Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
November 22, 2017, 11:45:03 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build  (Read 24234 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #200 on: July 05, 2016, 02:38:26 AM »

Hi Bill - does it look a bit thin? It isn't far from that w:l ratio and it fills the width of the fuselage, so couldn't be any wider. It looks about right to me except the leading edge of it should be a tad blunter. Pete's second photo above is a useful reference.
Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 36
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,727



Ignore
« Reply #201 on: July 05, 2016, 03:37:35 AM »

Rich, I think your photo was a bit deceptive and it did look a bit thin  - if it fills the fuselage width then it must be right. For years I assumed it was thin and flat.
The drawings of the Ni17 were done from a captured machine by the Germans, and are incredibly detailed and accurate, and show the rear end of the fairing has a radius of 15mm! Assuming the 11 used the same fairing, narrowing the rear end will make it look fatter
Bill
Logged
Mark Braunlich
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 934




Ignore
« Reply #202 on: July 05, 2016, 11:02:01 AM »

The Paris N.XI skid looks to have a modification, possibly post-war.  Anyway, the fairing looks original save for the hole for the bungee.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged

Mark
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #203 on: July 05, 2016, 12:48:26 PM »

Thanks Mark. I could defend my tailskid to some degree in terms of rough dimensions from Bill's observations, but from that photo, I think I'm going to have to redo the fairings on my tailskid now... If I could afford a trip to Paris...but I can't...

I based my tailskid on an average of various different drawings and what I could see in the collection of photos I have, which is quite good now, (and now one better). I was happy with it, in that it looked fairly believable and 'in keeping', but now I can re-evaluate it and make it better. Ho hum...

Thanks for the constructive criticism Bill and Mark. All useful and most welcome.
Logged

It wasn't me
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 33
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764




Ignore
« Reply #204 on: July 05, 2016, 01:57:19 PM »

Got to say I love all the exchange about Nieuport details!! Honest attempts at "getting it correct" is inspiring. Plus one gets a real appreciation for the machines and the men that flew them. Thank You!

" incredibly detailed and accurate" German Nieuport 17 drawings appear here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2021740
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #205 on: July 05, 2016, 03:59:57 PM »

Thanks PP. I am happy to be told I am wrong, as long as it is backed up in some useful way. It can only lead to improvement, or at least an interesting discussion. This tailskid is an obvious example. I made it wrong and I would rather it be less wrong, which, until someone tells me otherwise, I think it is.

 I have seen parts of those drawings but it is good to have them all in one place. Thanks for the link.

Bill was right. I need to get the fattest bit fatter and further forward to get the blunt end more blunt. I cut off the cheeks and replaced with rafters, or rather, crude formers and covered with 'plywood', ie 1/32" balsa. This is more like Mark's close up photo. A bit of furniture polish and hey presto. I think that looks better. Needs more coats of stain and a buff to finish.

Addded: I've still messed up with the angle on the fairing, which should be more rounded. I may be able to soften this a bit. Generally overall, I think it captures the essence of the original reasonably well and will look OK on the model. One small mistake may draw the judges eye away from another bigger one...ahem
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
« Last Edit: July 05, 2016, 04:51:52 PM by Rich Moore » Logged

It wasn't me
ChrisH
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 24



Ignore
« Reply #206 on: July 05, 2016, 05:21:40 PM »

Hopefully my photo is attached!

Apologies for the amateur slide copy via slide/loupe/Canon Ixus, but I assume this photo taken in 1977 is the Le Borget Nieuport before a more recent rebuild.    Sadly it is the only photo of the '11' that I have.   I appear to have been more interested in the Nieuport monoplane and Deperdussin racer!
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #207 on: July 05, 2016, 05:51:58 PM »

Cheers ChrisH!
Logged

It wasn't me
danmellor
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 38
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,859




Ignore
« Reply #208 on: July 05, 2016, 06:47:59 PM »

The Nowlen peanut kit has been sat on my shelves for ages, so I'm really enjoying this one!

Cheers,

Dan.
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #209 on: July 06, 2016, 02:26:45 AM »

Couldn't sleep without tweaking the fairing shape. Tailskid is now looking like this. Looking field worn already. Just needs brackets and an aeroplane and I'll be happy
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 36
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,727



Ignore
« Reply #210 on: July 06, 2016, 03:24:13 AM »

Looks good to me Dan
Logged
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 33
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764




Ignore
« Reply #211 on: July 06, 2016, 10:54:50 AM »

Great photo in reply #206.

Note visible  sag in LE of StBd wing.  Is that a structural flaw of the design? Possibly a wood selection issue? Or just a warp over time? In flight, would aerodynamics tend to deform it  the other way? Has anyone ever seen a period inflight Nieu. 11 photo?

I'm starting to notice these kinds of things more. Never paid much attention til I got to looking at period Dr1 and Albatros DIII photos!
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #212 on: July 07, 2016, 02:13:26 PM »

I have been looking at the wings for this model. Interestingly, the number of ribs drawn, on all the drawings I have refererred to, show 12 ribs, including the root rib for each half wing. The Paris example clearly only has 11. I have looked closely at lots of photos, and think that 12 ribs seems more normal, although the 3rd photo seems to have 11. I reckon the prototype only had 11.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged

It wasn't me
Mark Braunlich
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 934




Ignore
« Reply #213 on: July 08, 2016, 09:58:17 AM »

Rich,
Are there differences between Nieuport and Macchi built examples perhaps?
Logged

Mark
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #214 on: July 08, 2016, 03:41:53 PM »

Maybe. I am in favour of using the clearest photos I have, which means 11 ribs, as demonstrated by the Paris example.
Logged

It wasn't me
Pete Fardell
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 53
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,744




Ignore
« Reply #215 on: July 08, 2016, 08:34:12 PM »

Rich, I think you've dug up yet another Nieuport XI controversy with the wingrib question. Have you seen the discussion and graphic here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/landoni/2395335970 ? I wonder where that uncovered wing pic came from originally.

