Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / September 2009



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Dumb Insight for the Day

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Tim Wescott - 31 Aug 2009 02:32 GMT
Maple is hard.

I'm putting together my first plane with maple motor mounts (my much-
denigrated Top Flight Nobler kit, which I bought about five years before
they went belly up the first time).  I needed to shorten one up by
about .025", so the plywood front fuselage former would fit up correctly
to the spinner.

_No_ hand tool that I could bring to bear would wear that stuff down (I'm
too cheap for a belt sander). Sandpaper?  Ha!  (granted, I didn't go get
anything coarser than 100 grit).  Metal file?  Ha!  Cheese grater file?  
Ha and Ha again!

I finally took the whole mostly-built fuselage, with the 50" wing and
horizontal stab/elevator assembly attached, and ground the thing off on a
bench grinder.  That's a 40" x 50" balsa assembly that I'm pushing
against a tool designed to cut steel, just to remove less than 1/32 of an
inch of _wood_.  It wore away a bit faster than a similar-sized drill bit
would, so I guess I can't claim that it's harder than steel, but c'mon!  
It's just _wood_!

Ah well, I made progress.

And the wooden wing fillets look nifty, even though it was kinda insane
to cut and fit balsa fillets when putty would have been _much_ faster.

I can't wait until I go to fly the thing -- it's been over 20 years since
I've seriously flown control line.

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

MJKolodziej - 31 Aug 2009 03:51 GMT
> Maple is hard.
>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> I can't wait until I go to fly the thing -- it's been over 20 years since
> I've seriously flown control line.

Be sure and keep us updated on this project.
Maple: it will make a pretty noxious smoke when you use a high speed Dremel
on  it too..........
mk
Tim Wescott - 31 Aug 2009 04:58 GMT
>> Maple is hard.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> too..........
> mk

Ooh, high speed Dremel -- I hadn't thought of that, but the bench grinder
did a much more controlled job (a belt sander would have been the bee's
knees, were I the kind to spend _money_ on tools).

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 31 Aug 2009 05:33 GMT
> ... I finally took the whole mostly-built fuselage, with the 50" wing and
>horizontal stab/elevator assembly attached, and ground the thing off on a
>bench grinder.  ...

You da man!

If it worked and didn't break anything, it was the
right tool for the job at hand.  

Well done!

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Tim Wescott - 31 Aug 2009 06:18 GMT
>> ... I finally took the whole mostly-built fuselage, with the 50" wing
>> and
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
>                 Marty

This whole build process is getting a bit nerve-wracking, because of the
mismatch between the gross level of completion and the fine level of
completion.  Unlike your average R/C plane, C/L planes -- and stunters in
particular -- are almost universally built in one piece.  No removable
wings here!  

Add to that that C/L stunters are built _light_, which means that the
wing gets permanently married to the fuselage very early in the fuselage
built process.  This means that your plane is up to the full, finished
size _permanently_ long before the fuselage is strong enough to take any
serious dings.  You're lofting this great, big, delicate assembly around
the shop, worried that you're going to bump the stab into something and
rip the back half of the plane off.  I don't even have all the fuselage
planking on yet, for crying out loud, and yet the wings and stab are on
and the control system is fully completed.  I keep expecting the dang
thing to fall off my workbench and self-destruct.

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 31 Aug 2009 13:14 GMT
>This whole build process is getting a bit nerve-wracking, because of the
>mismatch between the gross level of completion and the fine level of
>completion.  Unlike your average R/C plane, C/L planes -- and stunters in
>particular -- are almost universally built in one piece.  No removable
>wings here!  

Understood.  I ended my CL career failing to finish a
Ringmaster (circa 1967-1968).  

