FT War Hawk vs Mustang vs Spitfire

[danskis]

@Marty72 - thanks for the info. I don't think I'll ever get up to 50% rate but thats OK. I maidened my $tree foamboard Spit today and it flew great - its going to be a fun plane. This is my second one - the first one only lasted about 4 flights and that was a year ago. I high started it on the first flight to see how it would glide - no prop - and it glided well so I went for it. Put the prop on and high started it again. Flew great. I did a camo paint job on the bottom but left the top white for the maiden. That white shows up really well and is good for orientation. I've still got to put on the front turtledeck and paint it. For the maiden I used a small 2212 - 1200kv motor with an 8" slow fly prop. It cruised around just fine and had no problem with loops. Eventually I'll put a 2835 on it with a 10 prop - same as my bloody baron. I can see me following your lead and just building a bunch of these and playing around with the build.

 

[Marty72]

@Marty72 - thanks for the info. I don't think I'll ever get up to 50% rate but thats OK. I maidened my $tree foamboard Spit today and it flew great - its going to be a fun plane. This is my second one - the first one only lasted about 4 flights and that was a year ago. I high started it on the first flight to see how it would glide - no prop - and it glided well so I went for it. Put the prop on and high started it again. Flew great. I did a camo paint job on the bottom but left the top white for the maiden. That white shows up really well and is good for orientation. I've still got to put on the front turtledeck and paint it. For the maiden I used a small 2212 - 1200kv motor with an 8" slow fly prop. It cruised around just fine and had no problem with loops. Eventually I'll put a 2835 on it with a 10 prop - same as my bloody baron. I can see me following your lead and just building a bunch of these and playing around with the build.

OH so you were talking about the Spitfire. Glad it went well. I just finished up a third Spitfire tonight, 4th of July Special. Will fly it this weekend and see how it goes. I'm running a motor much larger than I need, but it's all I have available at the moment, 3536 Rimfire w/ a 10x7. I'll curious how it will fly, will know this weekend.

 

[danskis]

It will be fast....do you put an extra bulkhead in for that canopy?

 

[Marty72]

Yeah, I suspect it won't really be much faster, it's vertical capacity should increase greatly (and climb speed) but level flight, probably won't change a whole lot. I say this based on experience with the P 40 and P 51 using this motor, but the Spit if far more aerodynamic then either of those planes so who knows. Tomorrow, I should have an answer.

 

[AIRFORGE]

What an exceptionally informative thread, @Marty72 ! Thank you, Sir.
You should consider doing a thread on build technique, paint, and/or how you make and apply decals.

 

[Marty72]

What an exceptionally informative thread, @Marty72 ! Thank you, Sir.
You should consider doing a thread on build technique, paint, and/or how you make and apply decals.

Thanks Addict, that means a lot. I kind of gave up on it, as there didn't seem to be much interest in this thread. I was hoping others would pipe in about their experiences with the three planes and what worked and what didn't. But that really never happened. I did learn a few things doing it, so it was useful.

I don't really do anything different with build technique, just follow the video instruction and try to be clean. I use more patience and do a dry run before any critical gluing. For example, if I'm not happy with how the poster board "turtle deck" looks, I remove it and do it over. I've found that by using a iron, you can heat up the glue under the post board to remove it. With care, you can also remove most of the glue left behind (and smooth it out) with the iron (wipe off the iron frequently with a paper towel). Also, if things go sideways (which they do), I'll do a side experiment. I'll create the bad situation I have, with scrap foam board and poster board and figure out how to improve it (on the experimental piece first) without making things worse on the plane I'm building. This is how for example, I discovered I could use an iron to undo the mess I made with poster board error or to remove excess glue. Now honestly, I realize most folks are interested in this OCD stuff. But on some of my builds, I do take the extra time and effort to get them right. There are many better and more experienced builders on here for sure, I'm no expert. I just find that stopping when things go wrong, figuring out a fix (on test samples) and then proceeding is the best route for me. If I don't do this, typically the issue bothers me for the life of the plane. Haha.

