Woo hoo...Ziroli Stuka!
#27
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Probably as a static Item. I have heard they do little on the model as far as function. They might look cool extended though.
National Balsa answered some questions I had, and they seem to be the ones to go with. They offer a short kit, and ship the wood still in the sheets they were cut from. I want them this way from a protection and organizational standpoint. Otherwise you get a bunch of broken puzzle pieces.
National Balsa answered some questions I had, and they seem to be the ones to go with. They offer a short kit, and ship the wood still in the sheets they were cut from. I want them this way from a protection and organizational standpoint. Otherwise you get a bunch of broken puzzle pieces.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bemis,
NM
Posts: 2,889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a couple of more to keep you inspired.
http://www.rcuvideos.com/video/Giant...uka-production
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1FDxARE52g
http://www.rcuvideos.com/video/Giant...uka-production
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1FDxARE52g
#29
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
I ordered my kit tonight. I went with National balsa. They seem to be willing to communicate, and have a good rep on the forums. I went with the full kit, as running the numbers, it is a much better deal.
I really am excited to build this plane, so it may happen sooner than I was thinking, but we shall see. From looking at the plans, it looks like it will be a fairly straight forward build, and should go quickly. It is nice when you can move along nicely through a build. When you get bogged down solving problems (because of poor engineering) it can get to be a little disheartening.
Also, it looks like there are some great scale details available. Such as the MG 15 gun and a good instrument panel. I think the cockpit is an area that needs special attention on this plane, as it is so much out in the forefront.
Again, I will try to do my best to scale it out, as this one would most likely be a candidate for scale competition.
I really am excited to build this plane, so it may happen sooner than I was thinking, but we shall see. From looking at the plans, it looks like it will be a fairly straight forward build, and should go quickly. It is nice when you can move along nicely through a build. When you get bogged down solving problems (because of poor engineering) it can get to be a little disheartening.
Also, it looks like there are some great scale details available. Such as the MG 15 gun and a good instrument panel. I think the cockpit is an area that needs special attention on this plane, as it is so much out in the forefront.
Again, I will try to do my best to scale it out, as this one would most likely be a candidate for scale competition.
#30
Dynamic Balsa has a nice cockpit kit for the Stuka. http://www.dbalsa.com/cockpits/stuka.htm It's not 100% scale, but it definately looks the part.
I used one in mine, and added a few details along the way. I was very happy with the results.
A few pics of their kit are here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=615484
A few more, here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...615484&page=62
I used one in mine, and added a few details along the way. I was very happy with the results.
A few pics of their kit are here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=615484
A few more, here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...615484&page=62
Last edited by TomCrump; 10-23-2013 at 04:19 AM.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: streamwood,
IL
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subscribed ! will be lurking and watching. what books do you have? I have just about everything printed and a few c/d's and could suggest a couple of what I think are the better ones for details. I would suggest first off that you check the overall length of the plans against your 3 views. there may be a discrepancy (plans too short) there. Hope to see this take shape soon, but that's just cause I like STUKA's.
#32
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
I have the Peter smith Warbird colors books on the way. I am going to do a B model. Any leads on good books would be welcome. Something with good 3 views. The stuff I would need to put my competition packet together. I think I have pretty much settled on a scheme. Kind of funny, I really do not like the yellow that I see on so many Luftwaffe birds. So I will avoid that. Probably the 2 tone fractured camo scheme on top, with the RLM 76 or similar color on bottom.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: streamwood,
IL
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuka by Alex Vanags-Baginski is one of my must haves. ISBN 0-517-54853-4 easy to find used for around $12.
Aero Detail #11 Junkers ju87D/G Stuka is out of print I think but still can be found. Even tho its on the D/G version a lot of the detail remains the same.you should be able to find a free download with a search.
Junkers Ju87 by EddieJ. Creek ISBN 978 1 90653 728 9 has a lot of photos and drawings and some color profiles.
Kagero publishing has 4 volumes out on the Ju87.vol 1 & 2 cover the earlier versions A & B models while vol 3 & 4 cover the later D/G versions.These have a lot of color profiles and some excellent 3 views.
Aero Detail #11 Junkers ju87D/G Stuka is out of print I think but still can be found. Even tho its on the D/G version a lot of the detail remains the same.you should be able to find a free download with a search.
Junkers Ju87 by EddieJ. Creek ISBN 978 1 90653 728 9 has a lot of photos and drawings and some color profiles.
Kagero publishing has 4 volumes out on the Ju87.vol 1 & 2 cover the earlier versions A & B models while vol 3 & 4 cover the later D/G versions.These have a lot of color profiles and some excellent 3 views.
#34
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Thanks for the info. I am one of those geeky types that is always bringing books to the flying field! I can never have enough of them. I will look for those.
