CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
09-10-2008 | 05:39 PM
#151
My Feedback: (13)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Hi All
I wanted to show a pic of what I mean when I said the covering on the CMP models come off (all mine anyway).
The 109 wing panel was left in direct sunlight for around 1 hour in the morning. The day was not very hot at this time, yet my covering detached from the wood as the pic shows.
Ambient temp around 83 degrees at that time. Normally in So cal in the summer we get 90's around here. This also softens the fuses. Again in my CMPs
Still good for what it costs.
Steve
I wanted to show a pic of what I mean when I said the covering on the CMP models come off (all mine anyway).
The 109 wing panel was left in direct sunlight for around 1 hour in the morning. The day was not very hot at this time, yet my covering detached from the wood as the pic shows.
Ambient temp around 83 degrees at that time. Normally in So cal in the summer we get 90's around here. This also softens the fuses. Again in my CMPs
Still good for what it costs.
Steve
09-11-2008 | 07:34 AM
#153
My Feedback: (1)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
I wouldn't call that coming off. All covering tends to bubble in sun. Once you shrink it back a couple times with a heat gun it does it less. I know what you mean about the fuse softening though. I have a CMP lancair that I left in the back seat once and it got hot enough to twist the fuse. I heated it up again and twisted it back, but I am careful from now on to keep the CMP planes out of the windows. Just sitting in the sun outside they get hot but I have never had any problems, now if I lived in Arizona I might be a bit concerned.
09-11-2008 | 08:38 AM
#154
My Feedback: (13)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
snapa
I may be unclear in my example.
What I am trying to say is that while all coverings will react to heat, some react in much lower temp ranges such as direct sunlight. Much like the coverings used here.
For modelers that use covering regularly it is just part of maintenance. For me personally, its discouraging to have my warbird finish on "monocote".
I'm only posting as a "heads up" to fellow modelers of what can happen and how to minimize the effect of heat on this model.
Steve
I may be unclear in my example.
What I am trying to say is that while all coverings will react to heat, some react in much lower temp ranges such as direct sunlight. Much like the coverings used here.
For modelers that use covering regularly it is just part of maintenance. For me personally, its discouraging to have my warbird finish on "monocote".
I'm only posting as a "heads up" to fellow modelers of what can happen and how to minimize the effect of heat on this model.
Steve
09-11-2008 | 06:18 PM
#156
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: , NEW ZEALAND
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
well mine arrived today..... WHAT A BEAST!! now after seing it the servos I have been looking at may be too small, I will have to think about that one, well put together kit no dammage at all.... even the hinges are proper pinned ones not CA which is good, A little nervous about the prospect of cutting in the retract equipment and wells also that flat grey paint? how will that handle fuel and exaust smoke? BIG THANKS TO A-KMODELS for supplying the kit with very cheap freight and fast delivery (left the states on 7th and arrived on the 12th not a bad effort from the US to New Zealand
09-11-2008 | 08:46 PM
#157
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: , NEW ZEALAND
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
More thoughts, looking at things the only two servos with a high load are the elevator and rudder?, all the other surfaces are single servo for one movement the Hitec HS-325HB gives a value of 51oz/in at 6v so at half an inch or 12mm the torque should be doubled? and about 100 oz/in? that should be adequate for all the wing and motor controls I would think? what is hitec servos like ? http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...5&I=LXHHV5&P=K
09-12-2008 | 02:06 PM
#159
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: North Bay,
ON, CANADA
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Hello All:
I've been following this build/kit bash thread since the beginning and I'm sorely tempted to purchase it, however, I'm a bit concerned about all of the mods that some people are making. In particular Scalecraft is taking this model to a whole new level with leading edge slats, relocating the main gear positions and redoing the V stab/rudder (among other mods - very impressive). I like the BF-109 very much, but all I want to do is assemble the kit, outfit the engine and radio and install retracts. I don't want to make a lot of modifications or do a lot of additional building. In your opinions, can this model be assembled in stock form and still produce a good looking (stand-off scale), good flying and performing aircraft?
Thanks,
Peter
I've been following this build/kit bash thread since the beginning and I'm sorely tempted to purchase it, however, I'm a bit concerned about all of the mods that some people are making. In particular Scalecraft is taking this model to a whole new level with leading edge slats, relocating the main gear positions and redoing the V stab/rudder (among other mods - very impressive). I like the BF-109 very much, but all I want to do is assemble the kit, outfit the engine and radio and install retracts. I don't want to make a lot of modifications or do a lot of additional building. In your opinions, can this model be assembled in stock form and still produce a good looking (stand-off scale), good flying and performing aircraft?
