<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: medium">not exactly what it sounds like, i'm going to build a sig smith mini for anyone in this forum that hasn't read the history on my other post. (stick plane for clear covering) the naming is for the covering. being a beautiful "stick" plane, i'm going to cover it in clear covering to show off as much of the framing as possible. i love looking at a plane all framed up and perty before it gets all covered up.so far, i'm thinking of the same colors as on the box, with the red and white and black trim, but i just had an idea a few minutes ago for thinning out some acryllic paint and painting the frame work for the color of the plane and using clear (no color)covering over the entire plane showing the color on the wood. ??? not really invisible, but it sounds cool.</span></span>

Painting the framework sounds cool. Don't think I've ever seen one like that. Please keep us posted!

Test to make sure your planned adhesive will work over the paint..just to be safe.

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: medium">yeah, i built a set of floats one time and covered them with glass but was afraid the edges would leak water from sanding them smooth and maybe going into the covering a little,so i decided to cover them with monocrap just to make sure. i was unhappy with some of the work with the covering so i stripped the covering off. but after the glass work, i sprayed them with primer gray krylon and the covering stuck rather well. but i was thinking of very very very very much thining out some latex or acrylic paint so it would pretty much just soak into the wood. any thoughts on that? i would be tempted to think the spray paint method would just add unnecassary weight.</span></span>

Using water-thinned acrylics or latex paint applied heavy enough to soak into the wood will almost certainly cause warping. I would not want ANYTHING water-based on the wood. Just a thought but you might consider checking out an art store such as Michaels for Magic or dry-type "art" markers. They come in numerous colors and dry almost instantly when applied. They would work more like stain than paint on balsa. Doing large sheeted areas will be a challenge.

<span style="font-size: small"><span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS">wow... good to finally be back on here. i had a little vacation time after getting back from the dirt, so unfortunately, i burnt it doing things other than working on the mini. like fixing a leaky dishwasher, mowing down the forest in the back yard and the usual "honey do" items. got suckered into that one somehow. so i got the box open and popped a few pics that i will be posting tomorrow (gotta charge the camera)of just the usual whatever people take pics of stuff in the box for. then the construction will commence. woohoo!!! ohhh, after i clean the work bench off from the "doesn't belong in the house" type items. but i can't wait. it's been a 7 month thought process of what i was planning to do with the plane and the order of doing it. please post any suggestions that may come to thought for those with experience building the mini, as some of the steps are rather awkward reading. i'll be keeping tabs on the other mini thread in the forum here as well for what else is going on with that. i really don't want to crash someone elses thread to start a new construction after 20 something pages of awesomeness already going...so here's my construction. </span></span>

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="font-size: small">so my computer is a piece. i can only upload a couple of pics at a time. here's a couple pics before getting started. just about everything had to be cut out and sanded down. even the parts that are supposed to be die cut. guess i'm pretty spoiled with the quality of the great planes guys. the pieces pretty much fall out of the wood sheets. i'll get the rest of the photos on here in a bit.</span></span></span>

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: x-small">here are some more. think i got the computer fooled!!!i guess they call it a "stick" plane for a reason. not only do i get to cut out all the pieces from the sheets, but i guess Sig thought it necessary to stamp the pieces with ink instead of using a punch stamp to i.d. the parts. YEAH!!! more sanding...</span></span>

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: x-small">a couple more for the day.

1. what doesn't belong in the house???
2. saving grace without a scroll saw (coming soon to a garage near you)
3. i hate ABS (cowl from fiberglassspecialtiesinc.com in the mail)
4. don't get too hasty. OOPS!!!</span></span></p>

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small"><span style="font-size: x-small">so i received my cowl from the guys at fiberglass specialties inc. and have an issue with it. on the top of it where the 2 seams join together, there is a step between the 2 halves of about 1/16 inch. not a terrible problem, but a problem none the less. i'm concerned with using putty to take care of it and even it out and possibly end up using too much and packing on the pounds. i've never used the epoxy and microballoons, and was curious if i would have any problems later with it coming loose or cracking or anything in the likes. the cowl is of course fiberglass, but will the microballoon stick well with it, and what kind of prep work would need to be done aside from roughing up the surface a little bit? or should i try to send it back for a replacement before even messing with it? i did pay $42, not to say everyone should be a perfectionist. but there is a reason i spent that instead of doing one myself with the ABS one that came with the kit.</span></span></span>

If it was me, I'd contact Fiberglass Specialties about the problem before I did anything to the cowl. A 1/16" error in alignment of the two halves would be unacceptable to me. I'd ask them to replace it.

