Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
March 18, 2019, 05:26:38 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 [2] 3 4   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon  (Read 2469 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Andrew Darby
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 64
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,200




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2019, 08:16:16 AM »

Nice!  Grin

Andrew
Logged

Klunk
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 30
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,245




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2019, 12:04:20 PM »

Werry good  Smiley
Logged
TheLurker
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 483




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2019, 03:34:45 PM »

Hmmm, well unless we can get you on a technicality I think I may have to have that conversation with my piggy bank.  It'll be difficult to break it (to him), but he's had a long and happy life and his sacrifice will be in a good cause.

That's looking really good.  I think you might consider that as being your primary entry for the Nats rather than the back up.
Logged
flydean1
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 14
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 826



Ignore
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2019, 06:20:40 PM »

Please put the motor peg at the first upright aft of the wing trailing edge.  Not the one under the trailing edge but the next one back.  A Stinson Flying Station Wagon was the first airplane I ever had the controls of.  My dad owned one with a couple other men in town.  N6274M.  Blue with cream trim.
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #29 on: January 28, 2019, 07:58:28 AM »

Total workbench time so far: 19 hrs 15 min.

Please put the motor peg at the first upright aft of the wing trailing edge.  Not the one under the trailing edge but the next one back.  A Stinson Flying Station Wagon was the first airplane I ever had the controls of.  My dad owned one with a couple other men in town.  N6274M.  Blue with cream trim.

Ah - flydean1, you're a little too late!  Smiley I've moved the motor peg forwards (photos #1 and #2) but not quite as much as you recommend; I checked with a mate of mine who has one of these, weighs an ounce and he runs it on 4 strands of 0.073" and a Guillows prop which is slightly heavier than the Peck prop I'm planning on starting with.

The important thing, though, is that it has no nose weight with the peg in the standard position. I did consider moving it further forwards but didn't want to end up with tail weight; however, we are where we are and if I end up having to add nose weight, you can say that you told me so...  Smiley

I was going to do my Stinson in red but if you have a couple of good-resolution colour photos of N6274M (I had a quick look online, couldn't find any), there's still time for me to change my mind if it's an attractive scheme...

We had the weighing ceremony earlier this morning, as seen in photos #1 and #2 it weighs 5.58 grams, almost a gram of which is the undercarriage wire.

And now to legal matters where I try and get clearance to bend the rules of the bet slightly (see post #1), and the legal department of Lurker industries get out their green pens. However, I have supreme confidence in Jack Plane's judgement and sense of fair play...

So, JP, what I'd like to do is the following, please indicate approval or otherwise:

  • The wing ribs as supplied don't really fit - they're a little bit small/short and the slots are about 3/32" wide rather than the intended 1/16" (spar slots are 3/32" square), so I can't use them; what I intend to do is to make a couple of templates out of ply by drawing around a rib with a 0.7mm pencil and then make another set of ribs using the usual sandwich method. It won't take long.
  • The plan shows "optional spats" - see photo #3 - so I'm assuming that it's OK to make some spats to that general shape using my own materials?
  • The wing strut fixings as drawn - see photo #4 - leave a bit of unsupported tissue at the front - I assume that this is because Albert E Hatfull found that he didn't have enough 1/4" x 1/16" in the standard strip wood allocation unless he made some savings somewhere. I'd obviously like to add a bit of wood at the front of the strut support so that there's no unsupported tissue.
  • Is it OK to correct minor structural deviations? For instance, one side of the stabiliser is about 1mm longer than the other?
  • I'd like to cover the front of the centre section back as far as the wing spar with card, because it will look better. Is this OK, or not?
  • Is it OK to paint the visible balsa struts in the cockpit area to match the overall colour scheme?
  • Finally, is it OK to add a simple representation of an instrument panel, even though there isn't one on the plan?

(I can see the staff at Lurker industries scurrying around as soon as this is posted to see if they can get me "on a technicality"...) Smiley
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2019, 12:45:44 PM »

FYI, Currently-selected colour scheme is a tissue-based rendition of N638C (see attached), planning to start covering on Thursday 31st Jan (if things go well) or Friday 1st Feb (if things go less well).
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 30
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,245




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2019, 05:46:40 PM »


[...]

And now to legal matters where I try and get clearance to bend the rules of the bet slightly (see post #1), and the legal department of Lurker industries get out their green pens. However, I have supreme confidence in Jack Plane's judgement and sense of fair play...