Thanks,
Peter
09-12-2008 | 02:33 PM
#160
My Feedback: (1)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
I have quite a few warbirds ARFs including a bunch of CMP's, and this is the best looking I have seen. The controls surfaces have scale type insets and use good hinges, not CA hinges. I may add a bit of color to set it off, enlarge the wheel wells a bit for bigger tires, but other than that it is very good as it is. Most of the Mods are people wanting to make something special out of an ARF, but they are not required. The plane will most likely fly better without a bunch of weight adding scale mods, and look just a bit less scale. If you see one out of the box you will not be disappointed, tough to beat for the price. If you don't add a bunch of weight it should be a great flier too.
Contact Alex at A-K models, he has a bunch in stock for $276.
Some of my Warbird Fleet.
Contact Alex at A-K models, he has a bunch in stock for $276.
Some of my Warbird Fleet.
09-12-2008 | 03:40 PM
#162
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Some of the people doing the massive mods are doing so because they want to make it more scale yes. Also, since as yet, there is no oleo strut equipped retract set available for this plane that fits without major rework, this is another reason why a few have torn open the wing and are installing something that IS available...hence relocating the gear rails and such.
BUT I have been working with a manufacturer to get some retracts made specifically for this plane that will be close to scale as possible while still using the existing mounts without cutting anything and they will include the 3-5 degree forward rake that the CMP rail/strut channel has.
In fact, I sent half of my wing as well as the black spinner to this company so they could build the retracts to suit the plane exactly and come up with a metal spinnner(3 blade).
So, stay tuned for the retract setup. They should be a drop in fit. For the spinner, please let me know who might be interested. A total number of ppl who would order one would be helpful to the company so they know how much the demand may or may not be.
I should have the retracts in hand by next week.
The spinner....i dont have a time frame on yet.
BUT I have been working with a manufacturer to get some retracts made specifically for this plane that will be close to scale as possible while still using the existing mounts without cutting anything and they will include the 3-5 degree forward rake that the CMP rail/strut channel has.
In fact, I sent half of my wing as well as the black spinner to this company so they could build the retracts to suit the plane exactly and come up with a metal spinnner(3 blade).
So, stay tuned for the retract setup. They should be a drop in fit. For the spinner, please let me know who might be interested. A total number of ppl who would order one would be helpful to the company so they know how much the demand may or may not be.
I should have the retracts in hand by next week.
The spinner....i dont have a time frame on yet.
09-12-2008 | 04:56 PM
#163
My Feedback: (13)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Kahlog
If you have a minute, please help me understand.
Why would the arf builder not just shim a standard air retract to achieve the degree of forward rake as desired/needed?
Also in an air retract system, the desired gear down position can be achieved with shims as well, due to the air cylinders having pressure in them at all times. No binding as with electric/mechanical. This air pressure on my planes have always been enough to keep my gear up even when the retract has no locking up position. Since the air pressure is enough to keep the gear up, the gear down position can be in the position you want. And in the down position is where the locking design is important.
So the up position goes up till it hits the top wing and stops. The 120-150 psi air pressure keeps it there. No air loss, (quality system and installation) no battery drain, nothing.
There are many readily available air retracts that will work here. Its not special design, the Spitfire retracts out there will work as well.
I can make any air gear system work in the CMP factory design, as can anyone. The retracts in my CMP 109 are for my CMP Zero
As far as tearing models apart, thats just a disorder I guess.
Steve
If you have a minute, please help me understand.
Why would the arf builder not just shim a standard air retract to achieve the degree of forward rake as desired/needed?
Also in an air retract system, the desired gear down position can be achieved with shims as well, due to the air cylinders having pressure in them at all times. No binding as with electric/mechanical. This air pressure on my planes have always been enough to keep my gear up even when the retract has no locking up position. Since the air pressure is enough to keep the gear up, the gear down position can be in the position you want. And in the down position is where the locking design is important.
So the up position goes up till it hits the top wing and stops. The 120-150 psi air pressure keeps it there. No air loss, (quality system and installation) no battery drain, nothing.
There are many readily available air retracts that will work here. Its not special design, the Spitfire retracts out there will work as well.