I lightly apply minwax before paint (after build) and then three light coats of Rustoleum 2x usually does the trick. I mask with 3 M blue masking tape and plain old printer paper or garbage bags for large area cover. Decals, I still haven't found something I like. Vinyl doesn't seem to hold the ink with all the water my planes get from dew on grass landings. The dark ink runs and stains the plane. Photo paper works best, with 3M 77 adhesive on the back. I hand cut out the prints and glue them to the plane (very carefully, no way to pull up). They holds up pretty well but when it's time to replace the graphics, it's a lot of work, basically I have to delaminate the photo paper and sand the remaining paper from the decal off the plane. Vinyl is simple, just peel off. I really haven't seen anything written up on what others are doing for stickers, this has been my own trial and error approach. I believe I need to protect the vinyl stickers with a sealant, commercial stickers do fine, so I need to find out what they do. I just haven't done it. For the most part, the photo paper survives the life of the plane.

If you have a specific question or a suggestion on improving something I'm doing, please let me know. I'll respond as best I can.

 

[Zetoyoc]

Well if nothing else this thread has inspired me to go back and revisit these planes and try building them again. My p40 suffered from orientation issues and an unskilled pilot. But now that I am a bit more experienced I plan to try it again. So thanks for that. And I'll bump it up to the 3536 as well

 

[danskis]

@Marty72 - well you inspired me which I appreciate. My first Spit came after a successful Versa Wing but the Versa did not prepare me for the Spit which I couldn't get to fly. I suspect I didn't have the aileron pushrods set up correctly and I was always losing orientation as it was a full camo paint job. By the time I put the florescent orange on it it was too far gone. That was about 9 months ago. I decided I needed to fly something besides wings so I built the Bloody Baron and eventually got used to flying that thinking it would prepare me for other planes. I was right. After flying the Baron the Spit was fun. I built this Spit as a test mule - first to see if I could fly it and second to see what I wanted to change. I didn't put a lot of effort into making it pretty. For the maiden there was no front turtle deck, canopy or nose cheeks - I just ended the fuselage at the power pod. (I've since added basswood nose cheeks)

The power pod is glued in and I did opt for the removable wing thinking that in the event of a crash I'd have more good parts to work with. With the removable wing the electronics go on the bottom of the power pod as does the battery - which is wedged on a shelf under the power pod. I'm using a small motor - 2212 with a cheap 9X6 prop and a 1500 3s. I think a 2212 is the same as a 2830 or a Park 400. Good enough for a maiden, some loops and to get it trimmed. I've only had one flight so far but maybe a couple more tomorrow. The paint jobs a mash up but I don't really have enough patience for a nice one. After reading the Sportster thread maybe I'll build one of those. I like the P-40 and P-51 but they just don't inspire me as much as the Spit.

 

[Marty72]

@Marty72 - well you inspired me which I appreciate. My first Spit came after a successful Versa Wing but the Versa did not prepare me for the Spit which I couldn't get to fly. I suspect I didn't have the aileron pushrods set up correctly and I was always losing orientation as it was a full camo paint job. By the time I put the florescent orange on it it was too far gone. That was about 9 months ago. I decided I needed to fly something besides wings so I built the Bloody Baron and eventually got used to flying that thinking it would prepare me for other planes. I was right. After flying the Baron the Spit was fun. I built this Spit as a test mule - first to see if I could fly it and second to see what I wanted to change. I didn't put a lot of effort into making it pretty. For the maiden there was no front turtle deck, canopy or nose cheeks - I just ended the fuselage at the power pod. (I've since added basswood nose cheeks) View attachment 173704 The power pod is glued in and I did opt for the removable wing thinking that in the event of a crash I'd have more good parts to work with. With the removable wing the electronics go on the bottom of the power pod as does the battery - which is wedged on a shelf under the power pod. I'm using a small motor - 2212 with a cheap 9X6 prop and a 1500 3s. I think a 2212 is the same as a 2830 or a Park 400. Good enough for a maiden, some loops and to get it trimmed. I've only had one flight so far but maybe a couple more tomorrow. The paint jobs a mash up but I don't really have enough patience for a nice one. After reading the Sportster thread maybe I'll build one of those. I like the P-40 and P-51 but they just don't inspire me as much as the Spit.

