B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
04-10-2006, 07:36 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: , KS
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
Hi, I was just wondering if anyone knew of a website where I could get a B-17 Flying Fortress ARF, or any other multi-engine aircraft? Thanks!
04-11-2006, 10:34 PM
#5
04-11-2006, 11:59 PM
#7
04-12-2006, 12:34 PM
#9
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
MK:
I'm sure retracts can be installed, but I don't know any specifics. Just left a message on Neil's machine, asking him to call back. When I know more I'll post.
Bill.
I'm sure retracts can be installed, but I don't know any specifics. Just left a message on Neil's machine, asking him to call back. When I know more I'll post.
Bill.
04-12-2006, 10:25 PM
#10
My Feedback: (5)
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
Bill- OK. If the production version looks a lot better... But I would have to see several detailed, close-up pics. I always wanted to have a B-17. You see a lot of half-built Royal kits at swap meets- a lot of labor goes into one of those!
Wasn't somebody going to come out with an ARF B-24? Thought I remembered reading about it last year. That would be cool too!
Wasn't somebody going to come out with an ARF B-24? Thought I remembered reading about it last year. That would be cool too!
04-13-2006, 05:55 PM
#13
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
ORIGINAL: Kmot
I just clicked on the banner for the Cedar B-17 ARF. It takes you to the same page with the same butt ugly B-17. He needs to update those pics if indeed that is not the final production version.
I just clicked on the banner for the Cedar B-17 ARF. It takes you to the same page with the same butt ugly B-17. He needs to update those pics if indeed that is not the final production version.
amen to that brotha!!! if your gonna spend the money to put 4 engines in something, it should at least look kind of close to scale.
04-14-2006, 09:58 PM
#14
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Galesburg, IL
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
I thought that some profile planes looked ugly but boy does that take the cake. I'd be ashamed to post pictures of something like that. Even my ugliest plane looks better than that. The main fuse looks alrite except for the top(or cotpick) and the engine cowels. And especially for the pice it better start looking better than that.[:'(]
04-15-2006, 12:03 AM
#15
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
The only thing I could add is that the production model HAS to be better looking that what is being shown on Cedar Hobbies website. A 81" wingspan scale model ARF for $550.00 sounds ok to me. But not for what is shown of the prototype it isn't.
Looks like it would be a single piece wing. Is it or does it seperate into two halves at the fuse?
Looks like it would be a single piece wing. Is it or does it seperate into two halves at the fuse?
04-16-2006, 06:52 PM
#16
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Katy,
TX
Posts: 1,648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
Ok, the production one's are on the boat. Neil has given me the final copy for production to do the build and review the instructions.
Neil has gone through FIVE prototypes to try to get this right and yes, I have complained on certain points also, but he listened. The picture in the site is three prototype back.
Enclosed is the final version and I took the pictures over the picture of the real plane.
Features of it include in nacell fuel tanks, a separt module for the tail wheel. The separate module was the easiest way to handle the messy linkage, as the tail wheel is not in line with the rudder. A special hatch inside the nacell that WILL clear the fuel tanks for the throtte servo. The 82" wing is now a two piece for easier transportation.
You can look for yourself inside the fuse. Yes, you see TWO wing tubes.
More as the build begins.
Twinman
PS I did notice the overhead machine gun turrent is too far back. Cedar Notified
Neil has gone through FIVE prototypes to try to get this right and yes, I have complained on certain points also, but he listened. The picture in the site is three prototype back.
Enclosed is the final version and I took the pictures over the picture of the real plane.
Features of it include in nacell fuel tanks, a separt module for the tail wheel. The separate module was the easiest way to handle the messy linkage, as the tail wheel is not in line with the rudder. A special hatch inside the nacell that WILL clear the fuel tanks for the throtte servo. The 82" wing is now a two piece for easier transportation.
You can look for yourself inside the fuse. Yes, you see TWO wing tubes.
More as the build begins.