I can make any air gear system work in the CMP factory design, as can anyone. The retracts in my CMP 109 are for my CMP Zero
As far as tearing models apart, thats just a disorder I guess.
Steve
09-12-2008 | 06:37 PM
#164
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: , NEW ZEALAND
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Mine is not going to be pulled apart, just assembled and flown, air retracts I see someone has talked about http://www.retracts.com./Retrax_700.htm this lot here back in the thread, price seems ok but what extra costs are there? air tank, control valve? I have never used air retracts before
09-12-2008 | 07:21 PM
#165
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Banning,
CA
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Steve,
Have you done anything on the gear installation? I spent most of the morning building a mockup of the support plate for the gear.It is nestled between the existing forward gear rail and the leading edge.
The scale location of the gear requires that the pivot point of the gear falls in the spanwise center of the rib #2 with the gear forward mounting flange touching the back of the leading edge.
I'm concerned that there is not enough hardwood structure to tie the gear plate to.
Any sujestions you might have would be greatly appreciated.
Bob Q.
Have you done anything on the gear installation? I spent most of the morning building a mockup of the support plate for the gear.It is nestled between the existing forward gear rail and the leading edge.
The scale location of the gear requires that the pivot point of the gear falls in the spanwise center of the rib #2 with the gear forward mounting flange touching the back of the leading edge.
I'm concerned that there is not enough hardwood structure to tie the gear plate to.
Any sujestions you might have would be greatly appreciated.
Bob Q.
09-12-2008 | 08:17 PM
#166
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
ORIGINAL: SCALECRAFT
Kahlog
If you have a minute, please help me understand.
Why would the arf builder not just shim a standard air retract to achieve the degree of forward rake as desired/needed?
Also in an air retract system, the desired gear down position can be achieved with shims as well, due to the air cylinders having pressure in them at all times. No binding as with electric/mechanical. This air pressure on my planes have always been enough to keep my gear up even when the retract has no locking up position. Since the air pressure is enough to keep the gear up, the gear down position can be in the position you want. And in the down position is where the locking design is important.
So the up position goes up till it hits the top wing and stops. The 120-150 psi air pressure keeps it there. No air loss, (quality system and installation) no battery drain, nothing.
There are many readily available air retracts that will work here. Its not special design, the Spitfire retracts out there will work as well.
I can make any air gear system work in the CMP factory design, as can anyone. The retracts in my CMP 109 are for my CMP Zero
As far as tearing models apart, thats just a disorder I guess.
Steve
Kahlog
If you have a minute, please help me understand.
Why would the arf builder not just shim a standard air retract to achieve the degree of forward rake as desired/needed?
Also in an air retract system, the desired gear down position can be achieved with shims as well, due to the air cylinders having pressure in them at all times. No binding as with electric/mechanical. This air pressure on my planes have always been enough to keep my gear up even when the retract has no locking up position. Since the air pressure is enough to keep the gear up, the gear down position can be in the position you want. And in the down position is where the locking design is important.
So the up position goes up till it hits the top wing and stops. The 120-150 psi air pressure keeps it there. No air loss, (quality system and installation) no battery drain, nothing.
There are many readily available air retracts that will work here. Its not special design, the Spitfire retracts out there will work as well.
I can make any air gear system work in the CMP factory design, as can anyone. The retracts in my CMP 109 are for my CMP Zero
As far as tearing models apart, thats just a disorder I guess.
Steve
09-12-2008 | 09:29 PM
#167
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Hi KAHLOG, Saw your post about the retracts and 3 blade spinner for this BF 109 from CMP.....[sm=thumbup.gif] I would like to purchase both of these items when they are available !! Let me know the details when they become known to you, please. You can email me if you like. [email protected] Thanks[sm=teeth_smile.gif][sm=teeth_smile.gif]
09-12-2008 | 10:21 PM
#168
My Feedback: (13)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Thanks for taking the time to explain. I did misunderstand " forward rake" and "parallel to the leading edge" as it was used.
Just for infos sake, Century Jet retacts are a drop in for this model also, but flying ( and crashing) assorted sizes of pretty scale configured 109s for around 20 years led me to conclude that the current LG set up is a problem (for me anyway) waiting to be improved/solved. .
I am always trying to avoid putting new cash into a model if I have hardware that I can make work. My fix will be a few hours of fun design/building and cost relatively nothing. And believe me, I have a accumulated a lot of stuff over the years and saved a ton of money. Plus I try to make a lot of my parts from composites.