So, JP, what I'd like to do is the following, please indicate approval or otherwise:

  • The wing ribs as supplied don't really fit - they're a little bit small/short and the slots are about 3/32" wide rather than the intended 1/16" (spar slots are 3/32" square), so I can't use them; what I intend to do is to make a couple of templates out of ply by drawing around a rib with a 0.7mm pencil and then make another set of ribs using the usual sandwich method. It won't take long.
  • The plan shows "optional spats" - see photo #3 - so I'm assuming that it's OK to make some spats to that general shape using my own materials?
  • The wing strut fixings as drawn - see photo #4 - leave a bit of unsupported tissue at the front - I assume that this is because Albert E Hatfull found that he didn't have enough 1/4" x 1/16" in the standard strip wood allocation unless he made some savings somewhere. I'd obviously like to add a bit of wood at the front of the strut support so that there's no unsupported tissue.
  • Is it OK to correct minor structural deviations? For instance, one side of the stabiliser is about 1mm longer than the other?
  • I'd like to cover the front of the centre section back as far as the wing spar with card, because it will look better. Is this OK, or not?
  • Is it OK to paint the visible balsa struts in the cockpit area to match the overall colour scheme?
  • Finally, is it OK to add a simple representation of an instrument panel, even though there isn't one on the plan?

(I can see the staff at Lurker industries scurrying around as soon as this is posted to see if they can get me "on a technicality"...) Smiley


Okey dokey... so there are in fact two parallel sets of rules in play here.  The first are the BMFA Kit Scale rules, which are there for "the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools" (i.e. all right-minded Englishmen are morally obliged to bend but not break them; however the rest of us can do what we like, to either our eternal glory or our utter peril).  Then there are the Cornithian Rules of the Current Challenge as defined by the Board of Lurker Industries, which don't (as I understand them) require the finer distinctions of the rules of Kit Scale to be taken into any account whatsoever, but that the Contestant (that's you Blackers!) just make the kit according to the kit plan and instructions... or summat to that exact same effect.  There might be a good degree of correspondence between the two sets of rules, however there are distinctions which I need to ponder item by item, aided at this advancing hour by my own beer... funded by myself and served at room-temperature but definitely not lager.

  • Ribs - if the supplied ribs don't fit, then they're not fit for purpose and the Contestant is required to re-make them from fresh stock to the best of his/her ability so that they do fit, the precise method being of no concern to the arbiter.
  • Optional spats - if they are shown on the plan but no indication is given as to their method of construction or any other information, then it is allowable for the Contestant to devise a method of making etc to suit her/himself.
  • Minor structural deviations - if the plan has, for example, a component elongated on one side but not the other, then that is clearly an error of the printing-process or an unconscious mistake by the designer, rather than his/her original intention, therefore the situation really ought to be remedied in the actual model.
  • Unsupported tissue is quite unacceptable and will have even the most lofty and entitled personage drummed out of their club, therefore the Contestant is duty-bound to support the tissue in any way normally achievable.
  • Covering the centre-section with card (because it might "look better"?!) is not on the plan. I'm really most surprised that you've even found it fit to ask this question.  No.
  • The answer to the final two questions can in fact be rolled into the single general observation that all flying scale balsa and tissue kits have always been designed and marketed at enthusiasts, both young and old, who are expected and indeed encouraged to use their own judgement and imagination as to what degree of finish and detail - a little here, a little there - will add to the overall impression of reality of the whole model aircraft, and these particular proposals are therefore entirely acceptable to this adjudicator.

I trust that I need not remind either the Sponsor or the Contestant that there is no process for appealing these decisions.

JP

« Last Edit: January 28, 2019, 05:59:57 PM by Jack Plane » Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #32 on: January 29, 2019, 03:59:30 AM »


> Covering the centre-section with card (because it might "look better"?!) is not on the plan. I'm
> really most surprised that you've even found it fit to ask this question.  No.

Ooh, that's a harsh judgement!

To be completely honest, I had hoped that by burying it in along with the "yes" answers that His Lordship wouldn't give it too much thought but - as in so many other cases - I was sadly mistaken...

Tail surfaces today, I think...
Logged
TheLurker
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 483




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: January 29, 2019, 04:14:25 AM »

... which are there for "the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools" (i.e. all right-minded Englishmen BRITONS are morally obliged to bend but not break them; however...

Ahem.
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #34 on: January 30, 2019, 06:28:03 AM »

Total workbench time so far: 24.75 hours

Tail surfaces and struts now done and sanded (see photo). Weights are:

  • Fin parts: 0.46 grams  Smiley
  • Tailplane: 0.55 grams  Smiley
  • Struts: 1.19 grams  Angry

Couldn't use the very hard wood in the kit for the struts because (as sometimes happens with heavy balsa) it bent after separation from the parts sheet, but did manage to find some allegedly-medium-grade 1/16" from which I stripped some 3/16" x 1/16", but it appears that I used a hard bit by mistake. Never mind...

