• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

1:9 Scale B-17G - 'Sweet Pea'

F106DeltaDart

Well-known member
Glad to hear the updates Wilmracer! I know the feeling of work issues interrupting things all too well. Glad to hear that you will be getting back into it! Your build so far has been awesome to watch, and I love the innovation in your design and build techniques!

Also, I love that HK foamy B-17! It’s one of my favorite models. I detailed mine up as the aircraft flown by one of our local veterans who I met at the Commemorative Air Force a few years ago, and we surprised him by seeing his plane back in the air again.
 

Attachments

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Glad to hear the updates Wilmracer! I know the feeling of work issues interrupting things all too well. Glad to hear that you will be getting back into it! Your build so far has been awesome to watch, and I love the innovation in your design and build techniques!

Also, I love that HK foamy B-17! It’s one of my favorite models. I detailed mine up as the aircraft flown by one of our local veterans who I met at the Commemorative Air Force a few years ago, and we surprised him by seeing his plane back in the air again.
Beautiful! That is awesome that you were able to share it with someone who actually flew on her. She looks great!

A bit of motivation popped into the YouTube feed this AM. RC Geek caught some footage of the 138" wingspan models version at Top Gun. The takeoff run is kind of funny because there are so many jets in the air and it SOUNDS like this is a turbine powered B-17. It is actually running on electric, which is really encouraging. I expect my version to be MUCH lighter than the wingspan models version, so this bodes well for a great flying model.

She will be the focus of all my RC attention when I get back from SEFF.

 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Got a travel cradle fabricated yesterday. I want to be able to get this one up tight against the wall in the trailer and this seemed to be the best layout. There is a lot of space under the fuse, but the Horus case, manuals, spare parts, and other stuff will be stored there so the space won't be wasted.

This won't exactly translate up to the cradle for the big bird, but it gives me some ideas. For that one I expect I'll do a similar setup for the fuse and center wing section, and I'll be able to store the fuse right side up as the horizontal stabs will be removed. Then either make some changes to this design, make a second cradle, or use a traditional "wing bag" for the stabs and outer wing panels. Still a LONG way down the road, but this little side project has me thinking about how I'll transport the big one.
 

Attachments

kilroy07

Well-known member
Speaking of alternate power, any chance we can convince you to convert this to an XB-38? Kidding... mostly. Some day I may have to have a B-17.
THIS is why I love the forums!! I had no idea this plane even existed.... At first (I'll be honest) I was like "Oh look, another Photoshoped fantasy plane." Then the realization that it was real?! :eek:
I mean, how cool!! Like an American version of the Lancaster...

And now one MORE plane has been added to my "must build" List!!
 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Not as much as I would like. Most of my time lately has been spent job hunting and doing career development stuff. The long term outlook is great as I've already got a good project lined up, but I am still looking for stuff to bridge the gap until I can join that project. I haven't spent much time on RC since the job stuff started. I did sneak in a small project before FF and was able to make it out to FF. I've been flying a few times when the weather cooperated but my focus has been largely NOT on RC.

That being said I'm still working on B-17 stuff when time allows. Mostly with CAD for printed engines and interior areas. To keep the peace at home I can't be spending hours with my toys every evening when I'm between gigs. Soon though... really soon I hope.
 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Time for a real update! Things are getting back to normal around here and to celebrate I pulled the Sweet Pea out of mothballs and did some actual work! Today I installed the trailing portion of the vertical stabilizer with hard points for the rudder and got most of the rudder itself put together. Still have a bit more to do with it but I went ahead and tossed the horizontal stab and elevators on to see how she looked and get a bit of motivation. Things will be busy for a while so building may be slow, but the self-imposed halt on this project is over!
 

Attachments

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
So I figure I'll poll the hivemind here and get some thoughts on the rudder setup. Way back we discussed 3 options for rudder/steering/retract operation and the consensus was go with 3 servos for ease of programming. I was about ready to cut in the access hatch for the rudder servo when I started having second thoughts about putting the weight out here in the tail. The servo is just a hair under 2oz, and with the mount plate, access hatch, and linkages I'll probably be close to 4oz hanging WAY out in the back. I'm now thinking I should be doing this as another pull/pull setup with the servo just aft of the main wing where the retract and steering servos are located.

The way I see it putting the servo in the tail keeps things VERY simple but will add a lot of weight. That 4oz back there could take 12+oz up front to offset.

Putting the servo aft of the wing and putting in a pull/pull keeps weight forward but adds complexity (and I may need a hatch just to service the rudder linkage).

Tying in to the steering servo is looking better and better to me to be honest. I'm thinking with a small access hatch I could mechanically adjust the throws at the rudder end and leave off all that weight. Perhaps have slightly different throws in the radio depending on gear position. Anyone want to talk me out of that idea? Should I just KISS or is it worth the effort to keep a lb off.
 