Granted, you can do whatever you wish, but this really sounds like a recipe for disaster. I hope you would reconsider.

I understand the desire to show it off "in the bones." It is cool.

Brian

I was under the understanding that you were wanting to paint the airframe under the covering. This is what I am replying to.

Brian

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: x-small">i thought about that originally, and yes it does sound pretty outlandish. i think it would look kind of cool, but definitely hard on the eyes. i forgot about posting that little idea. i think the clear and x-parent red will be the way to go, andwith all the decals in place, i would hope it would be pretty easy to see and keep oriented. i need to get away from work so i can get home and start working on it. i just finished up the coming home chores over the weekend and am cleared by the queen to have "airplane time". </span></span>

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small">so how much different is it flying bipes? i've only flown high wing taildraggers and my RV-4 once. i heard the mini is a ground-looping queen? is that typical of them because of the smaller stance or what?</span></span>

There is a short tail moment between the firewall and the end of the airplane. Therefore, the torque of the engine has a significant effect on the airplane. When you apply throttle, it desperately wants to spin the airplane hard to the left. This is why , with the miniplane, a bigger engine IS NOT better.

Advance throttle very slowly and do not over correct with the rudder on roll out. This will take a lot of time to master, but once you've got it- it's sooo good.

A gyro would help, but I've never used one.

Ususally with bipes, the extra drag with the cabanes, struts, extra wing, etc will stall you out on landing without throttle management, but the Miniplane will float in like your trainer, only land easier.

Once it's in the air, it is no big deal- other than it draws a lot of attention at the field.

A Hog bipe is a better Bipe trainer, so is the SSkybolt. For the ground-looping issues, I would not recommend it ad a 1st bipe.

I liked mine a lot before I stalled it out in a dumb manuver and auggered it into the ground!!

Happy building,
Brian

First call FGS about the cowl and see if the problem was in the plug/mold itself or if there was some other problem. The product I use for filling glass cowls with holes or seams is Bondo Glazing spot putty, easy on with light coats and easy to sand, good stuff!!
Ground handling on the Smith is just like any short coupled planes, hell on the ground but after you get used to the plane it's just the nature of the beast, you have to slowly roll on power and get the ground speed up, never just fire wall it. Once in the air it's pretty much like any other plane, bipes just slow down faster when you chop power. Landing the Smith isn't hard, it's smooth and slow but then after roll out you have to steer it back into the pits, ground handling again!!.
It's a fun plane and a fun build, just not a good choice for a first bipe but if you have enough hours on the sticks you can figure it out. I had to pull the OS .46 out of mine and install the OS .70FS but it was just to get rid of some of the nose lead I added to get the CG.

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small">so i watched a couple of videos on you-tube for the mini and one of them, the guy had a magnum 52 installed and it looked like it was flying great. not sure if it was a 4-stroke or 2-stroke. another thing he was talking a little about was reflexing the ailerons up and down a degree or 2. when doing this, what does it effect? is that aileron differential? what does it do? i have a .40 fx that i'm probably going to use, but i was thinking about the magnum .70 4-stroke. you said you put the .70 in yours to get rid of some of the nose weight. wasthe tail weightan issue with building design? do i need to look out for anything while building the fuselage or tail?</span></span>

Your 40 FX will fly the airplane perfectly. Keep in mind, your 40 is equal in power to some of the 60 size engines of the day that the mini was designed. You will be happy with the 40.

The 70 four stroke will throw A LOT of torque into it. It will fly fine once in the air, but ground handling.... That's another story altogether!

