FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

I love the looks of the Delta designs, love that builder's last name "Nutter".

donnyman

I just saw a jedi speeder flying! it used the quad copter technology and is causing a run on the kits for sale on ebay. I have to admit it really is a good thing to see and should help to get peoples minds relaxed about "drones" .......UPS or somebody is cranking up the home delivery drones also so we will be seeing more and more of this technology in time.

It won't be long before a man carrying unit comes to light and changes the mode of transportation from cars. Quad copter transportation is on the horizon. I look forward to it.

Did you see one of our military drones took out another Taliban leader?

GallopingGhostler

Donny, I know the bit about thumbs, sometimes I'm all dumb thumbs. Only block in the fuse was the portion after the firewall below the engine. With glow power that Sherman tank fuse still was reasonably light and with a hotter engine such as the later Cox reedies (Cox 049 R/C Bee shown as in my 1979 build), would do their stunt magic.


Still got that plane I built in the late 1970's, but now with a new "Sherman tank" fuselage and sporting a Norvel 061 RC Big Mig engine.


Yesterday received as a gift from Dane, a friend, a 1966 OS Max 10R/C cross scavenge engine with 702 muffler. This muffler is as rare as hen's teeth.


I've been lacking a suitable powerplant for my 1959 Berkeley Impulse single channel pylon racer / trainer build. Fuselage sides engine cheek cowls were too closely spaced to fit the A.C. Gilbert 11 Thunderhead side port, which would be in the same class as the 1950's Fox 09 Rocket side port shown on the plans, ditto for using an Enya 09-III TV. Didn't have a needle set screw for the Thunder Tiger GP-07 to extend it beyond the cheek cowl. Cox 074 Queen Bee stuck out almost 2 inches beyond due to engine's length. My other OS Max 10R/C's have only the variable exhaust restrictor baffle ganged to the carb, which cheek cowl interfered with. This gift engine fits perfectly. On a 7x5 wood prop ought to haul this 46 inch span model with reasonable authority. I am making a few other mods to it to make it fly better on full house.


It's hard to believe that Berkeley Impulse plan 16-5 was so cheap back in those days.


I bought the plan from Sig in the early 1990's in a close out sale of all remaining Sig and Berkeley discontinued plans. Then about 6 years ago, bought the Impulse kit, which I am now building.

rcnut42

My Feedback: (28)

I want to put in good word for AMR-RC out of Canada and Michel Normandin--bought a Trainer 26 kit from them more than a year ago then got side tracked with personal issues and never opened the box until two weeks ago. As usual practice, I always inventory a kit before starting and found three items missing notably nine-1/8" by 4" by 48" sheet balsa and and two minor items. I emailed AMR last Sunday explaining the situation and said if it was missing a few that would be end of it but since 9 sheets were missing and asking them to help me in that regard. To my surprise, I got a response within the hour from Michel saying that he would ship the missing items next day! Got them today! Wow---what a service and I wish some hobby distributors would learn from Michel/AMR-RC. I know my next giant scale project will come from them and might even buy other stuff from them as well because of the customer service! I've been building airplanes since 1960 and sure am glad to see a hobby store albeit a virtual one giving the same service as old-time stores of yore!

Michel--Thank you and you have a new loyal customer!

Steve

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

If manufactures and distributors only had a clue as to how much business they loose when people post the negative about them on web sites like this, they would probably shape up and answer there emails and phone calls. The reverse of that is the positive posts, a lot more orders will be placed from a positive then a negative. It's good to see a nice positive for a change. Hope it helps them sell more so they will be around a long time.

GallopingGhostler

One problem could not necessarily be with the manufacturer themselves, but the people who work for them. Some people have very poor communication skills, who end up on the tech support side of phone calls and E-mails. I suppose it takes all types to make up the world. But it is good to hear that rcnut42 had a good a good experience with a vendor. Occasionally I have had that happen to me, and when it did, it made a whole world of difference. It goes to show that one person can make a difference.