A few notes for anyone attempting one of these from the original print-wood patterns and plan:

  • The bottom printed-part on the fin (F3) is ~= 1 mm too short and requires a bodge packing, see photo.
  • None of the printed parts for the tailplane (T1-T4) are the right shape, I copied that part of the plan and made some alternatives using the established Spraymount method.
  • The bottom of the fin needs to be ~= 1 mm lower to fair into the bottom fuselage profile.
  • The left-hand half of the tailplane is ~= 2.5 mm shorter than the right.

On with the wings, then. New ribs are required, as discussed above, but that shouldn't take me too long and I expect them to be done sometime tomorrow morning; looking at the overall weight, I think I've possibly bust the unofficial 25 gram target slightly, but I'm still hoping that it'll be less than 27 grams.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
« Last Edit: January 30, 2019, 08:55:33 AM by Ratz » Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2019, 10:26:04 AM »

Total workbench time so far: 32.5 hours

So, apart from wheels and spats (still not sure if I'm adding spats - let's see how it looks without them), it's Structure Complete.

Photo #1 shows the template for cutting the dozen or so ribs; the template was produced by drawing around the original rib (in foreground) with a 0.5mm pencil, and it looks about right; I think it was quicker (for that number of ribs) than the sandwich method, but required a bit more care and attention to execute. All the ribs fitted OK, although I did have to make a new set of tip pieces (W1-W4) because they weren't quite up to the job; the finished wings are shown in photo #2. The two remaining jobs for the fuselage were to add the tailwheel wire and make the noseblock - finished fuselage is in photo #3.

Weights are:

Fuselage & noseblock6.84 g
Wings3.03 g
Fin parts0.46 g
Tailplane0.55 g
Struts1.19 g
Bare structure total12.07 g

Using my <ahem> patented finished weight estimation formula:

   Estimated final weight = 2.5 x 12 = 30 g

...which is perhaps a little more than hoped-for, but I think it'll be OK at that weight.

I'll try and get a (traditional) picture of the final assembled structure sometime tomorrow, but the weekend will probably be spent covering.


[/table]
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 11:36:46 AM by abl » Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 30
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,245




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: February 01, 2019, 01:00:14 PM »

Jolly clean Andy, as ever!

I think however your estimate of AUW, which does sound rather 'fat', is in fact too fearful.  Your multiplier, whilst based on long experience and great acuity (allegedly), fails in this rare instance to account for the fact that the fuselage is rather well-endowed with quite a lot of stringers and the suchlike, so while your bare-bones might be pushing the BMI boundaries a bit, you'll still only need as little tissue and dope as a more lightly-framed model.

My 20.5" Auster Arrow is of such minimalist fuselage framing, and its flying weight is about 23g.
Logged
Andrew Darby
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 64
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,200




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: February 01, 2019, 01:54:12 PM »

Like Jon I think your estimate is a little too high, thinking more like 26g for that style of model...

Lookin’ Good though!

Andrew
Logged

Klunk
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #38 on: February 01, 2019, 02:23:20 PM »

I'd like to think that you're right, gentlemen. Perhaps the multiplication factor should vary with the number of stringers, or something similar. I shall give the matter some thought.

A.
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #39 on: February 03, 2019, 11:57:07 AM »

Total workbench time is 36.5 hours, but in spite of this all I've really managed to do is to test a method pre-decorating tissue with pencil and check that all the parts will actually fit together in the proper place(s) - see photos. And I see what Pete meant about the fin, it's enormous. A chap certainly knows where he stands with a fin like that.

I did try the wheels on it, just to see what they looked like, but TBH they look slightly too big when compared to photos, so I think I'm going to make some wheels from balsa. This won't mean that I'll lose the bet, of course, because any size wheels can be used for kit scale (BMFA Contest Rules section 6.4.8.1) and under the terms of the wager, "...Any other changes that are permitted by the kit scale rules are allowed..." - see page #1, post #1.

