Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
September 16, 2019, 12:54:55 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   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Half Size Wakefield Models  (Read 16320 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #75 on: June 16, 2013, 11:43:36 AM »

Thanks Jim...it finally is sorting itself out and didn't fly "right off the board"...it shows promise but I'm wondering if I can get a blast tube down its throat...I'd hate to repair all those 1/32" x 1/16" uprights...we shall see at Geneseo...
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #76 on: June 17, 2013, 08:50:20 AM »

Isis,

 That looks great. You did a fine job on it. The '49 Elila does have a reputation for some interesting trim quirks, but history definitely shows it can be made to do the same thing well over and over.

A note on construction: I used 3/32 sq through out the fuselage of my GH.91 because the full sized one used 3/16 sq construction. Given the weight of these models, I'd advocate at least using 3/32 longerons on them, and probably 3/32x1/16 uprights. You've got enough weight to play with that unless you're wanting to put a full RDT in there, the weight is best taken up by a structure which will last a while and take the requisite abuse.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #77 on: June 17, 2013, 11:04:59 AM »

I use very hard 1/16" square longerons...about 14 to 16 pound wood and have no trouble when building a half size 1/8" square frame...of course, you did well to use 3/32" square on your GH91 and I have drawn that up as well but that designer (Harris?) is not one of my favorites. On the other hand, he did make a name for himself in the contest scene from 1940 to 1960. Aeromodeller ran an article about the GH91 awhile back.  I'm sure Mr. R. Moon has it referenced
in his FAC complilation. Keith Horry's wake flies like a dream and is of similiar construction but I haven't built a second one to confirm that. Only tricky bit is the plug in wings and with a little work, it works very well.
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #78 on: June 17, 2013, 08:46:25 PM »

I just picked the GH.91 because it looked like a rugged design and had clean lines. Too bad it wasn't a terribly good Wakefield and was a bit troublesome to get it flying in half scale. But it does fly pretty well now.

I've avoided the ones with plug in wings so far, mainly because I want to have the ability to rig a pop-off wing DT. I downloaded a bunch of old Wakefield plans of a Slovak SAM website recently...have to sort through them and see what we can find. I do know that Chatelain's NAA Fuselage winner looks like it would be really good. Pretty advanced design for 1938...

-Joshua Finn
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2014, 03:33:25 PM »

I think this thread might benefit from a little invigoration in the form of a new airplane. This 1950 Tangney Wakefield was finished this morning. What an airplane! It's nearly 19" long, carries a sweeping 24" span, and balanced perfectly right off the board (with the help of an adjusted rear peg location). Test glides revealed no required changes, so I set the stab location for the proper turn (slight tilt and rudder offset) and added keys so it would stay. The cabin fairing is glued to the wing so that I could mount a pop-off fuse. Fuselage construction is of course 3/32, and that was a wise choice given that it still came out underweight even with a thorough coating of Krylon.

I would be terribly remiss to forget crediting this build to Isismk2, who mailed me a copy of his plans for this airplane. He did a great job drawing them up from a very grainy scan of the full size plans. His drafting skills leave me in awe.

Off to the field for power testing!
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Half Size Wakefield Models
Logged
Dave Andreski
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 3,052




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: January 22, 2014, 04:23:55 PM »

Nice one Josh.
Dave
Logged

Aspire to inspire before you expire.
Don McLellan
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 63
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 2,371




Ignore
« Reply #81 on: January 22, 2014, 05:10:41 PM »

Agree with Dave, a very nice airplane Josh.
Logged
scrubs
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 501



Ignore
« Reply #82 on: January 23, 2014, 11:30:21 AM »

I would be terribly remiss to forget crediting this build to Isismk2, who mailed me a copy of his plans for this airplane. He did a great job drawing them up from a very grainy scan of the full size plans. His drafting skills leave me in awe.

Off to the field for power testing!

Nice one Josh. Hope it trims out easily for you.

Dave's plans are nice aren't they? I've got a few I want to build.

bill
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #83 on: January 23, 2014, 12:50:43 PM »

Thanks guys for the kind words...Outside of flying, I love drawing by hand on my old board....CAD drawings are just so cold and impersonable...when you go back and look through old model mags you come across many great draftsmen including Meuser, Lindstrum, Broderson and they make you want to build their stuff...I guess it's the challenge of figuring out the construction of these old birds and what their designers were thinking...and there is a certain amount of pleasure working with your hands...nice build Josh and I hope she flies as great as she looks...1/2 size wake was reinstated for Geneseo...
Logged
lincoln
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 31
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,004



Ignore
« Reply #84 on: January 23, 2014, 04:18:43 PM »

I think whether a CAD drawing is cold and impersonal depends a lot on who's doing it. I may be wrong, but I think some of Tom Nallen's drawings were done with CAD, and I find them very appealing. This is one:
http://outerzone.co.uk/plan_files_04/4624/Boulton-Paul_Defiant-Nallen.pdf

Nothing against old style drafting, though. I've admired some real wizards in that field. Used to have a guy on a job I worked at who did exploded isometric drawings all day. Beautiful stuff, and I don't know how he did it. I'm fairly sure he didn't formally construct every part.

Lincoln
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #85 on: January 23, 2014, 05:02:17 PM »

I agree than for the most part, hand drawn plans have it on personality (I've seen a few incredible CAD plans, though). For my own purposes, I'll never hand draw a plan again though, because you can't edit a hand drawn plan.