PA BEN

Checking in; I'm 55 and haven't been on RCU for over 2 years. Lots of changes including this thread. I flew U-Control when I was a Kid, I was alway interested in Radio Control. In 2005 I moved my family to the westside of Washington State and the town have a RC club. I joined the club and got my wings and enjoyed flying. To make a long story short alcohol took over my life and everything I enjoyed took a back seat to it. I went to a treatment center and quit drinking.I didn't drink and fly but with the DT's flying wasn't fun anymore. A little over a year later I moved back to eastern washington to my hometown again. I've been back almost 2 years now and after settling in to my new job and getting my place in order I took my first flight 4 days ago with a trainer plane. I fly off my driveway on my 10 1/2 akers. I built a flight station yesterday with wheels so I can roll it from storage to where I fly. I'm in the process of relearning my transmitter that I have my plans stored in. I have a new ARF I put together just before I left and am in the process of getting it ready to fly. I'm going to build an airstrip on my Dads farm hopefully this summer, taking off from here is a piece of cake but I only have one place to land right now in my yard, depending on the day it is either into the wind or with the wind. Enough for now, I will check in again. My daughter is standing on my driveway where I take off, I land to the right just outside of the picture.

donnyman

RCnut 42
I like what you had to say, Many of us forget to mention the good things that others do for us but will be quick to speak of the negative. Thanks for going to the positive side.

and give AMR-RC a attaboy.

G. hostler
You bring up a good point with the one person - employee thing I have seen it happen that way. we need a way to make the owners aware. ....This may just be the place.

donnyman

PA BEN

Welcome back into the world of R/C. Having a private place to fly is fantastic most of the time, I do enjoy flying at my home, but every now and then having the other flyers around is cool
I enjoy flying at home the most when I have a new bird to check out, it's times like that I don't want a audience I find it too distracting (comments in the background)

All the best to you - many happy flying hours!

Telemaster Sales UK

I have always had a soft spot for the BE2 range of WW1 two-seaters ever since I learnt that a man with the same name as me was shot down and killed by the Red Baron while flying one. Indeed his was the last of the BE2s which Richtofen shot down. I am building a replica which I will finish in the markings of my namesake's aircraft but when I noticed that another 1/6 scale BE2e was for available in a bereavement sale I just had to have it.!

I spent most of Saturday getting the BE2 ready for its maiden flight today as the weather was forecast to be excellent. This involved fitting the engine, the fuel tank, and the receiver; the servos were already there. Having fitted the radio I noticed that the elevators were well up when the lever on the transmitter was in the neutral position. I thought about leaving them as they were. Perhaps that's how the model flew. I then thought better of it and set them level.

When I bought it the model was fully rigged but the aileron struts were not fitted. I assembled the model and fitted the aileron struts for the first time at the field this morning as I really don't have the space to assemble a 2 metre wingspan biplane in my house! When everything was rigged it was obvious that the aileron struts were too long. If the lower ailerons were level the top ones were over 1/4 inch above the top wing. I resolved not to fly the model but to get the engine running properly. I had bought the engine, an OS 70 FL, years ago from some kid in Telford. It has hardly run at all. I had previously started the engine on a test stand but this time the exhaust was rooted to a "scale" silencer which sent the smoke out over the top of the wing in true BE2 fashion. While I was at it, I also took the time to check the C of G which seemed to be OK, perhaps a bit nose heavy.

There was a lot of faffing about caused mainly by the engine being almost brand new and reluctant to tick over. It was also running rich which caused it to vibrate and the mounting bolts to slacken off. Part of me wanted to take the thing home! However, we didn't win two world wars by giving up so with the help of my club mates I adjusted the throws on the throttle channel of my Spektrum DX9 transmitter, took the engine out of the model, tightened all of the bolts, added lock nuts, and leaned out the mixture until it ran well enough at moderate to high speeds and ticked over in a lumpy sort of way. Another club mate said that if I cut down the plastic clevises I might be able to get the ailerons to line up correctly. I borrowed a craft knife, snipped off a bit from all four clevises and was able to get the ailerons to line up properly. One of the expert pilots said that with a new engine you are not going to get much of a tick over anyway, so as there were perfect flying conditions and as I had solved the problem of the of the aileron struts, I decided to have a pee, and a cup of tea and then fly the... er... fellow! My colleagues gave me the traditional Maiden Flight Air!

I had an audience of at least ten when I pushed that throttle forward. With smoke puffing out of the exhaust pipes over the top of the wing the model trundled across the grass and took off. It was obvious straight away that the model was tail heavy but I controlled it, dialled in full down trim and flew it about somewhat unsteadily for five minutes. I then reduced speed and brought in for a landing. It flipped over but no damage was done and my audience applauded! Good job I'd reset those elevators or I would have been in trouble.