Also, the Nieuport XI drawings in this Cross & Cockade published book, 'Nieuports in RNAS, RFC and RAF Service' (which I've got) all show 11 ribs. So does this photo I think, but it's surprising how few really clear rib-counting photos there are generally.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Mark Braunlich
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 934




Ignore
« Reply #216 on: July 09, 2016, 12:31:01 PM »

Images from Macchi factory drawings, from the archives at Aeromacchi  
Ref: WW1 Aero No. 130, page 82, Nov, 1990

Sets of copies of the Macchi drawings for the Nieuports 10, 11 and 17 were/are? available from WW1 Aeroplanes, Inc.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
« Last Edit: July 09, 2016, 12:41:04 PM by Mark Braunlich » Logged

Mark
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 33
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764




Ignore
« Reply #217 on: July 09, 2016, 08:00:10 PM »

Excellent material Mark and Pete! you guys come thru again. It seems the Macchi drawings show the Muse d'lair example's rib spacing to be correct. I did notice the cowl in the drawing is slightly different than what is shown in photos. Especially at sides, lower fuselage, at firewall.
This is quite common occurance in full size factory drawings. Several instances where the parts drawings don't match the parts as built, such as P-51D, Luscombe Model 8's etc. Great if one can examine an original part, but photos are often the only reference to a certain production standard.

BTW- If I had a guzillion $, I'd have a complete full library of WWI Aero and its companion mag (covers interwar years- name eludes me at moment- must be "old timers disease"), plus a life time membership just to keep everything  current!!!
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #218 on: July 10, 2016, 06:09:24 AM »

Looks like 11 is the magic number. Thanks guys - that ends the debate for me. I have been messing around with my wing design and now I can be confident it is going to be right. It is a thin wing, but at this size I can try for a scale rib profile. Hopefully, I'll cobble some wing together soon.
Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 36
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,727



Ignore
« Reply #219 on: July 10, 2016, 07:30:17 AM »

What structure are you planning , Rich?
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #220 on: July 10, 2016, 11:44:26 AM »

Hi Bill. I want to keep it as close to the real thing as possible, so two spars as deep as I can. Capping strips top and bottom to give an appropriate rib width and to tie the structure together. In order to keep the leading edge visibly 'thin' I am going to try a T shaped l/e, to give me some width centrally within the rib. I am currently building a mock up section, to get a feel for it. Hopefully might have a photo later. Might have get me some spruce for the spars but so far it is looking OK.
Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 36
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,727



Ignore
« Reply #221 on: July 10, 2016, 12:08:29 PM »

Are you using carbon? I just weighed some:
1 metre of 1mm rod (LE).  is 1.6g
1 metre of TE section 1.6mm wide is 1.1g
« Last Edit: July 10, 2016, 12:36:22 PM by billdennis747 » Logged
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 33
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764




Ignore
« Reply #222 on: July 10, 2016, 02:02:41 PM »

 This build gets more interesting!

Full size Nieuport practice on 17 (and assuming 11 is similar) had spars  where the wood blank was split vertically on CL, routed out and a vertical ply web was added and then glued back together. Depending upon the engineer one talks to, the internal web added no real benefit, routing saved no weight,and a solid spruce or linden spar is adequate, and possibly more torsionaly  stable. A solid spar is also MUCH simpler to make and outwardly identical to original.

I'd stay with balsa, even at 1/8 scale, in approx. scale timber sizes at LE, spars, and TE etc. 1/32" for rib webs and balsa caps. I get excited thinking about it!

I used to fly a lot of A-1 gliders. Always swapped out 1/16"x1/4" spruce spar caps for hard balsa. Never had one fail under heavy tow!

You might also think about using grain orientation to  best advantage. If you think about it, a piece of "C" grain 1/4" square is identical to an "A" grain stick rotated 90 deg. and, as a spar, will be strongest, most stable and warp resistant with the C grain on front/rear spar faces. This is just good wood practice (breadbox, furniture, pianos, etc.) and  it is recommended/required for full scale spar application.

Don't get me wrong, the traditional uses of balsa grain selection is more than adequate , but 45 years as a wood worker has influenced me, a little.
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 36
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,322


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #223 on: July 10, 2016, 02:24:02 PM »

I am going to allow myself to be dragged into the 21st century and am ordering some 2.5mm carbon rod (Mark's drawing above shows 20mm LE) for the LE and TE. Is carbon any good for spars?

Oh, and another thing. The sweep back on the 3-view I have mostly been using (Ian Stairs) is too much when compared to dimensions given in Macchi drawing above and the Ni17 drawings.


« Last Edit: July 10, 2016, 03:19:07 PM by Rich Moore » Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 36
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,727



Ignore
« Reply #224 on: July 10, 2016, 03:44:34 PM »

Rich
I've built a few carbon wings. I would suggest 2.5mm LE is too thick and heavy. I would have used 1mm n a model this size, which will go up to approx 1.5 after covering  and painting.
I certainly wouldn't use 2.5mm rod for TE. I have used Woodhouse's pultruded TE section (1.6mm x 0.6mm to 0.4mm) on big diesel models, with paper-thin carbon caps on the ribs to ock it in place. No warps and plenty strong. I can send a sample if you want a look.
At least you'll have your black outlines!
Beware, carbon can quickly put the weight up.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!