Moving on...I need to edit the videos and get some more footage, but the Tangney has flown. All that was needed was a 1/64" side thrust shim. It flew beautifully on an old loop of 3/16. It wants 4 strands of 1/8, though.  Against all that I had predicted, it looks like 2+ might be possible in dead air with one of these. I really didn't think a 50 sq in model could do 2 minutes at 1 oz empty. Anyway, it looks great in the air. I'm very happy with this airplane.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #86 on: January 23, 2014, 05:05:18 PM »

'Tyke' was intended to be an entry level Wakefield. I think it would be a good subject for this class, being quite simple and intended for a fast climb.
Where can I find a copy of the plan for TYKE. Looks like one even I can do.

Help me ok?
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #87 on: January 23, 2014, 05:11:58 PM »

Where can I find a copy of the plan for TYKE. Looks like one even I can do.

Help me ok?

Same sources as everything these days--Outerzone: http://outerzone.co.uk/plan_files_02/2975/Tyke_Wake.pdf
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #88 on: January 23, 2014, 05:18:39 PM »

Where do I go for a full size copy?
Logged
lincoln
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 31
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,004



Ignore
« Reply #89 on: January 23, 2014, 05:42:44 PM »

It must be close to full size. The pdf says the paper size is 40.74 X 27.9, I presume in inches. Or, by full size, do you mean you need it printed out?
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #90 on: January 23, 2014, 05:46:20 PM »

Hello lincoln,

 I am looking for a complete plan without having to tape many sheets together. Hope you can help
Logged
scrubs
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 501



Ignore
« Reply #91 on: January 23, 2014, 05:52:12 PM »

Don't know if you intend to fly the TYKE in FAC or not but it's not legal anymore. It dates from 1952 and the cutoff is 1950. I built mine before the rules change. Taping the plan  isn't that bad, I think I did mine on 3 8 1/2 x 14 sheets.

Have a look at the FAC plans source doc or send ISIS a PM to find out what he has available in plans.

bill
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #92 on: January 23, 2014, 05:56:11 PM »

Thanks scrubs

I got his list earlier today. He can really draw nice plans. I was confused about the legal dates. I guess it pays to read the FAC rulebook.  Have a nice day.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #93 on: January 23, 2014, 09:46:41 PM »

Here's 2 pics of my 1949 Ellila...
Is this model designed with a lifting horizontal stab?

I like it a lot if it has one.
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 95
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,724


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #94 on: January 25, 2014, 07:46:17 AM »

Here's 2 pics of my 1949 Ellila...
Is this model designed with a lifting horizontal stab?

I like it a lot if it has one.

Don't get addicted to "lifting" stabs. I've built two scale jobs that just would not fly with them before I realized that I was just following convention instead of giving my airplanes what they really needed. On a post-war wakefield with any reasonable pedigree, you can assume that whatever airfoil it has will work well. This is not necessarily true of the pre-war wakefields. I built two half size Stahl Gypsy's and found that the airfoil does not scale down well for that airplane.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #95 on: January 26, 2014, 09:46:06 AM »

I'm curious about the scaling down factors. So far, RAF32 airfoils behave pretty well as 2.5" chords for me. I don't know if this always works or what upper surface turbulence does to its performance. I always use what is shown on the plan. And I don't think lifting stabs versus flat plates do anything to performance. I think the important thing is aspect ratio vs airfoil vs weight.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #96 on: February 08, 2014, 07:24:09 PM »

Today I received two plans . The first one is the Ellila Winner from 1949 and the second plan is the 39 Wakefield named Rimfaxe. I have seen pictures here for the first one and wonder if anybody could show what the Rimfaxe looks like. The plan was sent as it seems to be better and easier to build. Simple things are better and I really like both of these. Any comments ? Lets hear from you.  By the Way Thanks for the plans Dave they seem ideal.
Logged
FLYACE1946
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 26
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,542


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #97 on: February 08, 2014, 07:45:32 PM »

Today I received two plans . The first one is the Ellila Winner from 1949 and the second plan is the 39 Wakefield named Rimfaxe. I have seen pictures here for the first one and wonder if anybody could show what the Rimfaxe looks like. The plan was sent as it seems to be better and easier to build. Simple things are better and I really like both of these. Any comments ? Lets hear from you.  By the Way Thanks for the plans Dave they seem ideal.
I just went out and found a picture on Google. Nice RED all over color photo. Should be able to finish it to look like the full size Rimfaxe. Boy oh boy.
Logged
skyrocket
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 28
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 662

nothing hard is ever easy



Ignore
« Reply #98 on: February 09, 2014, 09:52:03 AM »

Yep...the 1949 Ellila is a lot of wood but still comes out at under 28 grams....I liked the looks of it but I felt it was too much work for what you got in the end. The Rimfaxe on the other hand, seems less work and straight forward construction. Also, the D/T tie down is simpler. I'll build one also and we will see if it is up to the task of giving us 2 minute flights. Don't be put off by the sheeted upper surface of the wing : I simply sand down 1/32" (soft) and add it on top with cyno. The airfoil giving in SAM-35 (Nov./Dec. 1994) is a strange one for Sigurd but it is all I had to work with. It might have been the start of the sharp LE aifoils that came out of Scandinavian later on. I really don't know. Maybe we take this hobby too serious at times?
Logged
LynnM
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 32



Ignore
« Reply #99 on: June 20, 2014, 10:25:24 AM »

Is the Korda 25 by Harry Purser a legal FAC half wakefield? There are major differences from the original. My math skills may be rusty,but the polyhedral also seems very flat.
Logged

Lynn
Pages: 1 2 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!