I obviously need to add 6-8 ozs of lead to the nose and to give the engine more running-in time. Otherwise the model was fine, requiring no trim adjustment on the aileron or rudder! Pictures of your humble servant and the BE2 after the flight, attached. Pity I didn't get any pictures of it with the engine running and the smoke chuffing above the wing.

Happy Landings Gentlemen!

GallopingGhostler

Really nice BE-2 there, Telemaster Sales UK. You have a lot of scale detail in it, bet it flies like a dream.

Don't know what I was thinking, posting photos of my rebuilt Airtronics Q-Tee when I meant to post my Minnie Mambo. Only reason why I haven't flown it yet is we rarely have calm days with winds under 10 mph. Most of the time here they are 15 mph+. Can manage the winds with 2 channel stuff and above, but small single channel is a bit of a challenge with the winds.

Telemaster Sales UK

It might when I get around to sticking that lead in the nose!

PS. I should have made it clear that my namesake was flying a BE2e in the above post. I've edited it accordingly.

buzzard bait

Are you sure it's tail heavy and not just out of trim? If tail heavy, it would tend to diverge from your control inputs, which usually means oscillating up and down until something bad happens. Extremely nerve wracking.

It it just swoops up when you advance the throttle, or tends to climb too much, it's just out of trim. Adjust for more down elevator.

I always check out the relationship between wing and stab incidence before I fly and unfamiliar plane. They should be pretty close for most planes.

Lovely airplane, good find!

Jim

Telemaster Sales UK

You may have a point Jim. The tail incidence on both the real BE2e and the Practical Scale model is very positive, i.e, the leading edge is rather higher than the trailing edge. It wasn't easy flying it yesterday but I was skillful enough to stop it from crashing. The landing was dead stick but I simply held in down elevator and it came in nice and steady. I'm not quite sure what to do. I used all of the down trim yesterday but it was still difficult to fly. Should I simply adjust the elevators to give more down at the central position on the transmitter? Should I add weight to the nose? Or both? I think I'll consult a British modeller who has built one and put its flight on YouTube.

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

I'm not familiar with that particular plane and don't have the time right now to look it up so I will ask, did it have a LG wing on the original??

Telemaster Sales UK

Sorry Gray Beard but I don't understand your question. LG wing. Landing gear? Lewis Gun?

buzzard bait

Good idea to consult with someone who has already dealt with it! Knowing where he has his CG would be a help.

Here is an old RCM plan for this plane: http://www.outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=6303

It shows the CG surprisingly far back. I can also see a lot of positive stab incidence, but the wing incidence is very positive also, so that explains that. For the CG to be that far back, the stab must be pretty big. You want to make sure it isn't enlarged on this model but not on yours. Otherwise, if they are both to scale and have same proportions, the CG location for one model should work for the other because it depends on the neutral point, which is determined by proportions.

If the CG is OK, then it is a matter of elevator trim (or stab trim if you can change it). A lot of old biplanes needed more positive stab incidence than you might think. Apparently the downwash on the elevator was pretty powerful. The Fokker Dr.I was well known for this, and requires 5 degrees positive incidence on the stab, full scale and model.

When you say "difficult to fly" do you mean climbing to much, or wildly uncontrollable? If the latter, add nose weight; if the former more down trim.

Jim

tomfiorentino

Started back around 1974 at 11 years old by building a rubber powered Piper Cub. Stick built with paper and dope. Then "built" a bunch of those .049 control line "Lil" series planes...can't even remember the names of them.

Built my first RC in my bedroom on a ceiling tile with white glue. A Falcon 56 with an OS engine. I squirreled away money by shoveling driveways and mowing lawns so I could buy a Kraft control unit. Dad was supportive but I had to do it on my own basically. Time was plentiful and money scarce.

The hobby is way, way different now...everything has changed including available time. About the only thing that hasn't changed much is money being pretty scarce! But no regrets on that front as the higher calling is raising my 5 children. By the time I get done with college tuition I probably could have bought an F16!

My youngest son is now showing a lot of interest in the building aspects of the hobby. He is 14 and about to maiden an UltraSport 60 that he probably built the majority of over the last winter. It has an OS 65AX in it, no retracts though...he doesn't know it yet, but once he gets that plane under his belt I'm gonna hand him over my Phoenix 7!

Tom

Telemaster Sales UK

Yes that's the plan. It was first produced as a plan by Roy Scott then Practical Scale kitted it. I have both plans.

