ESM FW D-9
#2579
you two are right!
the pic is from the real one, its for reference and i am asking a question.
i make the question again :
the gun blisters our esm fw 190 d9 have the same shape compairing to the real one;
...i think ours are off scale
thank you.
the pic is from the real one, its for reference and i am asking a question.
i make the question again :
the gun blisters our esm fw 190 d9 have the same shape compairing to the real one;
...i think ours are off scale
thank you.
#2580
My Feedback: (49)
http://youtu.be/tNtAtkIPpdo
On a 3W 20X10 prop I got 6450 rpm.... First run
On a 3W 20X10 prop I got 6450 rpm.... First run
#2583
#2584
My Feedback: (1)
I would be interested in the differences between each aircraft of the full scale FW 190? I am going to guess they were not all perfect in fit and finish. Just sayin'. It seems many modelers chase perfection that never actually existed.
For a minute I thought I was in the Scale forum, not the Warbird forum. There is a difference.
For a minute I thought I was in the Scale forum, not the Warbird forum. There is a difference.
#2586
here you can see the gun blisters of our models.
their shape is ok; shouldnt it be more rounded;
sorry for asking but i think that this "tiny detail" is the most recognizable spot on a fw 190 wing either its a 1/5 scale or a full scale one, dont you think;
their shape is ok; shouldnt it be more rounded;
sorry for asking but i think that this "tiny detail" is the most recognizable spot on a fw 190 wing either its a 1/5 scale or a full scale one, dont you think;
#2587
My Feedback: (1)
Oh maybe, but it also is a panel that is hinged into the wing fillet that opens to reveal the MG 151/20 cannon. There are many aspects of this detail that are wrong. Kinda tough to chase them all down and fix them on an ARF. I say throw your radio and engine in it and fly. But that is just me. Maybe get all of these minute details right on the next full build, where it is easier to fabricate these items when creating the wing. The beauty of balsa is it can be shaped to whatever it needs to look like, by and large.
#2588
#2590
My Feedback: (1)
You can always build a simple vacuum forming machine and make some more accurate blisters. Maybe make them just slightly oversized to go over the existing ones.
I understand about a particular out of scale issue with some aircraft. I cannot stand to see the long cowl/noses on the Fokker DR1 triplane. I went to great pains to make my 2 tripes more scale in this area.
I guess my point is when it comes to ARF's, you have to lower the expectations and live with it, or modify/fix them if you cannot. For the price of these things, I do not think you can ever expect them to be exactly what you want.
I understand about a particular out of scale issue with some aircraft. I cannot stand to see the long cowl/noses on the Fokker DR1 triplane. I went to great pains to make my 2 tripes more scale in this area.
I guess my point is when it comes to ARF's, you have to lower the expectations and live with it, or modify/fix them if you cannot. For the price of these things, I do not think you can ever expect them to be exactly what you want.
#2592
My Feedback: (1)
This would depend on the aircraft. As far as the FW 190 D series goes, you could have one exact scale, and there would be no problem with how it flies. Wide gear, long fuselage moments, good wing/tail area. The trick is always to keep the weight down.
As far as ARF's go, if you wanted one exactly scale, the price would skyrocket. So there has to be a compromise. While not an ARF, look at SisT. That is such an expensive plane, many would be too nervous to fly it.
I am of the opinion that almost any design can be made to fly well. It has more to do with wing loading than anything. Try scaling these warbirds down to 1/12th scale, and try to get that to not only fly, but out perform what everyone else has built. That was the challenge of the 1/12th scale combat event. You know which airplane came out on top?.............The TA 152 H. It came down to the long wings, large wing area, and long fuselage moments.
So in the large sizes, if you keep your details light, you can have a god flying plane. The biggest trick is learning how the details are supposed to look, and then fabricating them .
Again, are we in the Scale forum? I understand you guys want god looking airplanes though.
#2593
My Feedback: (3)
Chris, I think the XYZ would be the best solution but it is real close. Its a twin so it will vibrate less. I think it only fits because the molded cowl flaps are partially open. In retrospect, I think I would have did the XYZ. I put in the DLE 55 and the head sticks out the bottom by about 1.5 inches. Not too bad but still unsightly if you want to go for the clean look. Ticketec has tons of experience with it and I think he was the first to install one in this plane.
Jason
Jason
Does anyone have a comparison diameter measurement between the SisT D9 and ESM D9? I have the SisT D9 kit so im checking out engine options used on the ESM version for comparison. Thats why Im looking for the best possible solution thats concealed as much as possible.
#2594
Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
#2595
My Feedback: (1)
As I slogged my way through the entirety of this thread I began wondering the same thing. Only thought that comes to mind is that these planes cross the line value-wise where most do not want to risk losing them. Doesn't seem like anyone has really done a lot of flying in theirs, and the risk of damaging the wing and retracts due to their fragility doesn't help.
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
#2596
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BLENHEIM Malbourough, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I slogged my way through the entirety of this thread I began wondering the same thing. Only thought that comes to mind is that these planes cross the line value-wise where most do not want to risk losing them. Doesn't seem like anyone has really done a lot of flying in theirs, and the risk of damaging the wing and retracts due to their fragility doesn't help.
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
#2597
My Feedback: (49)
Originally Posted by McCrazy;11757
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. [COLOR=#b22222
Speaking of retracts, seems to me that for the $600-$1000 people are investing in retracts for these planes they ought to be bulletproof. [COLOR=#b22222
I think of the firearms I can buy in that price range and all the material, design, and manufacturing effort that goes into them and can't believe these retractable landing gear cost the same yet perform so poorly and are such simple objects[/COLOR]. Seems like it would be a fairly easy market for someone to get into with room for plenty of profit if you could make decent equipment.
Last edited by HoundDog; 03-12-2014 at 06:24 AM.
#2598
3.5 Guns in this country and probably over half worth less that $1000. Where there probably less than 350,000 PR/C planes and less that 10% are worth more than $1000 and fewer than half of thoes have Retracts. and may be $350 are D-9's pretty well explaines the price of the retracts when U have to deride the total number of retract systems up among 4 or 5 Manufactures ... If they only made a couple hindered "Saturday Night Specials" the would cost fart more. It's the law of NEED for a Product. and at what profit can be made on any one item make.
Last edited by dgiatr; 03-12-2014 at 06:35 AM.
#2600
My Feedback: (24)
.......i will have to AGREE with McCrazy!!!. in all over "RC UNIVERSE" i see that you consider spending a fortune for retracts like something to be inevitable. Sorry HoundDog but here in Europe, we know different maths than you do ....Have you ever listen anything about EUROKIT; Here in Europe its the BEST COMPANY FOR MAKING RETRACTS AT HALF THE PRICE YOU PAY THERE. AND ITS FAR MORE BETTER IN QUALITY THAN YOURS. Except FW 190 AND BF 109 which need a special retract design with big angle, in all the other ocassions EUROKIT have a cheaper and more reliable solution. i really dont know why you, in U.S. have never heard of them...probably its a mistake from Eurokit. but for me i have over 15 pairs of them in my planes and i can tell you that its far more better in price and quality that some expensive retract of yours. Look here :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTBoc...-nrFLhgNo57dSw all the models you see there, except ESM BF 109 50CC, have Eurokit retracts.
When you add in the exchange rate, the prices for someone in the US to buy Eurokit gear is pretty close to what the prices here are
http://www.eurokitshop.it/category.php?id_category=131
Last edited by 70 ragtop; 03-12-2014 at 07:55 PM.