Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
May 25, 2020, 10:22:21 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 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Junkers 87 B-2/R-2  (Read 7006 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Russ Lister
Free Flight Modeller .... sub 250g!
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 73
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,340


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #225 on: February 23, 2020, 03:57:40 PM »

Quote
The Met. wallahs keep piling on the misery here.  Absolutely no chance of flight trials for heaven knows how long so I've been getting on with correcting the "dud" formers so that the after part of the fuselage looks right.  Well, less wrong.

We should contact Kew Gardens ..... get them to grow some genuine Keilkraft grass under glass. We just need to persuade them of the need to fly model aeroplanes over it. Could happen ...... currently a higher probability than flying outside.
Logged
flydean1
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 24
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,078



Ignore
« Reply #226 on: February 23, 2020, 04:34:07 PM »

Never, ever, ever, ever move a peg back.  I will cause far more problems than it will solve.

Sort of like the government.
Logged
TheLurker
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,067


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #227 on: March 19, 2020, 03:56:46 PM »

His Honour the Judge Herr Baron von Markovitz having retired to chambers to consider the protest, below, lodged by a firm of low scoundrels, rogues and ambulance chasers on behalf of Testwood Towers has handed down his decision. In summary he finds in favour of Lurker Industries.  His full judgement his given below.

Quote from: Messrs. Grabbit, Scuttell & Dashe
Dear Sirs,

My client has directed that a protest be submitted as he feels that the board of Lurker Industries has identified a (regrettable) gap in the rules; my client informs me that the member of staff responsible for drafting the rules will of course be subject to the usual sanction.

As you will no doubt be aware, the Ailerons and flaps of the Ju 87 sit below the wing trailing edge and the standard Keil Kraft plan mirrors this arrangement by using small pieces of 1/16" square to fit the flaps to the wings, as shown in the bottom right-hand corner of the plan.

However, the most recent picture of Lurker Industries' Ju-87 build appears to show the ailerons and flaps attached directly to the trailing edge of the wing.

Now, obviously, this departure from the plan should be covered by rule #4 ("If the judge considers that a particular change is detrimental to the overall character of the model, no points will be awarded for that change.") because it clearly changes the overall look and character of the model, but my client considers that this sanction is not sufficient.

The reason for this unusual and forthright view is that my client has submitted the pictures to a number of independant aerodynamic analysts, the unanimous opinion of whom is that moving the ailerons and flaps up to the trailing edge will confer a significant aerodynamic advantage by reducing the drag associated with the original 1/16" wide slot, thus making the achievement of a minimum 12 second flight even more likely than it already is.

My client considers that a fair and reasonable penalty for such a gratuitous change would be:
For each surface that has been moved (6 in all), remove 10 points from the total of penalty points that have already been awarded, and
For each surface that has been moved (6 in all), add 2 seconds to the minimal duration requirement.

I await the judgement of the court with some degree of interest.

sincerely

J Grabbit (acting for the board of Testwood Towers Operational Research)

Quote from: Press Office Lurker Industries
Mr Barnes-Norway, after much careful and considered thought had the following to say, "Awa bile yer heid..."  and he, most unusually for a Sunday afternoon, not having yet had his accustomed sherry.

After a little further thought (and a fortifying glass or two of sherry) he went on to say, "If there is a gap in the rules then no rule can have been infringed so no sanction is applicable. " he also went on to point out that the flaps are attached in a similar manner to that indicated in Mr. Hatfull's plan; split cocktail stick replacing 1/16" balsa strip and that TTOR's ambulance chasing shysters should be,  to use a delightful American phrase, "Run out of town on a rail."  Nor does this trivial difference represent a change to the overall look or character of the model.  The enclosed photographic reproduction is presented as evidence of adherence to the spirit as well as to the letter of the rules as originally drafted.


Quote from: His Honour Baron Von Markovitz
Gentlemen,

I've now pondered the matter for the requisite period of time, and my judgement in the matter of Alterations is:

Ratio Decidendi: in favour of Lurker Industries.

Obiter Dicta: if Lurker Industries fails to achieve the minimum flight time as previously agreed, then the above judgement is annulled and Testwood will be deemed the winner.

The losing party will need to provide photograph evidence of his consumption of the green goo.

No judgement is given as to costs (i.e. both parties will carry their own costs) and no leave is given for either party to appeal.

HH Baron Von Markovitz

My, but I am cheesed off with this blasted weather.  Doesn't seem to have stopped raining or blowing half a gale since mid January.  All the fields here are quagmires if they're not actually under water.  Beginning to wonder if I'll ever get this thing tested.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2020, 04:12:00 PM by TheLurker » Logged
Andy Blackburn
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 19
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 541




Ignore
« Reply #228 on: March 20, 2020, 05:09:18 AM »

Bah...

I am, however, advised that I should ask for a Judicial Review from the Lord Chancellor.

And I still think that a mere 12 seconds will be easily achiveable.

A.
Logged
OZPAF
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 184
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5,556



Ignore
« Reply #229 on: March 21, 2020, 04:53:17 AM »

At a indoor site perhaps?

John
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 41
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777




Ignore
« Reply #230 on: March 21, 2020, 06:32:28 AM »

Or a decent slope...?  Wink
Logged
Andy Blackburn
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 19
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 541




Ignore
« Reply #231 on: March 21, 2020, 11:33:51 AM »

That settles it - I'm going for a judicial review.  Smiley
Logged
TheLurker
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 27
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,067


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #232 on: March 21, 2020, 12:55:21 PM »

Quote from: OZPAF
...indoor site perhaps?
Alas.  As of last night all "gymnasia" are closed.  I expect that to include sports halls as well and even if they weren't I should imagine any that are attached to a school are unlikely to be available following the closure of schools on Friday.  I do know that the Newbury hall (a school building) used by some members of this parish has shut up shop of its own accord.

Quote from: Jack Plane
Or a decent slope...?  Wink
Sutton Bank has been considered, but White Horse hill is considerably nearer.

Quote from: Andy Blackburn
That settles it - I'm going for a judicial review.  Smiley
Hmmm, now... who was it tried to bribe His Honour the Judge with spirituous liquors? Hmmm?  Smiley
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 41
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,777




Ignore
« Reply #233 on: March 21, 2020, 03:48:22 PM »


Hmmm, now... who was it tried to bribe His Honour the Judge with spirituous liquors? Hmmm?  Smiley


Indeed a bottle of rather fine single malt turned up on the doorstep with a note saying it was from Lurker... but I rapidly saw through his ruse!
Logged
Andy Blackburn
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 19
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 541




Ignore
« Reply #234 on: March 22, 2020, 04:14:07 AM »

...
Quote from: Andy Blackburn
That settles it - I'm going for a judicial review.  Smiley
Hmmm, now... who was it tried to bribe His Honour the Judge with spirituous liquors? Hmmm?  Smiley

Bribe? Me? Surely not.  Smiley

A.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]   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!