Hey glad to inspire! Good visible color scheme for orientation!

I know I keep repeating myself, but if you could only build and fly one FT (regular) Warbird, I'm pretty sure the Spit is the one. I don't know if you saw my Sportster thread, but if you build it, you will want more motor. It's big, heavy and has a large projected frontal area, so it benefits more from a large motor than most. I ran the Rimfire 3536 1200 w/ 10x7 prop. Flew fantastic with that. It's a big plane, very easy to see in the sky and fun to fly. It's built like a tank, it is one of the most durable ft builds. Yes, it will fly fine with the spec motor but it will be very slow unless it's perfectly calm day.

 

[Marty72]

So I'm going out this morning to fly but we are badly fogged in, so I wait........

Here's some pictures of what I did to the bottom of my spitfire. I made this addition to keep the battery from falling out in the event the velcro let loose. It also finishes off the plane and gives the nose some strength and stiffness.

Option 1 on the brand new Spit:


Option 2, on the heavy used, 68 flights Spit: A door for full enclosure. That's Gorilla tape to reinforce the worn "hinge" and velcro tab to secure. Before adding this feature, it is important to find the battery location first (for cg), then add this as location of the door is critical. The opening is just big enough to get the battery at a specific angle in and out (by design).

 

[danskis]

Yeah I really don't like the "power pod solution" I'm more of a traditional hatch type of guy or find some way to slide the battery into a nice tight space. Always a trade off with the CG. The removable wing on the Spit might seem at first to be a little sketchy but l ended up liking it because it just acts as a big hatch to access everything. The only drawback is the aileron wires which you have to deal with every time you change the battery. My battery, 1500 3s ended up going all the way to the nose as far as I can get it even with the spinner. I even put the rear servos inside right behind the wing.

As far as which plane to build next you probably talked me out of the Sportster. After a year into this I'm not going to spend much time on stuff that isn't fun to build and fly. So far that's been the "mini" series for me - I just can't get them to work yet. Next up will probably be my 4th Versa Wing which is really fun to fly. It will be a twin with two 2206 2300kv motors. The last guy to build one on the forum said he can do 100mph on a 3 cell.

 

[Marty72]

So big day at the club field. Did some landing and take off practice with the Simple Scout and some attempts with the P51 w/ gear. This nylon liner on bumpy ground is the most difficult surface to land so far. Finely trimmed grass is by far the easiest. A pave road is good too but this stuff is hard, bumpy and it doesn't scrub speed. Anyway, I digress.

So I maidened the Spit 3.0, 4th of July edition. It went well, I have video. After the fog cleared, a fellow came out to the field and I ask him to video the maiden. I was hoping to get more zoomed in video, but that didn't happen. I was not helping the situation because I was flying maiden style, High! That's typically what I do, get the plane way up, trim and work it through some maneuvers.

So here it is:

 

[Marty72]

So what did I learn today, a bunch. First I built the Spitfire 3.0 just like the 2.0, same horns and servo arm positions ect. I made one change, I installed a Rimfire 3536 1200 w/ 10x7 prop. So what was the outcome? Surprising and not surprising, the plane was a tad bit faster flying horizontal, but vertically, night and day different. I think this thing could go into orbit now. The loops are way faster. The best news is it didn't ruin the flight characteristics of the plane. It handles great and with a little thrust angle, it loops straight under power. I probably should add a little down thrust angle to the motor, as when I do open it up all the way (which isn't often), it climbs. The bad news is I'm probably done flying with the C pack motor, as this is a lot more dynamic. This isn't the surprising part.