I didn't know how to use dope correctly.  I didn't understand
the need for a base coat under the color coats.  I kept
painting and painting the thing with dark blue paint and
never got it to look presentable.  <sigh>

                    Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Bob - 31 Aug 2009 18:49 GMT
Hey a suggestion... you do not need a belt sander, just the belt and a
block of wood that it fits tightly around.   I have a belt on a piece
of 1" thick hardwood (probably aspen but almost any decently hard wood
would work) cut to fit tightly inside the belt.   It is easy to
handle, lasts forever (as compared to regular sandpaper) and is quick
and very accurate to use.    My memory of using a belt sander is of
taking waaaaaaaaay too much wood off in less than a second of
operation when trying to sand some 1/8" hard birch plywood.
Bob
Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 31 Aug 2009 22:55 GMT
>Hey a suggestion... you do not need a belt sander, just the belt and a
>block of wood that it fits tightly around.   I have a belt on a piece
>of 1" thick hardwood (probably aspen but almost any decently hard wood
>would work) cut to fit tightly inside the belt.   It is easy to
>handle, lasts forever (as compared to regular sandpaper) and is quick
>and very accurate to use.

I've got one or two block sanders made out of belts
bought at a flea market.

>My memory of using a belt sander is of
>taking waaaaaaaaay too much wood off in less than a second of
>operation when trying to sand some 1/8" hard birch plywood.

And I've cut myself many times with the X-Acto knives.

But I wouldn't go back to life without a belt/disc sander
sitting there next to my band saw and drill press.  Nor
would I want to work without the knives.

The right use of tools takes practice.  That's one of
the fun aspects of the hobby.

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Morgans - 01 Sep 2009 01:50 GMT
> Hey a suggestion... you do not need a belt sander, just the belt and a
> block of wood that it fits tightly around.   I have a belt on a piece
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> operation when trying to sand some 1/8" hard birch plywood.
> Bob

I do the same thing.  Another advantage is the fact that you can rotate the
belt to expose a brand new surface to use.

I get it really tight by cutting some small blocks of wood to put between
the main sanding block and the belt on the back side of the block.  You can
really get it tight, and it also gives something more to grip the whole
thing with.
Signature

Jim in NC

Fubar of the HillPeople - 01 Sep 2009 01:06 GMT
What's the name of that waltz they played on 2001?   Da da di da daaaa....
dum dum... dum dum...
Glue two three, sand two three, crunch two three, cuss two three...

> This whole build process is getting a bit nerve-wracking, because of the
> mismatch between the gross level of completion and the fine level of
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> and the control system is fully completed.  I keep expecting the dang
> thing to fall off my workbench and self-destruct.
OldSchool - 02 Sep 2009 21:14 GMT
On Aug 31, 8:07 pm, "Fubar of the HillPeople" <fubar1@(DieSpammers)
socal.rr.com> wrote:
> What's the name of that waltz they played on 2001?   Da da di da daaaa....
> dum dum... dum dum...
> Glue two three, sand two three, crunch two three, cuss two three...

"Thus Spake Zarathustra" is the most commonly remembered piece.  As I
recall, it was playing when the ape/human threw the bone skyward and
they cut to the space station....
Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 02 Sep 2009 21:48 GMT
>On Aug 31, 8:07 pm, "Fubar of the HillPeople" <fubar1@(DieSpammers)
>socal.rr.com> wrote:
>> What's the name of that waltz they played on 2001?   Da da di da daaaa....
>> dum dum... dum dum...
>> Glue two three, sand two three, crunch two three, cuss two three...

>"Thus Spake Zarathustra" is the most commonly remembered piece.  As I
>recall, it was playing when the ape/human threw the bone skyward and
>they cut to the space station....

True.

But the walz (one, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, three, ...)
that he is alluding to is "The Blue Danube."  It's played at a
happy time during the construction or launch of the space ship, if I
remember correctly.

"Thus Spake Zarathustra" is probably cut time or 4/4.  Think
of the timpanies in the piece.  Seems to be that they are
being struck on eighth notes in a 4/4 framework.