If this was something like a P-51, the LG wouldn't matter much. I have the CMP 54" span P51 and the CMP 72" span P51. They are easy on the ground.
BobQ, Basically what I have done is removed the forward rail and cut another just like it, then mount the retract to the free rails, then glue them into the "as scale" position as possible. The rails are beveled at an angle to sweep back towards scale retract position, the original wheel wells.. The rails are cut to fit between the original 2 ribs, then reinforced.
I'll post pics when I have the configuration. If you can post a pic of what you have, it would help as well.
Steve
Just for infos sake, Century Jet retacts are a drop in for this model also, but flying ( and crashing) assorted sizes of pretty scale configured 109s for around 20 years led me to conclude that the current LG set up is a problem (for me anyway) waiting to be improved/solved. .
I am always trying to avoid putting new cash into a model if I have hardware that I can make work. My fix will be a few hours of fun design/building and cost relatively nothing. And believe me, I have a accumulated a lot of stuff over the years and saved a ton of money. Plus I try to make a lot of my parts from composites.
If this was something like a P-51, the LG wouldn't matter much. I have the CMP 54" span P51 and the CMP 72" span P51. They are easy on the ground.
BobQ, Basically what I have done is removed the forward rail and cut another just like it, then mount the retract to the free rails, then glue them into the "as scale" position as possible. The rails are beveled at an angle to sweep back towards scale retract position, the original wheel wells.. The rails are cut to fit between the original 2 ribs, then reinforced.
I'll post pics when I have the configuration. If you can post a pic of what you have, it would help as well.
Steve
09-12-2008 | 10:29 PM
#169
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
From what I understand, the retracts with functional scale struts will be $220. Depending on spinner interest, the cost will be less the more ppl that are interested of course.
Now, I did go back and look at the wing again and someone could put normal retracts in there by simply canting the retract housing a little as long as it wasnt a snug fit. But, the two sets of regular retracts i tried to fit(IE Robart 706RS and the 512RS were difficult). The 700 series is slightly too wide to even fit withiin the rails(but you could dremel out some space, but you'd have to do extra to cant the position some). The 510 series is about the same snugness as the 700 series, but could be made to work. The problem with the 510 series is they are only rated up to 12 pounds and going by the weight of the KMP of the same basic size(with less servos), that plane usually came out around 13.5 - 15 pounds.
Anyhow...the reason for getting a manufacturer to make gear is so you dont have to do any modifcations and i believe this is what some here have stated theyare looking for.
When i said regular retracts cant fit previously, i meant in the context of NOT modifying the wing or rails. I just wanted to make that clear.
Now, I did go back and look at the wing again and someone could put normal retracts in there by simply canting the retract housing a little as long as it wasnt a snug fit. But, the two sets of regular retracts i tried to fit(IE Robart 706RS and the 512RS were difficult). The 700 series is slightly too wide to even fit withiin the rails(but you could dremel out some space, but you'd have to do extra to cant the position some). The 510 series is about the same snugness as the 700 series, but could be made to work. The problem with the 510 series is they are only rated up to 12 pounds and going by the weight of the KMP of the same basic size(with less servos), that plane usually came out around 13.5 - 15 pounds.
Anyhow...the reason for getting a manufacturer to make gear is so you dont have to do any modifcations and i believe this is what some here have stated theyare looking for.
When i said regular retracts cant fit previously, i meant in the context of NOT modifying the wing or rails. I just wanted to make that clear.
09-12-2008 | 11:54 PM
#170
My Feedback: (13)
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Its good to have options discussion for this CMP on this thread, should help the future 109 owners streamline the assembly.
Builders: Note that too much canting for forward rake will put the tire too far forward when retracted, and will not enter the wheel well. Try mock up.
Steve
Builders: Note that too much canting for forward rake will put the tire too far forward when retracted, and will not enter the wheel well. Try mock up.
Steve
09-13-2008 | 06:49 AM
#171
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Almelo, NETHERLANDS
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
The Tower info on the prop for the OS 120 AX in my earlier threath was incorrect. The manual itself proposes a 15x10-12 or 16x8-10. It would rev at 9.000 for 3.1 BHP. I'll go for this one for the size; fits with standard muffler in cowl. Weight 865 gramm including muffler. This engine has a lot of torque for a two stroke. And the last reason, I.ve got one already.
When I fly the bird I'll let you guys know if it has enough power.
