Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
November 15, 2018, 09:50:37 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]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build  (Read 5346 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: October 25, 2017, 05:20:16 AM »

Useful feedback, thanks Andy.

I don't know why I decided to make a separate hinged rudder - will just add weight at the wrong end, and a fixed 1/32 offset is so little! - so I'd be better off running up another single-piece fin as per the plan.  I'm already following your generous advice about smaller incidences.  Re the peg-position, I've moved mine forward only by about 1/4", but will make a specific stooge-bracket to fit this.

Perfectionism is laudable, but I wouldn't personally worry about building another one!  There are just SO many other subjects to make (if Peanut-scale torture is your thing), and it seems that your 'heavy' Andreason can become the perfect test-bed for outdoor duration, braided rubber and all that...?
Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #51 on: October 25, 2017, 06:35:48 AM »

I don't know why I decided to make a separate hinged rudder - will just add weight at the wrong end, and a fixed 1/32 offset is so little! - so I'd be better off running up another single-piece fin as per the plan.

Ah, but it didn't turn left quite enough, and the hinged rudder is very, very useful.

I'm already following your generous advice about smaller incidences.

It's very generous of you to call it "advice"; "assertion" might be a better description  Smiley

Perfectionism is laudable, but I wouldn't personally worry about building another one!...

Perhaps you're right; but as I'm tarting it up for Nijmegen anyway (to try and avoid coming too close to the bottom of the results) I'm now looking at the cabane struts and bottom wing mounts with a bottle of CA de-bonder in hand. Perhaps a bit of careful surgery might be possible and then if the noseweight and downthrust can in fact be reduced, I'd feel better about making unsupported assertions...  Smiley
Logged
rgroener
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

Switzerland Switzerland

Posts: 1,207



Ignore
« Reply #52 on: October 26, 2017, 01:56:38 AM »

Jack Plane: Wow, sporty schedule for this build! And I thought I am late with my planes for Nijmegen Roll Eyes
I cross my fingers for you that you will make it. Looking forward to see the result in Nijmegen.
To work intensive but concentrated on a project can lead to better results than bobbing arround with a build for month or even years... therefore I believe in you!

Roman 
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #53 on: October 26, 2017, 03:06:47 AM »

Roman, you're spot on.  I find continuous effort on a single project much more satisfying and efficient, and less prone to errors than to keep coming back cold to a slow or old build.  And there's nothing like a deadline to focus the mind!  On the downside, it can lead to the errors of too fast a pace, e.g. forgetting to pre-sand the 1/16 wing ribs down to 1/32.

Getting technical, a quick calculation shows that halving the thickness of the ribs would save a total of about 0.35g.  This is only 2.5% of the AUW, and in a place that doesn't effect the CG, whereas the increased delicacy - possible breakage or warps after covering - would frustrate me.

Mindfulness is a wonderful thing, but so is progress (one lunar cycle seems about right) and a sensible balance has to be found!  Grin

Look forward to meeting you in Nijmegen,

Jon

Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #54 on: October 30, 2017, 05:18:33 PM »


I've started to re-jig the wing incidence to match what the plan actually shows, rather than what it says - the bottom wings eventually came loose after the application of copious quantities of CA debonder and are in the process of being re-fitted at a slightly reduced angle. The plan is that the top wing incidence will be re-set by razor-sawing through the front cabane struts as close to the top as possible and then re-gluing - this should reduce the height of the front struts by about a third of a millimetre, which is probably enough. I hope.

Also on the job list is:
  • Replace the nose block with one of the right colour (done)
  • Replace the wheels with some that look better (in progress)
  • Add "EXPERIMENT" in white below the cockpit (technique identified, letters sourced)
  • Add a yellow paint cheat line around the noseblock
  • Add a headrest
  • Various other slight enhancements, including painting the prop black

Actually, that's quite a list. I'd better get on with it...
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #55 on: November 04, 2017, 05:46:21 PM »

First off... Andy has given me explicit written permission to (continue to) hi-jack his excellent Andreason thread.  In an ideal world I'd have done a separate build-blog, but I've been up against time for Nijmegen, plus extra outside distractions, and haven't documented my whole build.  Thank you Andy for your generosity!

There are a lot of differences between the kit design and my chosen subject G-BEBS, a later version than the prototype modelled by Moody/Peck, which have exercised me and have taken some time to incorporate into the build.  These are principally in the engine cowling, the cockpit coaming area, and the wing-tips so far (which I've remade with laminated curved tips - currently speed-drying in the airing cupboard!).  The ailerons on the upper wing and connecting rods should be uncontentious... when I get round to them!

Piccies below show the progress so far, with some other shots of the full-size G-BEBS.

Only a few days left before departure for Tulipland, so my skates are well on to get this one finished!  Shocked
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,349




Ignore
« Reply #56 on: November 04, 2017, 07:01:09 PM »

It's looking very nice indeed, Jon. I think you need to slow down a bit though, or you're in danger of finishing early.
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #57 on: November 05, 2017, 04:44:44 AM »

Don't worry Pete.  With my usual vast disparity between imagining how long things are likely to take and how long they actually take, I'm sure to be scrutinised by Heathrow security with half my fingers still stuck together and wearing a thousand-yard stare!  Shocked
Logged
Free Flight Modeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 59
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,248


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #58 on: November 05, 2017, 10:08:37 AM »

A very fine build, young Jack  Smiley
Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #59 on: November 05, 2017, 10:23:27 AM »

...

Only a few days left before departure for Tulipland, so my skates are well on to get this one finished!  Shocked

Good luck, Carruthers!  Smiley

As of now, I've called mine done - the "before" and "after" photos are attached.