                    Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Fubar of the HillPeople - 02 Sep 2009 22:05 GMT
Yeah, that's the "theme song" of 2001 but the one I'm thinking of came later
when they were docking with the space station. Some kind of waltz.

OK, looked it up: Blue Danube

Dan
On Aug 31, 8:07 pm, "Fubar of the HillPeople" <fubar1@(DieSpammers)
socal.rr.com> wrote:
> What's the name of that waltz they played on 2001? Da da di da daaaa....
> dum dum... dum dum...
> Glue two three, sand two three, crunch two three, cuss two three...

"Thus Spake Zarathustra" is the most commonly remembered piece.  As I
recall, it was playing when the ape/human threw the bone skyward and
they cut to the space station....
KGB - 03 Sep 2009 08:47 GMT
>On Aug 31, 8:07=A0pm, "Fubar of the HillPeople" <fubar1@(DieSpammers)
>socal.rr.com> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>recall, it was playing when the ape/human threw the bone skyward and
>they cut to the space station....

The Waltz was the "Blue Danube"

"Thus Spake Zarathustra" goes Daa Daa Daaaa DiDaaaaaaa  Boom Boom Boom
Boom Boom Boom Boom          8^)

Regards
KGB
KGB - 01 Sep 2009 09:57 GMT
>>> ... I finally took the whole mostly-built fuselage, with the 50" wing
>>> and
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>particular -- are almost universally built in one piece.  No removable
>wings here!  

Hi

I once built the fuselage for a 60" span WW1 biplane in my loft
workshop.  Having finished the fuselage, I sort of temporarily lost
interest and the fuz languished, carefully preserved, in a corner of
my loft for a year or so.

Eventually I summoned up the enthusiasm to finish the model, picked up
the fuz, carried it across the loft to my workbench - and stepped
straight down the loft access hatch.  I arrived (unhurt) in a heap at
the bottom of the loft ladder on the floor below clutching a handful
of matchwood!!!!

I did eventually rebuild it and it flew very well.

Regards
KGB
Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 01 Sep 2009 14:02 GMT
> ... stepped
>straight down the loft access hatch.  I arrived (unhurt) in a heap at
>the bottom of the loft ladder on the floor below clutching a handful
>of matchwood!!!!  ...

OH, how awful!

I'm glad that you survived and were able to
repair the damage to the fuse ...

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Tim Wescott - 01 Sep 2009 17:43 GMT
>>>> ... I finally took the whole mostly-built fuselage, with the 50" wing
>>>> and
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> Regards
> KGB

Oh ouch!  And I don't mean your injuries, either.

I can't recall building mishaps of that magnitude, but since picking up
this hobby after a long layoff, I don't think I've gotten a plane in the
air that didn't get some sort of crash repair before it was completed.

(although the worst ones have been self-inflicted -- I'm a design
engineer, and I like to build unique things from scratch.  But working
out everything in detail ahead of time gets to be a lot like what I do
for pay.  So sometimes skip doing the detail design first and I just
start building.  I'll build myself into a corner, then cut out a bunch of
work, then start again.  It's not the "least work" way to get an aircraft
done, but it can be the only way to get started, at times.)

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

Six_O'Clock_High - 01 Sep 2009 19:02 GMT
> Eventually I summoned up the enthusiasm to finish the model, picked up
> the fuz, carried it across the loft to my workbench - and stepped
> straight down the loft access hatch.  I arrived (unhurt) in a heap at
> the bottom of the loft ladder on the floor below clutching a handful
> of matchwood!!!!

Oh I hate the pain and agony of serious hangar rash before you finish the
build.

I framed up a Midwest Super Stinker that sat in the shop for a year while I
figured out how to prevent the flutter that was mentioned on almost every
page of the manual.  When I engineered the solution, I was covering the tail
feathers and heard a knocking.  I asked my 6 year old what he was doing and
he told me he was driving nails.  He was using the leading edge of the lower
wing for a hammer.