Twinman
PS I did notice the overhead machine gun turrent is too far back. Cedar Notified
04-16-2006, 09:35 PM
#18
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Galesburg, IL
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
I'll have to agree with Kmot it defenately is better. The windshield could use a little dressing with an egsacto knife to make them bigger. But the rest look a lot better than what the box shows. Howd they do on the engine cowels? That to me was another issue that I thought just didn't quite do the plane justice.
04-17-2006, 08:48 PM
#20
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Katy,
TX
Posts: 1,648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
Nchrome,
Your killing me. Cedar is killing me to get this one built and flying before the shipment arrives.
Ok, one last set of pictures on the nacelles per your request.
Twinman
No pressure here...let's not talk about the wife pressures for attention!!!
Your killing me. Cedar is killing me to get this one built and flying before the shipment arrives.
Ok, one last set of pictures on the nacelles per your request.
Twinman
No pressure here...let's not talk about the wife pressures for attention!!!
04-18-2006, 02:50 PM
#24
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
You know-
There are, uhmmm three, maybe four things I would like to see with this model.
1. Retracts (already asked above).
2. Paint Schemes - in the photos above, it appears that Thunder Bird will be the chosen one. Will there be an option in the future to order either the camo or a all silver version?
3. Decals - It would be nice to include with these kits a set of standardize set of serial numbers so that the modeler could cut out the desired serial number of the bomber he wanted thus allowing this model to be customized a little bit easlier.
Just some thoughts I wanted to toss out and see if anyone would agree with them or not.
There are, uhmmm three, maybe four things I would like to see with this model.
1. Retracts (already asked above).
2. Paint Schemes - in the photos above, it appears that Thunder Bird will be the chosen one. Will there be an option in the future to order either the camo or a all silver version?
3. Decals - It would be nice to include with these kits a set of standardize set of serial numbers so that the modeler could cut out the desired serial number of the bomber he wanted thus allowing this model to be customized a little bit easlier.
Just some thoughts I wanted to toss out and see if anyone would agree with them or not.
04-18-2006, 03:29 PM
#25
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
RE: B-17 Flying Fortress ARF Question
All:
Cedar Hobbies is one man, and his one assistant. Neil Chouker (pronounced Show-KAY) is very busy trying to make the business go. He will listen to any suggestions, and will answer your emails with questions. Might take a while before you get the answer, remember he’s busy.
He wants to specialize in multi engine planes, and a minimum wing span of either 81” or quarter scale so his models can be flown in IMAA as well as flying for sport.
I may be talking out of school, but in his pipeline is a “60 size” sport twin, and a just barely post WW2 twin engine war plane that saw service in China and Korea. Let’s see if anyone can guess what it is from that hint. If everything goes as planned I’ll have the war plane at Multis over McDonough in late June, along with my new Super Duellist 2/60 Mk II. The SD is NOT from Cedar Hobbies.
Neil is asking for suggestions, what planes to model. Go to his web site http://www.cedarhobbies.net/ and leave him a note. You can also find him on RCU as nchouker
Bill.
Cedar Hobbies is one man, and his one assistant. Neil Chouker (pronounced Show-KAY) is very busy trying to make the business go. He will listen to any suggestions, and will answer your emails with questions. Might take a while before you get the answer, remember he’s busy.
He wants to specialize in multi engine planes, and a minimum wing span of either 81” or quarter scale so his models can be flown in IMAA as well as flying for sport.
I may be talking out of school, but in his pipeline is a “60 size” sport twin, and a just barely post WW2 twin engine war plane that saw service in China and Korea. Let’s see if anyone can guess what it is from that hint. If everything goes as planned I’ll have the war plane at Multis over McDonough in late June, along with my new Super Duellist 2/60 Mk II. The SD is NOT from Cedar Hobbies.
Neil is asking for suggestions, what planes to model. Go to his web site http://www.cedarhobbies.net/ and leave him a note. You can also find him on RCU as nchouker
Bill.