Changes/additions are:
  • Incidence of top and bottom wings reduced to match the plan (rather than the text).
  • Replaced the rather worn nose block with a red one to match the pictures.
  • Replaced the wheels with some balsa ones that match the documentation better.
  • Added a yellow paint cheat line around the noseblock to more-or-less match the documentation.
  • Added a headrest (see previous remarks about documentation).
  • Replaced the instrument panel, which had become a bit lubricant-soaked.
  • Painted the prop black.

What I haven't done is to add "EXPERIMENT" in small white letters below the cockpit; it's just too fiddly and I've run out of time - it's not going to win anything and it's looking a bit secondhand anyway, so I'm not too bothered. Would have been nice to add it, though.

I've been able to remove all the noseweight (about a gram) so even after all the extras, weight without rubber is 16.5 grams. Might get a test glide in tomorrow if it stays calm.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #60 on: November 05, 2017, 11:26:20 AM »

Your seemingly minor additions and changes really lift the look Andy!

Carruthers Grin
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,457




Ignore
« Reply #61 on: November 05, 2017, 08:23:48 PM »

The word that is required on homebuilt aircraft is spelled EXPERIMENTAL  not EXPERIMENT . Just in case you decide to put it on both sides of the cockpit.
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,349




Ignore
« Reply #62 on: November 06, 2017, 03:17:15 AM »

The word that is required on homebuilt aircraft is spelled EXPERIMENTAL  not EXPERIMENT . Just in case you decide to put it on both sides of the cockpit.
In America maybe, but evidently not in Sweden. Or perhaps the original builder left off the 'AL' to save a bit of weight? Grin
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #63 on: November 06, 2017, 04:24:06 AM »

Here's an upside-down 'Experiment' also in Sweden.

Interestingly, of the twelve BA-4B aircraft listed on the Airport-Data site, two are Swedish and the other ten are all British.  The CAA register only includes six of these.  Checking the register for my own subject reveals that it was 'manufactured' by FENTON DM (the first owner), and neither this nor any of the other British Andreasons have the word 'Experiment(al)'.

But lots of fun colour-schemes to choose from!  Smiley
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Re: Peck-Polymers Andreason BA-4B Build
Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #64 on: November 06, 2017, 04:53:11 AM »

"Experimental" relates to a U.S. FAA certification category for operating amateur-built aircraft, among others, and I think that all aircraft with that certification are required to display the word "EXPERIMENTAL" somewhere. But this is a Swedish-built aircraft so I assume that "EXPERIMENT" denotes the Swedish equivalent.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,457




Ignore
« Reply #65 on: November 06, 2017, 08:58:58 AM »

You are correct. Thanks for giving the reply with the correct information. Have a nice day.
Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #66 on: November 15, 2017, 05:26:25 AM »

Quick update...

Things started going wrong at Nijmegen on Saturday; due to one of many process and procedural errors (translation: I'm an idiot) the model spent Saturday night stuck in the roof netting; I think it takes a special sort of skill to put a model in the nets just five minutes after the previous crop have been rescued...

Best time at Nijmegen was 42 seconds including the ROG bonus, but there were loads of turns left so there's more to come (even for something as heavy as this), I'd hope for an ultimate flight time in the high 40's; didn't manage to make this happen on Sunday for the reasons outlined above.

In summary, I think the wing incidence fix has worked and if an Andreason kit can be built much lighter than I've managed, it should fly really well.
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #67 on: November 15, 2017, 05:50:03 AM »

Flying well!

https://photos.app.goo.gl/26BmPoCUNqz0T0Oj2

Note netting... for later parking!  Grin
Logged
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #68 on: November 16, 2017, 04:26:25 AM »


Flying well!

Just not for very long, in that case. I suppose I can admit that it had at least 200 turns short of what it should have had, and it needed a bit of downthrust packing on the top-left corner of the noseblock...  Smiley

Oh well, next time.


Note netting... for later parking!  Grin

Bah!  Tongue
Logged
Crabby
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 125
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,864


I never met a modeler I didn't like



Ignore
« Reply #69 on: November 23, 2017, 12:03:31 PM »

I think the wing incidence fix has worked and if an Andreason kit can be built much lighter than I've managed, it should fly really well.

Funny Andy you just about quoted word for word something my Olde Man said 30(?) years ago. A light Andreason was a goal he never achieved to his satisfaction. I have built several but they were kinda porky.
Logged

The Threadkiller!
abl
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 9
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 216


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #70 on: December 15, 2017, 07:58:03 AM »

Well, if the current peanut project goes well, I might try a similar slimming exercise with the Andreason later on in the new year.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,457




Ignore
« Reply #71 on: September 06, 2018, 08:30:10 PM »

Since I am about to build another BA-4B I guess I will visit this often. Does anybody remember the proper amount of dihedral to build into the top  wing? I hope to fly this later this month so I got to get busy.


Thanks for your help here.
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #72 on: September 07, 2018, 03:31:50 AM »

Same as the bottom wing.

I can't lay my hands on my kit PP plan at the moment, but my actual model has about 10mm (just over 3/8") dihedral on all four wing tips.

These measurements are all taken from the LE, as the wings have different amounts of wash-in and -out (see plan).
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,043




Ignore
« Reply #73 on: September 07, 2018, 03:48:49 AM »

PS

Have just found a build photo on which the plan shows a dihedral of 13/16" (20mm) but can't recall why I gave mine less  Huh
https://photos.app.goo.gl/fWKyKpm46QrZ9pa89

But this doesn't seem to matter!  With a 3.0 x peg to hook length of 0.109" on 1700 turns gave 44secs ROG indoors: https://photos.app.goo.gl/DXNb1dmCgo89f2SA7

Note that the shape of the eventual tips differ from the prototype shown on the plan, as I modelled mine on a slightly different later version.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   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!