As for, "Climbing too much or wildly uncontrollable," I'd say it was a bit of both but more of the latter. I'm going to add the lead and put in a bit more "down" on the elevator by altering the clevises on the elevator cables. I'll fly it again the next calm day we get.

donnyman

From what I can summize from your description of the flight of you be2e is you have too much incidence on you wings your plane should not climb at or below 3/4 throttle, Lead in the nose probably won't do much other than add weight. The high incidence of the horizontal stab is to counteract the high lift of the wing. raise the trailing edge of your wings a little until the excess lift is nuetralized. that plane is not designed to be flown at full throttle, full throttle is for climbing only. unless you have a wimpy engine.

donnyman

Telemaster

I've looked at the plans and it is surely not a high speed type, slow and easy is it's nature the under camber is a high lifter. down trim and nose weight isn't the way to go! the instructions seem to bear me out. The designer in my opinion did not have the bird properly set up. The supplement page for the bird has a lot of info I assume you have downloaded and read it ....a lot of tell tale info there!

It is a fine model, Good luck!

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

The LG wing or plane goes between the LG like on a D-VII. According to the plans your plane doesn't have one. In WWI that plane or wing was used to trim the airplane during flight. The one I had on my D-VII was adjustable so the trim could be changed.

Telemaster Sales UK

Thanks for the advice gentlemen but tomorrow looks like being a good flying day with light winds. My pals are able to go flying tomorrow too; serious family commitments sometimes prevent this, so I'm going to try it with the lead in the nose and a bit more down elevator and take the consequences. There isn't time to alter the wing incidences.

On a different tack, I'd had quite a good dinner on Saturday night washed down with a fine South African Pinotage. Just before going to bed, I went on eBay. On another site, everyone was waxing lyrical about Enya engines. Now I've owned several Enya SS two-stroke engines in the past, usually fitted to trainers which I sold on once I'd started selling the Telemasters. Over the last couple of weeks I've had a yen to own an Enya again, solid reliable engines that they are with a good spares back-up in the UK. OK they're not the most powerful engines in the world but you pays your money and you takes your choice as they say on this side of the Atlantic. Now it's not that I need a model aeroplane engine. When I last counted I had thirty-three of them ranging from a Mills 75 of 0.75cc to a Laser 150 V twin and only six were fitted to serviceable models, but I bid peanuts on several Enya two-strokes and was always out-bid.

So there I am on eBay late last Saturday night when I noticed an Enya 120 four-stroke. There had been no bids and the starter bid was £75. I dropped £75 on it.( American Nationals please multiply by 1.5 to get the approximate US Dollar equivalent.) Then there was that section which reads something like, "People who viewed this item also viewed...." There was an old Laser 62 listed. Bidding had reached £47. Now in the UK, the going price for a decent second hand four-stroke is about £45, but this was a Laser so I dropped £50.11 on it and went to bed confident that I would be out bid on both of them.

I went flying on the Sunday and, yes, you've guessed it I won both of them! £139 including postage up my jumper for something I don't need!

Aaargh!!!!!

343sp

How about this as a diagnostic tool for your be2. Return your C/G to the recommended location. Then to get a feel for an incidence concern. Raise your ailerons an equal amount. Say 1/16" to 3/32" above the neutral position. Should this show improvement in handling then begin the necessary modifications to the wing or stab incidences.

Telemaster Sales UK

Gentlemen!

I have the model assembled on the living room table which I took the precaution of covering with an old sheet! The c of g seems to be spot on. I have adjusted the elevator so that I now have as much "down" in the central position on the transmitter as I had on Sunday with the elevator trim on maximum down. I will check for warps. and may well take up 343sp's advice about introducing a little wash out on the ailerons. I'm going to fly it tomorrow.


Having just typed the above I had a light bulb moment!

The previous owner had cut off his incidence wires! The bottom wing is bolted to the fuselage but it is fairly flexible. The top wing is in two halves fitted to the centre section with tubes and dowels. The interplane struts are just pieces of spruce with holes drilled into the end of them. These locate onto four 1" tacks which are fitted to the underside of the upper wing and into the top side of the lower wing. The whole structure is then held together with working landing and flying wires. There do not appear to be any warps but if the incidence of of the wings was moving in flight, that might be the reason for its instability.

I'll fit incidence wires tout de suite!