It took another month to repair that damage and the bird flew well enough
that I was able to land when it shed the top wing.  It flew again after
that.

Jim Branaum
AM 1428
Morgans - 02 Sep 2009 03:45 GMT
> I once built the fuselage for a 60" span WW1 biplane in my loft
> workshop.  Having finished the fuselage, I sort of temporarily lost
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> I did eventually rebuild it and it flew very well.

Wow, a double whammy!  I have to think that story the prize, but I have one
that might be entertaining, in a way.

Back quite a few years ago, I started to try to learn to fly RC.  There were
no nearby clubs, but after a few failed attempts to teach myself, I found
one, and committed to the drive to get someone to teach me to fly.

I was a building contractor at the time, and carried my ugly stick type of
trainer in the back of my big van along with all of my tools.  There was
plenty of room for both, I thought.

Nearly every trip to the field seemed to end in some minor flying mishap
that required a little repair to my airplane, but sometimes only after a few
good hours of fun.  I would return home for the usually quick repairs, and
return in the next week or so for more lessons and flying, still a happy
camper.

I was getting better, and felt that soon my solo flying was going to result
in a full day of flying AND returning home with an intact airplane.  I was
sort of right.  One day I flew for hours, and finally had to return home,
but this time the airplane went into the van with NO damage, ready to fly
again the next time.  I was on cloud nine, all the way home.  Until...

I got to an intersection a few blocks from home that involved a slow sharp
turn with a big deep dip in it, which always rocked the van pretty hard.
This trip was no exception, but this time, my 3HP, 20 gallon tank
construction air compressor came loose from its tie down, and flopped over
on its side, right on top of my airplane.  CRAP!

The damage was much worse than all of my minor flying mishaps of the
previous weeks, put together!  My wife loves to tell that story, of the
complete and utter dejection I had on my face when I walked in the door.
She knew that something bad had happened to the airplane, but she had to
keep herself from laughing when she found out how the damage had taken
place.

Needless to say, the next time I went to the field, I had the airplane
stored in the van in a new place.

Hanging from the ceiling!   <ggg>
Signature

Jim in NC

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 02 Sep 2009 04:18 GMT
> ... My wife loves to tell that story, of the
>complete and utter dejection I had on my face when I walked in the door. ...

I don't have a wife, but I sure have had that look on
my face often enough.  :-O

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Morgans - 02 Sep 2009 19:17 GMT
> I don't have a wife, but I sure have had that look on
> my face often enough.  :-O

Yep!  Meeee too.

I was (as you would say) bummmmed out, that day.

What a change, in a millisecond.  From elation over a full day of good
flying (the first) to disaster!

An eighty pound compressor can do a really good job of smashing balsa wood.
:-(
Signature

Jim in NC

KGB - 03 Sep 2009 09:03 GMT
>> I don't have a wife, but I sure have had that look on
>> my face often enough.  :-O
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>An eighty pound compressor can do a really good job of smashing balsa wood.
>:-(

Hi

I used to have a (chow chow) dog and a van - with Rusty the dog
usually travelling in the back of the van.

One day I was transporting several model aircraft - and Rusty.  On
that occasion, Rusty travelled in the front passenger seat with the
aircraft safely in the back.

Arriving at my destination. I let Rusty out first - then opened the
back of the van to retrieve the planes.  "Oh great!" thought Rusty "We
are going somewhere else"; then jumped in the back.

Unfortunately, my loud obscene yell frightened Rusty so much he
cowered in the back, running round to avoid being grabbed, unsure what
he had done wrong.  When I finally did grab him (by the throat) and
dragged him out, a passing lady threatened to report me to the police
for cruelty and my wife wouldn't speak to me for days for being nasty
to the dog.

Fortunately the damage to the planes was repairable and Rusty (and the
wife) soon forgave me for trying to strangle him.