Honestly, I've built 3 of these gems, and they are a tad heavy on the tail. I used a Saito .56 and mine balanced perfectly. I would simply build it as shown. Balance it before you cover it. Try not to add any extra weight anywhere, but shift onboard equipment as far forward as possible.

My last mini built VERY heavy- about 7lbs. The airplane never noticed it at all. Do not worry about adding weight if needed.

Aileron differential is adjusting the aileron with more up than down throw- or vice versa to get the airplane to roll straight on it's axis. When you use aileron and elevator only (no rudder) on a lot of aircraft to turn, you will notice the tail "drag through the turn. In order to correct this, you must add rudder to "center the ball" and keep the tail up in the turn. On full scale aircraft, I understand this type of turn without rudder can induce a stall or spin...NOT GOOD. Not so much a problem with rc.

In order to "cheat," that is.. turn without using rdder, you add more up than down throw on the aileron to bring the tail up in a turn. Most radio transmitter companies have provided extra control arms with your transmitter. Most of the time, these are not just extra parts. Look at the arms to see if the holes are off center. These are designed to give you the option with differential throw for single aileron servo use.

Now days, with computer radios, most of us will simply use 2 servos in the wing and program the throw with adjustable travel volume (in futaba jargain).

I have to admit.. on roll out with the mini, I find I add a little right aileron by hand on the sticks. I noticed this when someone told me I was doing this watching me fly. I was doing it without even realizing it. I think it might just be one of those things that a person just reacts too without thinking about it as they get to know the airplane.

Well, there's my book for you. Sorry I took so long to explain.

Brian

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small">no... that's awesome! i appreciate all the long answers vs. the short "here's my quick reply" ones that don't explain things very well. the adjustable travel volume, is that the same as the end point adjustment? i haven't messed with my radio in so long, i can't remember. i think the end point adjustment would effect the throw up and down, now that i think about it.i know what you're talking about now that i thought about it. if i did switch to a 4-stroke motor, you said the .70 would be way too much torque put into the ground handling. did the .56 still sling it around nicely? or make it a little more docile? not sure how a really want to fly it just yet, but i got a little scare from a friends plane that i was flying one time and probably wasn't ready for it yet. but it seemed really fast and almost out of control-ish. but i pulled back on the throttle, the plane didn't want to stay in the air very well. could have been prop size and pitch with that as well.</span></span>

The only issue with the bigger power plants is ground handling and prop clearance.

I thought the saito 56 was perfect, but still a lot of torque. If you are adament on a 4 cycle, the Saito .56 is my recommendation.

I still think you'll be happy with a good modern .40 two stroke. If it isn't eventually enough for you, then I'd move up.

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small">i just like the sound of the 4-strokes. i don't have one yet, buthave beeneye-ballingthe magnum .70for a long time. it seemedlike a good all around motor for most of the planesi have are .40 size.looking at your photos, your n-struts look more sq'd around the edges. is this okay or should i try tostreamline them? the instructions make it look a little intimidating along with the construction. not that i can't handle it, though. i think i'm more concerned with making the solder joints look nice. i hate soldering!!! i have a buddy that works in a machine shop and was even thinking of asking him if he could fancy CNCme up some T6 ones, nice and thin, then just paint them.same with the gear struts. how snazy would that be??? probably not really any more weight, either.

also, the black trim tape you used on the edges of the red...is that 1/16 or 1/8 inch?

and what scale guages did you use in the cockpit?</span></span>

I would reconsider the N Strut procedure.

I'll PM you in a little while.

The pin striping is 1/8", and the scale guages I do not remember. I just used what I found that most closely matched the photos in the manual of the full scale original. I built this airplane in 2004- I think. So it's been a while.

I enjoy my magnum engines very much. I have a .61 XLS mounted in an ultrasport that I will be mounting a tuned pipe to.

I own a .91 four stroke new in the box. I've had 2 of them in the past and completely regret selling them... I won't be doing that again.

Brian

<span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><span style="font-size: small">well, i'm going home and hopefully going to start building on this thing. i'm going to really start looking at the n-struts and figure something out for the construction of them before i get crazy with the cheese-wiz. i like the ultra-sport.</span></span>