of course with the .56 the Nieuport is over powered and I spend most of the flight below 1/2 throttle. If you want to remain with a 2 cycle. I would go with an OS .46fx,
They are extreamly powerful and you can get a header that will fit the muffler inside the cowl line. It will swing a 13x5 prop with no problem.

As to fixing your wheels to the axle. It is not required. The model does not swing bad on takeoff. Just keep the tail down on the start of you roll and the skid will keep you straight. Be prepared to use a lot of down after it gets up. Proctor advises you to set up the elevator with more down trim to start out with and it is good advise.

As to weight. if it is more than 6 pounds you are doing something bad wrong

Just build it like Proctor says and you will be fine



If you go to the AMA web site you will find an article in the Archives March 1982 on the VK Camel on putting in control wires to the controls to replace the push rods.

Before every starts thinking big motors.. The Sopwith was not a really fast plane,, I think with the wing loading of the Sopwith I would be able to fly that model SCALE with a .25 on the nose and a 11x3 prop.

I really don't see the need for power on these planes. Most 40 - 60 size planes with a wing loading of less that 16.. I would be able to fly calmly with a .25.. And the Sopwith did not do much more than that..

I would put a 52 OS 4 stroke on the nose, sounds better.

PS it also makes a difference if you are near the coast or high inland.

my .02

This is a good point.

You definitly don't want speed in your Camel. you only want the ability to spin a large diameter, low pitch prop. Proctor has quite a bit of guidance on this.

I have a .52 OS on a Kyousho Stearman and it weighs around 6 pounds. Plenty of power. I think I am using a 11X7 APC on it. It does fly quite a bit faster than the Nieuport which has a 13x5 on it.

I just stumbled across www.proctor-enterprises.com. If there are more great sites out there, I'd love to know.

I'm a newbie and I was wondering how long one of these VK kits take to finish. I know that is subjective, but compared to a GP or TF kit, does anyone have an ballpark guesses? I've only done a GP PT-40.

I've got a MDS68 looking for a home and I thought a scale biplane might keep me busy through the winter.

The VK-Provtor kits are what you would call 'builders kits'. They aren't for beginners, but it's nothing you can't handle as long as you take your time. I've been building my VK DRI triplane (off and on) for several years. It is a pretty complicated kit. The VK-Proctor kits build up almost as their full scale counterparts did, only in balsa and basswood as opposed to steel tube and plywood.

As for engine choice, get one that swings a big prop. You want to keep lots of air moving ofer the tail surfaces during approaches. My choice is a ST45 ABC converted to Diesel. A .52 - .70 four stroke would also work well.

If you'd like to see some photos of the pre-cover airframe, let me know and I'll post some.

HK

Sorry I misspelled Proctor. As for level of difficulty of VK-Proctor kits compared to GP PT 40. The PT-40 would be about a 2 or 3 and the VK kits are 8 to 10.

Would make for a very satisfying winter project.

I'm intrigued. I've been talking to the guys here and they found their trainer kit the most frustrating due to silly washout jigs, lots of wing covering and of course inexperience. I've read the MDS68 (which I got slightly used off a friend) is more powerful than many .75s, so it should swing a decent prop. Maybe if I can get a Proctor I'll give it a go. Thanks.

how much does the plane weiogh wihtout any equipment? and do you want a good amount of power or do you want a more true to scale amount of power?

I went out and weighed the [bare, uncovered] components of my VK triplane and came up with these figures:

Fuselage (incl. tail, L.G., wheels, cowl, plastic midwing fairing, motor mount and machine guns ----------- 25.5 ozs

Lower wing panels (also uncovered) --- 4.0 ozs

Midwing (uncovered) ----------------------- 9.0 ozs

Top wing (uncovered) ---------------------- 6.0 ozs
Total (approx.) -- 44.5 ozs
(2 lbs 12.5 ozs)

As for engine power, you don't want a screaming powerplant. A nice high torque system is desired. And a BIG PROP. Whiteknucles MDS 68 should be more than sufficient to provide scale flying speed and a prop. diameter to cowl diameter ratio.
The key to keeping weight down will be in covering choices. I've thought about this long and hard and may have decided to go with the familiar Silkspan and dope method. It has aleays worked in my old control line planes and is ver easily adapted to scale color schemes. Don't use plastic covering as I've never seen a wwI full size airplane with a perfectly smooth and glossy finish. The all lokked like they were painted with a painbrush (and probably were).

Hope this info helps. Keep the weight forward.

HK

I am currently building the VK Sopwith Camel and have started keeping a journal on the work as the instructions ar vague in places. I am up to about 8 pages with photos and will email it to you to show the construction method if you like.

Charles Pipes

[email protected]

The questions asked in this thread are mainly for the Sopwith Camel and my replies have been regarding the DRI Triplane. All the planes in the VK-Proctor line shouls have similar weights and flying characteristics as they all use the same scale and construction practices.

HK

I am flying the Nieuport now and love it. I am not a great RC flier, more of a sport flier than anything and am having no problems with the ground handling. I will admit to a high number of ground loops on landing with a number of nose overs. I fly with a wooden 13x5 wooden prop on a .56 Saito and have yet to break it on about 5 rollovers in the grass. Of course it is moving so slow it hasn't gotten a scratch sofar.

I have been told that the Dr-1 and Camel really outperform the Nieuport due to a lighter wing loading The Nieuport I fly is 25 years old and has many coats of paint. It should have a wing loading of 20 oz per sqft and the Camel is to have 15 oz per sqft.

You are right on the plastic covering. It would make an antique aircraft look like an ARF

Are you flying that Nieuport off grass or asphalt? Twenty years ago I spoke with the designer/builder of full scale DRI's and Nieuports (Walt Redfern) about the flight characteristics of those aircraft on landing approaches. He suggested, that due to the lack of any useable fin area and small rudders, that extra power be carried on landing in order to get enough air moving over the rudder. The same would be true on our 1/6 scale aircraft.

Do you have any torque related problems on takeoff? Are the factory specified engine thrust deflections fairly correct? I would like to know this stuff as I'm flying from a field that has both grass and asphalt.

Twenty five years is a long life for this type of aircraft. I hope mine the first flight as I've been building this thing (on and Off) for over ten years and I'm dreading that first flight.

HK