Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
September 20, 2017, 05:46:27 PM *
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]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: cessna 16in from guillow kit f50  (Read 1024 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« on: July 30, 2016, 09:21:34 PM »

I was wondering if anyone has built this dime scale Cessna Airmaster from the plan that is available from the Builder's Plan Gallery. I find it a very attractive model. I love the cantilever high wing because I hate building struts. It calls for balsa sizes unusual for period dimers like 3/64" wing ribs and 1/16x1/32 sticks in the fuselage, stabilizer and rudder. Would it even be FAC legal if built to the plan? Is 3/64" balsa even available? Should it just be built with 1/16 balsa ?

The plans call for only 3/8" dihedral. Should this be increased to the maximum allowed by FAC dimer rules?

Are dethermalizers allowed in dime scale? I see nothing in the rules allowing it.

If anyone has built this plan I would love to see some pictures and read your results.
Logged
Bredehoft
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 42
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 868


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2016, 07:47:34 AM »

I've looked at this plan many times.  You are correct, the wood sizes are unusual.  If you built it per plan and presented the plan with your model, it would be accepted.  This is because you built it PER PLAN, regardless of what the rules recommend.  The rules concerning wood sizes are there to prevent people from building or designing with undersize wood.  For example, if I designed a new Dimer with 1/32nd wood, it would be prohibited, but to build to original plan is acceptable.

You would probably have to sand down your own 3/64" wood (0.047"), although I would just use 1/20" wood (0.050") as it is indistinguishable from 3/64".  1/20" wood IS available.

3/8" dihedral is probably adequate, or maybe increase this to 1/2" each tip.  You won't need to go to extremes.

Dethermalizers are permitted, there is nothing against them in the rules.

I hope this helps,

--george
Logged

Volare Products Blog: http://www.volareproducts.com/
Volare Products Store:  http://www.volareproducts.com/BUY/
Follow on Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/VolareProducts
lincoln
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,584



Ignore
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2016, 07:05:37 AM »

High wing models generally don't need as much dihedral as low wing models. However, it's my understanding that parasol models need more than high wing models, though I guess if you put a bit of transparent plastic where the fuselage would have been, it helps. I haven't done a parasol scale model yet.

I guess if you can make a really lightweight DT, go for it. Another approach might be to disable the freewheel, at least if your model is capable of high times without it. I once flew an "indoor" sort of dime scale (Guillows Porterfield Zephyr) outside. The first flight was pretty good. The second flight was over a max. It probably would have vanished forever if it had a freewheel. I only ended up having to wade through 5 feet of moving water. (Fortunately, it was warm and seemed clean, though it didn't do much for my Social Security card.) If I had been able to get back in time, I could have put in a third flight and might have won the event. Sigh. I've tied the freewheel down on other models to make them come down after the motor run, and it's worked ok, though of course it's not the same as a major disruption of the flight surfaces.

My model weighed about 5 grams, with a couple of slightly overweight parts. I'm guessing yours, with more wing area, double covered wing, and a touch of dope could still be under 10g. For dimers, you can get away with really light wood for the 1/16" parts, since they're usually more than you need for strength with normal wood. Or, at least, I did on that model. My other dimer, an Aeroneer, hardly flies at all, and it's not the weight.
Logged
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2016, 05:21:28 PM »

I decided to begin making this little Airmaster. I find making models with less than a 24 inch wingspan difficult because of the fiddly little parts. I will make it with 1/16" balsa because that is what I have on hand. I will try to build to the plan and the FAC rules. It is unlikely that it will ever compete though. I will try to make a tilt up tail DT, probably using a fuse.

There is a lot about this old plan that is confusing and potentially pretty flimsy. The way that the leading edge is built up off the board looks like it will be hard to attach to the little ribs which are 4 different sizes. I think the FAC rules do allow for additional spars for some strength. It is also up for some interpretation how to build the front cowl and nose. I am using Duco thinned with Acetone. A new mount for the rear motor peg will add a little stiffness to the fuselage.

I would love to see how others have built this plan.

Last night I cut out the patterns and today I cut out a kit from 1/16" sheet. I have completed the tail feathers. Here is a picture:
https://flic.kr/p/KJE4KiCessna Airmaster Tailfeathers by vonfilm, on Flickr
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
Logged
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2016, 06:22:22 PM »

I have just about finished the wing framework, except for a little trimming and sanding. The 1/16" leading edge with the point forward does not seem to be favored by modern modelers. I ran into this on a 50" Easy-Built Taylorcraft I built many years ago. It was a lot easier to deal with a 1/8" leading edge. The wing is not very rigid, It could really use a top spar. Hopefully it will be firm enough when covered with Esaki and doped. I added some gussets not on the plan.
https://flic.kr/p/KZWStgAirmaster Wing by vonfilm, on Flickr
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
Logged
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2016, 03:52:39 PM »

Having built the fuselage sides, one on top of the other, I am about to lift them up and separate the sides with a fresh double edge razor blade. After that, connecting the fuselage sides on the top view of the plans, crafting a master box, connecting the tail end, all without creating a banana, is my greatest challenge. Many times I have had to abort a project when the result was a fuselage that I felt could not be straightened.

I don't recall ever seeing a thread anywhere on the build of this old Guillow"s plan. I invite anyone, especially some of the master builders here, to join this thread in building from this plan.

Here is another picture.
https://flic.kr/p/KZQr8LC34 Fuselage by vonfilm, on Flickr
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
Logged
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2016, 10:47:52 PM »

Here are some pictures of my progress so far. I still need to figure out how I am going to build the cowl and nose piece.
https://flic.kr/p/LryiV4Cessna C-34 by vonfilm, on Flickrhttps://flic.kr/p/Lry2NVCessna C-34 by vonfilm, on Flickrhttps://flic.kr/p/L83LeJCessna C-34 by vonfilm, on Flickr
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
cessna 16in from guillow kit f50
Logged
dohrmc
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 15
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 338




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2017, 11:43:18 PM »

I just saw this. Nice job! Have you finished it?
Logged
vonfilm
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 15

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2017, 12:11:03 AM »

Actually I have not gotten any farther. I broke the wing and became disillusioned with the plans. I found it to be unbuildable to plan with my level of skill.

I would love to see it built to plan by one of the masters.
Logged
Crabby
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 63
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,471


I never met a modeler I didn't like



Ignore
« Reply #9 on: August 10, 2017, 06:42:14 PM »

Hey! Get back to that plane! Belly up to the board you were doing great.
Logged

The Threadkiller!
skyraider
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 62
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,136

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2017, 08:26:53 PM »

Second what Crabby said. We all have had some times where maybe the smallest
problem took the wind out of the sails. But look to the bright side, if you start again
you'll now have a better understanding and the next step will be a breeze. Don't forget,
if you got questions, we are here to help. That said, give it another crack. You'll be amazed.

Skyraider
Logged
Pages: [1]   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!