Eindecker_pilot

Jim,
That is an interesting way of doing it... If I picture this right for a front strut... You'd only have to raise the locknut on the bottom of the wing to add positive incidence, lower the locknut to get more negative incidence. For final assembly would you come down from the top side with a 2nd locknut that would capture the wing onto the threaded rod? (I'm picturing the threaded rod going through a thru-hole in the spars).

Greg

geezeraviation

My Feedback: (3)

Allow me Art, Yup thats how it works, all of course in harmony with similar adjustments of the crossed wires at each strut pair, aaannnndddd the adjustments of the flying and landing wires. All together now,, one, two thre.....its how an air plane is rigged. Its important to start in the right place and go through it in a specific order.
Doc

Tmoth4

My Feedback: (1)

I wasn't thinking about a locknut on the bottom, just on the top when you assemble the plane. Incidence adjustments could be made by adding washers or nuts underneath on the front or rear strut, depending on whether you want to increase or decrease the incidence. Of course, as Doc Geezer says, appropriate adjustments would also have to be made on the rigging wires. I don't think the nuts showing on the surface of the wings would be inappropriate either.

Eindecker_pilot

Thanks Jim, I see how you'd do it now.
Greg

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

Wow! I just looked at the calendar and realized that I haven't posted anything all week.

Ya'll are probably wondering "Did he fall off the wagon or what?" I'll have to admit, I kind of scared myself during the first phase of this build.......the pace (for me) was dizzying - my eyes glazed over and I just didn't realize that I was actually building at a pretty good clip.

Well, I have slowed the pace down a bit, but I am still working on the project. I have been pondering how real designers (Jim, DJ & others) go about a project and I stand in amazement.
For instance, look a Jim's approach to the wing tips - he lofted a couple of tip ribs (which he sent to me and I ignored), laminated the tip shape and needs little more than finish sanding to complete the wingtip. I, on the other hand, added lots more to the parts count and added complexity where a simpler way existed........and added emensely to the head scratching required for me to figure out what to do next or rather what needs to be done before something else can be started.

Don't get me wrong, I am not quitting and I am still going to design and build my own planes (probably)........I just have a long way to go to become an industry acceptable model airplane designer!
But then again, I.m not building my resume........I'm just having fun with my hobby. But if there is model airplane company and/or designer who needs a company pilot, I am availabe.

Any whooooooo.........enough of the "I'm a slow builder lament!" And you can write in a couple of different meanings for 'slow'. I thought I might as well say it first - I know most of you are thinking it - and I know there are some of you who are going to blab it on the thread anyway.

Will post pictures later.....

abufletcher

I just want to point out that somewhere along the way, modelers seem to have lost their way. We used to just build a model for our own fun. It was "one off" building. Now, builders seem to feel it's their obligation to produce a model in a way that can be commercially/industrially reproduced. When you think about it, no one needs CAD for a model they are building for themselves. And ideas like "parts count" have no meaning whatsoever if you're just building for yourself. And there's no reason to "simplify" if you're happy with the level of complexity of your own building.

Let's take one simple example: What you call the "lofting" of the tip ribs. Nothing could be simpler. You just glue in a rectangular piece of balsa, then cut and sand it down until it fit the profile. It takes two minutes. On the other hand, if your goal is to produce a "kit" part that can be industrially produced (and that's what laser cutting is), then it's a considerably bigger task.

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

Art you are still cooking along. I can't wait to see both you and Jim finish these and see them in the air. One warning, if you think your Nieuport is a rudder ship, just wait...

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

[

Let's take one simple example: What you call the ''lofting'' of the tip ribs. Nothing could be simpler. You just glue in a rectangular piece of balsa, then cut and sand it down until it fit the profile. It takes two minutes. On the other hand, if your goal is to produce a ''kit'' part that can be industrially produced (and that's what laser cutting is), then it's a considerably bigger task.



[/quote]
The point here is I had the simpler way given to me and I ignored it, probably because it was different than "my" way.
The reference to "parts count" was another way for me to complain about how long its taking, not that I want to produce a commercially acceptable plan or design.

OR IN OTHER WORKDS :

Don't listen the to man (me) behind the curtain, he doesn't know what he is talking about!

later......

abufletcher

Remember also that these WWI aircraft we model have ALREADY been designed once....and there's no need to completely REDESIGN them from the ground up a second time. If you want to simplify some original structure or make some original structure stronger, that's fine. But what worked on the original in terms of basic structure will very frequently work on a model. Of course, commercial kit designers have to take a different approach. But that's their problem.