Covering is likely to continue in slightly slower time because I've got at least one model to fix and I really think that I should think about making a start on my (admittedly relatively simple) peanut scale nats entry...
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 114
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,568




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: February 03, 2019, 12:03:05 PM »

That looks really nice! Lovely job.
Logged
TheLurker
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 483




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2019, 12:06:07 PM »

Quote from: abl
...I see what Pete meant about the fin, it's enormous.
Hang on a mo.  You're supposed to be building a model aeroplane, not a weather-vane!  Smiley

It does look nice though.
Logged
flydean1
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 14
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 826



Ignore
« Reply #42 on: February 03, 2019, 04:44:48 PM »

The real ones were famous for that weather vane of a fin.  My dad got stuck on the runway at Orlando when the winds wouldn't allow him to turn.  Waited for a gust to die down then gunned it against one brake and got it to turn at last.
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #43 on: February 21, 2019, 10:59:05 AM »

Just to demonstrate that an amount of progress is being made, here are a couple of photos of the flying surfaces after a couple of coats of ~75% thinned dope (mixture of shrinking and non-shrinking) and a couple of days weighted down flat. Everything looks to be straight at the moment but what will happen over the next few weeks is anyone's guess.

Irritatingly, in spite of an unreasonable amount of care being taken (including pre-shrinking the tissue) there are a couple of (obvious and not-so-obvious) wrinkles on the fin parts; I think this is just because there's a long piece of small-section balsa that isn't properly supported. I did think about using wider balsa or adding a brace but this is Kit Scale - I might be able to get away with the odd extra gusset here and there but I didn't want to risk a 5-point penalty for a "...significant deviation from the original design...", so left it as originally drawn by AEH.

The representation of the corrugations on the fin and control surfaces and the leading edge slots was done using a 4B pencil on the back of the tissue; I did try it on the front face of the tissue but a) it doesn't really "take" properly on the shiny surface, and b) it tends to smudge during the doping process. I think it should be possible pre-shade panel lines using this process, which is what I'm planning to do for my Peanut Scale entry.

Anyway, back to the plot; I'm planning to finish-sand the fuselage this evening and add a few more gussets in the weak areas (purely for the sake of practicality - if the otherwise kind and generous kit scale judges think I've over-done it then I'll take it on the chin, but at least the model should still be in one piece in several years' time). The plan is that the fuselage and struts will be covered over the weekend.

Actually, I could do with a bit of advice, if anyone has experience with large waterslide decals; referring to photo #3, there's a fair bit of decoration to add - the Stinson logo on the cowl and the fin decoration can probably be done using an inkjet printer (there's no way I can cut a paint mask that small) but the wing registration letters and the yellow fuselage cheat lines really need to be painted. Is it better to either a) cut a mask and spray in the usual way, or b) spray some white waterslide decal sheet yellow and cut out the letters/cheat lines directly? I'm leaning towards the latter but I worry that the decal will tend to disintegrate.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Re: Keil Kraft Stinson Flying Station Wagon
Logged
steve33779
Nickel Member
*

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1



Ignore
« Reply #44 on: February 21, 2019, 02:18:01 PM »

Nice!  Grin

Andrew
hello having trouble with log in
Logged
TheLurker
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 483




Ignore
« Reply #45 on: February 21, 2019, 02:32:57 PM »

Looking good and what's a wrinkle or two here or there? At our age you should be happy there aren't more. Smiley
Logged
OZPAF
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 172
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 4,687



Ignore
« Reply #46 on: February 22, 2019, 12:28:37 AM »

The corrugations on the wing surface look effective.

Wrinkles? Smiley plastic surgery my dear fellow Smiley

John
Logged
ZK-AUD
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 43
Offline Offline

New Zealand New Zealand

Posts: 1,032



Ignore
« Reply #47 on: February 22, 2019, 02:16:01 AM »

Suggest that you  shrink and dope a piece of white Esaki on a frame.  Spray with your trim colour and then use a straight edge to cut your trim pieces.  Position with a couple of pieces of Tamiya tape and then wick in some RC56 canopy glue thinned with a drop or three of water.  Wipe  / press with a Kleenex tissue.  Once dry you'll never know
Logged
ZK-AUD
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 43
Offline Offline

New Zealand New Zealand

Posts: 1,032



Ignore
« Reply #48 on: February 22, 2019, 02:22:01 AM »

Works really well for registration letters
Logged
abl
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 16
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 290


Topic starter
Andy Blackburn



Ignore
« Reply #49 on: February 22, 2019, 07:37:32 AM »

Suggest that you  shrink and dope a piece of white Esaki on a frame.  Spray with your trim colour and then use a straight edge to cut your trim pieces.  Position with a couple of pieces of Tamiya tape and then wick in some RC56 canopy glue thinned with a drop or three of water.  Wipe  / press with a Kleenex tissue.  Once dry you'll never know

Ah!  Smiley

Thank you kindly, sir, I'll do that.

Andy
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   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!