Another build

rsv1cox wrote:P-38.

Well I can hope can't I...………

Guessing not!

Not a scale model

Well that's a hint.

Spar 3' long. It's a floater.

Bob

Here is the wing - about 90% complete

THAT is pretty !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Impeccable construction Ian. So.. it's not a scale model.. which leaves me with nothing for a guess. Something whispered Eindecker to me.. when you posted photos of the built-up wing.

Strike two. I'm not good at this.

Either way if Ian's building it I know it will be good.

I can see why Eindecker came to mind - when covered it could also look like "Das Ugly Stik".

It also seems to be large for 1/2A - at first I thought it was UK 1/2A with a 3ft wingspan for control line.

My first thought was a Stik, but the tip is wrong, as is the trailing edge and there's not two leading edge ribs in a Das Littlest Stik. 36 inch span is really big for 1/2A too. Hmmm.

No clue, but it sure is pretty. Please carry on. The fuselage might give it away.

Looks to me to be a Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder there's not too many I-Beam wings in 1/2A.

Ken Cook wrote:Looks to me to be a Brodak 1/2A Pathfinder there's not too many I-Beam wings in 1/2A.

Well done Ken, you are correct. Will post more details later today.

I was flying one with a Norvel .061 Big Mig, is this going diesel? I found the gear extremely weak which I remade. I enjoyed doing squares with this plane, it cuts corners very clean and accurate. I gave it to my flying buddy Larry and I know I'll never see it again. I don't know what he does with my offerings, I never see him fly any of them ever. I've gifted him at least 6 planes.

Subscribed and taking notes. This one is on my Dream Sheet for a future build.

That wing is just a work of art! I can't wait to see the fuselage.

Ken - I am still in a quandry with the engine for this. The kit specifies 049 to 070 and specifically recommends the Brodak 049.

I have several seemingly suitable engines including Brodak 049s but an 049 (0,8cc) seems to be a tad small for this airframe.

I have an AMA 061, a couple of Norvel 061s (but I can't find them), MP Jet 061 BB, Thunder Tiger GP 07 and a Norvel 074.

My first choice would have been the Norvel 074 but it has the button glow head, Although there are replacement heads on the Norvel Web site - standard glo, turbo glo and a diesel head - the site doesn't let me place orders to the UK so b******s to them.

The MP Jet is quite heavy and the Thunder Tiger is RC - the carb looks a little fragile for side mounted control line flying.

So I am now torn between the PAW 06 and AM 10 - both 1 cc diesel.

I keep considering electrifying it but the fuselage would need beefing up. I have seen the larger Pathfinders electrified and they fly really well.

Bellcrank installed and flaps, tailplane and elevator being prepared.

The Brodak .049 would be the completely wrong choice and it's only suggested because of who's selling it. I had the Norvel .074 on mine originally. Way too much engine, this is also a engine caught in between prop sizes with very limited offerings. I couldn't get the speeds under supersonic and this is very problematic for a stunter. Running it very rich was the only way to achieve what I was shooting for and adjusting speeds by your needle is very poor. You may already know this but removing your plug on your Norvel .061 and counting the holes in the liner quickly determines sport engine vs combat version. 3 holes in the liner is the higher performance AME vs 5 holes for the Big Mig. I like your thinking on the PAW .06. I've always desired that engine. I think it would be over the top cool to see that on the nose.

The engine will be a PAW 06 (100).

One of the problems with the PAW engines is identifying them. They all look the same size and PAW keep changing the naming convention. The 80 is also the 049, the 100 becomes 06, the 149 the 09, the 249 the 15 .................... there is a 55 or 033!

The 049 and the 06 share the same case and have the same dimensions - so does the 15 and the 19, the 29 and the 35, the 49 and the 60. Then they have the plain bearing, single bearing and twin bearing versions as well as competition tuned.

They are not always marked. The 06 I have has no markings but all the 100s have 100 stamped on the cover plate The anomolies are endless.

There are restrictions at my flying field where all engines except diesels up to 15s must be silenced. We fly PAW 19s unsilenced because you can't tell the difference!

Never thought I would hear Ken say something is too powerful. I guess with limited props it just is too much.

Looks good Ian, surprised you chose another slab sided model!

Ron

Cribbs74 wrote:Never thought I would hear Ken say something is too powerful. I guess with limited props it just is too much.

Looks good Ian, surprised you chose another slab sided model!

Ron

My dislike of slab sided models holds no bounds but I cannot resist a bargain. Unfortunately, depending on your point of view, I have over 15 slabby sided kits - 5 of which are Flite Streaks (one is the Combat which a proper fuselage), two are Carrier deck and a variety of Sig and RSM kits.

As some of my fellow modellers have moved to RC over the years (and got older!)- every now and again they have gone for loft clearance of kits they are not going to build. Some are ancient and I get them for the price on the box and so at current prices (and lack of kits in this country) - they are a bargain.

They always come with a PROPER model aeroplane though!

The picture on the Pathfinder box is also decieving. At first glance, it looks like a proper fuselage.

Here is the PAW 06 (100)




Same dimensions as the PAW 049 (80)

Back to the build. I find sanding a laborious and often mind numbing process so sanding 1/4" stock for flaps isn't a task I look forward to.

However, I have found that using tape to mark out or define areas for sanding (per Windy videos) and taking the slightly risky approach of using 80 grit paper to remove the bulk really speeds this up.






I also use these to keep a straight edge



and




for profiling

The plan for this model promotes the normal wing hinges but the trailing edge of the wing is flat and 1/4" thick and the flaps are 1/4" rounded.

Hinge fitting - first of all freeing the hinge for clean movement and then slotting is another laborious task prone to error in lining up the hinges. The trailing edge would also present problems sinking the hinge so that the pin is flush.

I thought I would try the round pivot pin hinges.

So using my  trusty Proxxon drilly thing with a grinding point (a drill bit tends to rip balsa)



drilling a hole is easy and quick



A little push with the hinge itself creates a nice square hole to sink the hinge



et voila



marking the centre point of the hinge for mating




Then we have a really flush neat flap joint. The whole process for two flaps took 10 minutes.

That is a nice looking wing Ian . You build fast ! I spend more time looking and thinking at my plane than building it but they eventually get done and flown .

Mike1484

Now things get a little fiddly - more time with not much to show.

The tailplane is complete



but this needs normal hinges and a wire elevator joiner and hinge making. Constant fit and refit until the elevators are parallel.



The wing flaps also needed a flap joiner and hinge




I now have to be careful when I remove the flaps, elevator and joiners to replace them exactly as removed or I will end up with them cockeyed.