When I was working with Chris on the prototype of the Snipe kit and again on the CI kit, I was bending over backwards to not just think of a "solution" to building problems but to think of a solution that would be reproduceable by subsequent modelers..or even made available in the kit. This made things ten times as hard as just fixing something on MY model. While I took a certain pleasure in thinking of how MY solutions might be included in the "production kit" (and many were), this shouldn't be our primary goal as modelers.

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

Yea, I know. Sometimes it just seems to drag along, especially when I hit a section that I don't like or want to do. I don't enjoy building much of the time - I will like this build a lot more next season when me and Jim are out there DESTROYING the Fokker Scourge!

Horsepoweraviation

My Feedback: (50)

From all the Fokkers in the ODP......BRING IT!!

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

yea, yea [:-] easily said by a guy who will be flying a Camel next season

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

I have a little bit of progress to report.

I have the one outer wing panel nearly complete - most of the cap stripping is on, the tip is blended into the proper shape, the hard points are built into the spars, the dowels are secured, the hinge blocks have been put into the wing trailing edge.

The aileron needs to be beveled and hinged, then the tip (both aileron and wing tips) can be sanded to their final shape. After that is completed the spar webbing is next........plywood webs at the dowel location and 1/8" balsa on the remainder of the spars.

Then all that needs to be done to the other outer wing panels.

Then on to the inner wing panels where the strut anchor/fuse boom hardware needs to be fabricated and assembled........I think I have that design finalized - I will show you when I get to that point.
I also have the struts designed.......they will be built up out of 1/8" lite ply and balsa and a/c ply. I will also spring that on you when I get there.

Question: What size pulleys are needed for the elevator and rudder cables (at the rear strut location) ?
Also, from where can the pulleys be obtained? I am looking for just the pulleys by themselves........I will fabricate the blocks and hardware to mount them.

I'll go snap some pictures and be back.

geezeraviation

My Feedback: (3)

Holy cow, are those two right and two left but just backwards, you know what I mean?
Doc

abufletcher

Very nice work!

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

Yep......the left is on the right and the right is on the left - if that's what you mean.......and I think that's what you mean, if you know what I mean.
(I was in the shop with too many chemical fumes wifting about, know what I mean, Vern?)

Thanks Don......(just don't look too closely)........ah, go ahead and look - its gonna get covered up anyway.......and none of the goobers will show during the 50 50 test - you know, 50 mph and 50 feet up!

abufletcher

I use the 2000/300 test myself, i.e. how is it going to look in aerial photos at 1/2000 of a second with a 300mm lens.

Tmoth4

My Feedback: (1)

Art, I knew that would wake him up!

Jim

Horsepoweraviation

My Feedback: (50)

From all the Fokkers in the ODP......BRING IT!!


[/quote]

yea, yea [:-] easily said by a guy who will be flying a Camel next season

[/quote]


Art...buddy??? ......What the hell?[X(][X(]
That was a secret from grasshopper to sinsai!

Art.....you get a pass..........(Jim, your dead meat! UNLESS you bring that crazy Jeff dude...then I am out!)

Keep up pace buddy, start drinking full leaded Mountain Dew!


HPA

geezeraviation

My Feedback: (3)

Im just a casual observer but it seems to me if I was going Fokker hunting I'd want a Camel or an SE 5 or a Spad or maybe another Fokker. I'm not sure a DH2 ever tangled with a Dr I or a D VII and I might not like the odds.
Jims will probably be easy to fly in a scale manner with the 50 he's got, Art whatcha puttin on yours?
Doc

R/C Art

My Feedback: (38)

Zenoah 445 twin......it should be adequate for combat with any of those Fokkers......

Tmoth4

My Feedback: (1)

I think Art's going to have to fly cover for me.[&o]

abufletcher

You don't have to be faster than the bear...

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

Abu, that is only true if the bear is not to bright:-) The fast bear should run away, turn around, and make another pass with his teeth from a favorable angle.

abufletcher

The continuation of that old joke is:

You don't have to be faster than the bear. You just have to be faster than your friend! So as long as Art's DH2 is faster than Jim's...