I may end up doing a build thread on this. Right here most likely once I get started. If there is much interest.
I may end up doing a build thread on this. Right here most likely once I get started. If there is much interest.
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: streamwood,
IL
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
another thing to consider is to get an Airfix 1/24 plastic kit. The detailing is really good and from what I have seen it can be scaled up really close to 1/5.3.
don't put it together just use it to measure with a vernier caliper and multiply by 4.5.
don't put it together just use it to measure with a vernier caliper and multiply by 4.5.
#37
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Yah, plastic models are great references. I have done that in the past.
In my searching, I found an interesting issue with the Ziroli kit. The Ailerons taper at the tips. I guess the full scale had constant chord ailerons. This would seem like a benefit as you would be increasing the area of the aileron, making it more effective. Also increasing the tip chord, is a benefit as well. Already made this change on my plans. I will have to verify this with some good, modern documentation though. It seems tapered aileron appear in a lot of 3 views, of old, but modern accurate documentation proves otherwise.
Another thing to look at is the space between the ailerons/flaps and the wings. It appears on the full scale they were very close. Not the case with the Ziroli design. I will be looking at this and making a change as well.
I had the opportunity to really study the plans last night, and I think this aircraft will be a piece of cake to build. I read a thread in RC Scalebuilder where a guy did one in 4 months! It came out very nice as well. Posted video of the early flights, and it looked great. Not sure I would move that fast, but I did complete my last 1/4 triplane in 4 months, and in some ways, I think it is more complicated. For me it is always about getting all the things I need to complete the model.
In my searching, I found an interesting issue with the Ziroli kit. The Ailerons taper at the tips. I guess the full scale had constant chord ailerons. This would seem like a benefit as you would be increasing the area of the aileron, making it more effective. Also increasing the tip chord, is a benefit as well. Already made this change on my plans. I will have to verify this with some good, modern documentation though. It seems tapered aileron appear in a lot of 3 views, of old, but modern accurate documentation proves otherwise.
Another thing to look at is the space between the ailerons/flaps and the wings. It appears on the full scale they were very close. Not the case with the Ziroli design. I will be looking at this and making a change as well.
I had the opportunity to really study the plans last night, and I think this aircraft will be a piece of cake to build. I read a thread in RC Scalebuilder where a guy did one in 4 months! It came out very nice as well. Posted video of the early flights, and it looked great. Not sure I would move that fast, but I did complete my last 1/4 triplane in 4 months, and in some ways, I think it is more complicated. For me it is always about getting all the things I need to complete the model.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: streamwood,
IL
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 3 views in the "Eddie Creek" book show them correctly as a constant chord. what I do not understand is why and how the Ziroli model is only 77" in length when if you use 36'1" as the actual length of the full size and scale it out at 2.25"/ft it comes out to 81.187 ".that's why I suggested checking the 3 view against the plans.
#39
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
I have heard the Ziroli was not totally scale. Not sure if I want to go to the effort to get it there either though. I need to get some docs with a good 3 view first and check it. If it is too bad to effect scores, I may make some changes, but otherwise I will not. Although 4.187" is quite a bit to be short, and may be noticeable to the judges. Kind of odd that a plane would be shorter than scale. It is usually the other way.
So for those that have built one of these, how does the balance generally end up with a G 62? Nose heavy, or tail heavy?
Also, I was wanting to use the Robart landing gear, including the tail wheel unit. Any reason why I should steer clear of their products for this design?
So for those that have built one of these, how does the balance generally end up with a G 62? Nose heavy, or tail heavy?
Also, I was wanting to use the Robart landing gear, including the tail wheel unit. Any reason why I should steer clear of their products for this design?
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: streamwood,
IL
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the book by Eddie Creek has really nice six view drawings. This book is fairly recent, first published in 2012.It has about 25 color profiles , hundreds of photos , and a lot of drawings from various Luftwaffe manuals. Cant go wrong on this one.
#41
So for those that have built one of these, how does the balance generally end up with a G 62? Nose heavy, or tail heavy?
Also, I was wanting to use the Robart landing gear, including the tail wheel unit. Any reason why I should steer clear of their products for this design?
The Robart gear is fine. I believe that it's installation is a bit more complicated than the Sierra gear.
#43
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Thanks Ram-Bro. To be honest, I have not looked at those things closely, so I am not exactly sure what the difference would be.
Gonna grab some wood today to fabricate the fuselage jig. (I work in a woodshop, we have plenty of melamine, sheet good, drop).
Unless it is recommended otherwise, I kinda wanna start with the Fuselage.
Gonna grab some wood today to fabricate the fuselage jig. (I work in a woodshop, we have plenty of melamine, sheet good, drop).
Unless it is recommended otherwise, I kinda wanna start with the Fuselage.
#45
#49