As I said above, the servo and TX set ups are identical between the two planes. However, the control surfaces are for more responsive with more power. I know the faster you fly, the less control surface input you need, but I was amazed how just running a bigger, faster prop can effect the control surfaces as well. Flying the 2.0, I use high rates (100%) but flying the 3.0 that was way too much. I went to low rates (approx 60%) and it rolled as fast as with high rates on the 2.0. (and I wasn't any where near fly throttle)

So I guess motor size and prop size have a much larger impact on control surfaces than I ever imagined. Even flying the same speed, you are likely pushing more air over the control surfaces. Again, I knew this, but didn't think it was this noticeable. I did fly the 2.0 and 3.0 back to back today, in the same conditions.

So I may have given bad advice earlier, if you are flying this plane (or likely any of the 3 warbirds listed in this thread) with a slow fly prop, and a spec equivalent motor, you'll want to fly using hi rates.

 

[danskis]

I made it to the field today too. Just a short vid of my underpowered Spit. As you can hear I've got some sort of vibration going on which I need to track down. It really is an electric motor it just sounds like a gasser.

And my high start launch with a very nervous videographer. I like maidening planes this way - they last longer. For my first flight I didn't even have prop on - just glided back to the field. And the Spit glides forever - probably make a great slope soarer.

 

[danskis]

Nice flying @Marty72 - no problem with that vertical launch. Ashville is such a pretty place. I'll track down that vibration in mine and put a real prop on it to get a little more power. Yeah advice is interesting. I started working with a club expert to trim out my powered glider for best glide. 3 weeks ago we added weight to the tail and yesterday he added weight to the nose....same glider same setup.

 

[Marty72]

I made it to the field today too. Just a short vid of my underpowered Spit. As you can hear I've got some sort of vibration going on which I need to track down. It really is an electric motor it just sounds like a gasser.

Check the prop for a crack and the firewall mount first. Usually the culprit.

 

[Marty72]

Check the prop for a crack and the firewall mount first. Usually the culprit.

Thanks.

Yeah, it comes down to the prop and if the motor can pull it. Speed looked go on your video.

 

[The Hangar]

I made it to the field today too. Just a short vid of my underpowered Spit. As you can hear I've got some sort of vibration going on which I need to track down. It really is an electric motor it just sounds like a gasser.

And my high start launch with a very nervous videographer. I like maidening planes this way - they last longer. For my first flight I didn't even have prop on - just glided back to the field. And the Spit glides forever - probably make a great slope soarer.

The spitfire really does glide well! @bracesport flies his as a sloper and has some great vids on it - it looks amazing!

 

[danskis]

This is such a great thread I thought I'd bring it up again to ask my question about the P-40. I've seen two wingspan dimensions stated for the speed build version of this plane. One is 1066mm and the other is 1166mm (46inches). If I download the speed build plans which one is it at 100%. Lookin at marty72's planes I'm thinking its 1066mm.

 

[Marty72]

Thanks for the kudos

That would be 1066mm, just measured mine, just under 42 inches (Wingspan). That is the download version.

I've been learning more about batteries lately, been doing some bench testing. In theory, you shouldn't need anything over 25c, but in the real world (of cheap batteries), I would recommend a 35c minimum (makes a difference in vertical climb). This is something I did not consider when prop testing, and should have. The battery C rating gives the plane more punch when you go vertical. I've also found that a higher c rating will give you way more punch at the end of the flight too. This is based on the testing I've done so far. By no means am I an expert, I'm just scratching the surface, but so far, I've been surprised by the difference in batteries (testing volt drop under load at beginning of flight and end of flight). I've only begun and I'm sure I learn even more. My batteries are now all numbered, and each battery has a different voltage drop (even the same model). I think quality is also another variable. Now if you fly around half throttle most of the time and occasionally run 2/3 throttle, none of this really matters.