Chuppster

Well-known member
So I figure I'll poll the hivemind here and get some thoughts on the rudder setup. Way back we discussed 3 options for rudder/steering/retract operation and the consensus was go with 3 servos for ease of programming. I was about ready to cut in the access hatch for the rudder servo when I started having second thoughts about putting the weight out here in the tail. The servo is just a hair under 2oz, and with the mount plate, access hatch, and linkages I'll probably be close to 4oz hanging WAY out in the back. I'm now thinking I should be doing this as another pull/pull setup with the servo just aft of the main wing where the retract and steering servos are located.

The way I see it putting the servo in the tail keeps things VERY simple but will add a lot of weight. That 4oz back there could take 12+oz up front to offset.

Putting the servo aft of the wing and putting in a pull/pull keeps weight forward but adds complexity (and I may need a hatch just to service the rudder linkage).

Tying in to the steering servo is looking better and better to me to be honest. I'm thinking with a small access hatch I could mechanically adjust the throws at the rudder end and leave off all that weight. Perhaps have slightly different throws in the radio depending on gear position. Anyone want to talk me out of that idea? Should I just KISS or is it worth the effort to keep a lb off.
Carl, on a bird this big, I think adding a pound would make it fly better. I'd keep it simple. You can always just put another battery in the nose :ROFLMAO:.
 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Carl, on a bird this big, I think adding a pound would make it fly better. I'd keep it simple. You can always just put another battery in the nose :ROFLMAO:.
There is some truth to that, but she will be heavy enough no matter what I do. It would be great to not NEED to add too much extra weight in the nose. Guess I'll sleep on it.
 

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
So, IMO pull-pull setups, if done RIGHT the first time, require very little maintenance. This is why it is preferred on large IMAC and 3D airplanes. Use metal wire and crimps and you should be good. If, and I do mean IF, you find that there is an issue, we both know that from John Morgan's and Keith Spark's builds that cutting a hatch in this style of a build is NOT a chore or painful at all. This would be pending ground testing so you would not have to fully commit to either before a true maiden flight. Take that for what it is and chew on it.

Nevertheless, it is still wonderful to see you back on this build, as well as gainfully employed again. Been a long road there and we all understand the hiatus on this build.
 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Yeah, it is good to be back to "normal". Will definitely be a bit before the new gig feels normal, but it will be a fun ride.

I'll give it some thought in the coming days. With the elevators I was able to hide the hatches and linkages on the underside, meaning they won't be too noticeable on the ground. That isn't an option with the vertical stab and rudder. Just one more thing to weigh in the decision.
 

SquirrelTail

Well-known member
So I figure I'll poll the hivemind here and get some thoughts on the rudder setup. Way back we discussed 3 options for rudder/steering/retract operation and the consensus was go with 3 servos for ease of programming. I was about ready to cut in the access hatch for the rudder servo when I started having second thoughts about putting the weight out here in the tail. The servo is just a hair under 2oz, and with the mount plate, access hatch, and linkages I'll probably be close to 4oz hanging WAY out in the back. I'm now thinking I should be doing this as another pull/pull setup with the servo just aft of the main wing where the retract and steering servos are located.

The way I see it putting the servo in the tail keeps things VERY simple but will add a lot of weight. That 4oz back there could take 12+oz up front to offset.

Putting the servo aft of the wing and putting in a pull/pull keeps weight forward but adds complexity (and I may need a hatch just to service the rudder linkage).

Tying in to the steering servo is looking better and better to me to be honest. I'm thinking with a small access hatch I could mechanically adjust the throws at the rudder end and leave off all that weight. Perhaps have slightly different throws in the radio depending on gear position. Anyone want to talk me out of that idea? Should I just KISS or is it worth the effort to keep a lb off.
Actually not to start an argument, people have been putting the rudder servo in the tail because it makes the rudder have more strength so to speak.
 

willsonman

Builder Extraordinare
Mentor
Actually not to start an argument, people have been putting the rudder servo in the tail because it makes the rudder have more strength so to speak.
Yes, but no. It does not make it stronger but it is more ideal to reduce flutter. A shorter control rod will help here because there is less area for side loads on the control rod. A pull-pull system would mitigate this as long as there is little stretch in the lines.
 

wilmracer

I build things that fly (sometimes)
Mentor
Yes, but no. It does not make it stronger but it is more ideal to reduce flutter. A shorter control rod will help here because there is less area for side loads on the control rod. A pull-pull system would mitigate this as long as there is little stretch in the lines.
You mentioned using metal lines. I could certainly retrofit the existing lines with steel fishing leaders or similar, but I used kevlar line with cotterpin ends for adjustment when I did the tailwheel steering setup. I was considering similar for rudder. In my experience the kevlar lines dont stretch much at all but you are around the bigger stuff more than me.