Regards,
Eric Schumacher, Netherlands
When I fly the bird I'll let you guys know if it has enough power.
Regards,
Eric Schumacher, Netherlands
09-13-2008 | 09:32 AM
#172
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Almelo, NETHERLANDS
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Put me on the list for a better spinner. Will it be 2, or three blade? I'm also interested in a better retract. At the moment I'm looking at a "Modellbau Lindinger" one. The adress is:
http://shop.lindinger.at/product_inf...442db5df8a6b8c But an option to put the wheels in a down position a bit furhter forward to prevent a nose over, is also attractive for me. I fly from a grass field, so an improven ground handling is welcome for me.
I'll watch this thread closely.
Eric Schumacher, Netherlands
http://shop.lindinger.at/product_inf...442db5df8a6b8c But an option to put the wheels in a down position a bit furhter forward to prevent a nose over, is also attractive for me. I fly from a grass field, so an improven ground handling is welcome for me.
I'll watch this thread closely.
Eric Schumacher, Netherlands
09-13-2008 | 12:02 PM
#174
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Banning,
CA
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
ORIGINAL: SCALECRAFT
Thanks for taking the time to explain. I did misunderstand " forward rake" and "parallel to the leading edge" as it was used.
Just for infos sake, Century Jet retacts are a drop in for this model also, but flying ( and crashing) assorted sizes of pretty scale configured 109s for around 20 years led me to conclude that the current LG set up is a problem (for me anyway) waiting to be improved/solved. .
I am always trying to avoid putting new cash into a model if I have hardware that I can make work. My fix will be a few hours of fun design/building and cost relatively nothing. And believe me, I have a accumulated a lot of stuff over the years and saved a ton of money. Plus I try to make a lot of my parts from composites.
If this was something like a P-51, the LG wouldn't matter much. I have the CMP 54" span P51 and the CMP 72" span P51. They are easy on the ground.
BobQ, Basically what I have done is removed the forward rail and cut another just like it, then mount the retract to the free rails, then glue them into the "as scale" position as possible. The rails are beveled at an angle to sweep back towards scale retract position, the original wheel wells.. The rails are cut to fit between the original 2 ribs, then reinforced.
I'll post pics when I have the configuration. If you can post a pic of what you have, it would help as well.
Steve
Thanks for taking the time to explain. I did misunderstand " forward rake" and "parallel to the leading edge" as it was used.
Just for infos sake, Century Jet retacts are a drop in for this model also, but flying ( and crashing) assorted sizes of pretty scale configured 109s for around 20 years led me to conclude that the current LG set up is a problem (for me anyway) waiting to be improved/solved. .
I am always trying to avoid putting new cash into a model if I have hardware that I can make work. My fix will be a few hours of fun design/building and cost relatively nothing. And believe me, I have a accumulated a lot of stuff over the years and saved a ton of money. Plus I try to make a lot of my parts from composites.
If this was something like a P-51, the LG wouldn't matter much. I have the CMP 54" span P51 and the CMP 72" span P51. They are easy on the ground.
BobQ, Basically what I have done is removed the forward rail and cut another just like it, then mount the retract to the free rails, then glue them into the "as scale" position as possible. The rails are beveled at an angle to sweep back towards scale retract position, the original wheel wells.. The rails are cut to fit between the original 2 ribs, then reinforced.
I'll post pics when I have the configuration. If you can post a pic of what you have, it would help as well.
Steve
Steve,
Here are some photos of the gear installation.
#1,2 are pics of the new opening in the wing
#3, is the gear support plate
#4, is the support plate installed
09-13-2008 | 12:18 PM
#175
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Banning,
CA
RE: CMP BF109F BUILDING THREAD
Continuation of gear installation....
#5, installs the gear retract mechanism
#6 is a mockup of the gear wire
#7, is a 4" robart wheel
#8, is the gear in the retracted position.
This was done to place the;
1. The pivot point of the gear in the scale position on the wing.
2. Position the axel center even with the wing root as shown is most 3 views.
3. Retract the gear assembly so the wheel would fit between the leading edge and the main spar.
#5, installs the gear retract mechanism
#6 is a mockup of the gear wire
#7, is a 4" robart wheel
#8, is the gear in the retracted position.
This was done to place the;
1. The pivot point of the gear in the scale position on the wing.
2. Position the axel center even with the wing root as shown is most 3 views.
3. Retract the gear assembly so the wheel would fit between the leading edge and the main spar.