Regards

KGB
MJKolodziej - 03 Sep 2009 18:20 GMT
>>> I don't have a wife, but I sure have had that look on
>>> my face often enough.  :-O
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> KGB

Is it ok now to look back and chuckle because I did.
mk
:)
Morgans - 03 Sep 2009 21:48 GMT
> Fortunately the damage to the planes was repairable and Rusty (and the
> wife) soon forgave me for trying to strangle him.

That's a good story, too.  No good deed goes unpunished, I always say.

I love dogs, so don't get me wrong, but....

I have seldom found that dogs and model airplanes mix well...

Either the damage they can do being around them, or the attempted chasing
while you "think" you are going to land.
Signature

Jim in NC

Morgans - 01 Sep 2009 01:45 GMT
> You da man!
>
> If it worked and didn't break anything, it was the
> right tool for the job at hand.
>
> Well done!

I only have one small reservation for the choice of tools for that job.

Using sanding, or worse, a grinder to machine wood is a poor choice under
most circumstances when the wood is to be joined using glue or epoxy.

The reasoning is that the pores of the wood are closed by the grinder
shoving removed or burnt wood into the pores, so glue of any type is unable
to deeply penetrate the wood and set up a really strong bond.  The best way
to prepare wood is sawing or scraping the surface.

I hope the surface area is sufficient to allow enough strength with the non
ideal wood surface prep of the maple mount.
Signature

Jim in NC

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 01 Sep 2009 02:22 GMT
>Using sanding, or worse, a grinder to machine wood is a poor choice under
>most circumstances when the wood is to be joined using glue or epoxy.

>The reasoning is that the pores of the wood are closed by the grinder
>shoving removed or burnt wood into the pores, so glue of any type is unable
>to deeply penetrate the wood and set up a really strong bond.  The best way
>to prepare wood is sawing or scraping the surface.

You may be right.  I haven't done any tests that
would allow me to affirm or deny this theory.

>I hope the surface area is sufficient to allow enough strength with the non
>ideal wood surface prep of the maple mount.

How much strength is needed to hold the front of
a cowl on to the nose of a CL aircraft?  

I can't imagine designing a highly-stressed structure
where the difference between success and failure is
surface preparation on some hard maple.  If the joint
has to stand up to a lot of force, the members should
be notched or fitted into a channel in some way so
that the structure is held together by the strength
of the material in it rather than the strength of
a butt joint.

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Morgans - 01 Sep 2009 02:55 GMT
> You may be right.  I haven't done any tests that
> would allow me to affirm or deny this theory.

Nor have I, but I have read it in one of the forest products papers, and
that was well researched.

> How much strength is needed to hold the front of
> a cowl on to the nose of a CL aircraft?

Probably not much strength is needed, which is why I said that I hoped that
there was "sufficient surface area to hold", and there probably is, even
with a less than optimal glue joint.

> I can't imagine designing a highly-stressed structure
> where the difference between success and failure is
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> of the material in it rather than the strength of
> a butt joint.

Adding a little triangle stock is another good way to add strength to a nose
joint, and it probably has that feature added, as well.  I would add it,
even if it was not specified, in this case, as I usually do in all my noses.
I hate a nose falling off, if you know what I mean! <g>
Signature

Jim in NC

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 01 Sep 2009 04:35 GMT
> ... I hate a nose falling off, if you know what I mean! <g>

I do, I do!

All of my nose jobs have come from face plants.  It
wasn't the glue that failed ...  :o(

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Tim Wescott - 01 Sep 2009 06:10 GMT
>> You da man!
>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> I hope the surface area is sufficient to allow enough strength with the
> non ideal wood surface prep of the maple mount.

It'd be an interesting experiment to do -- I feel that _hand_ sanding
works pretty darn well.  In fact, after I got the thing roughed out with
the grinder I didn't like the looks of the polished and scorched wood, so
I put some elbow into it with a sanding block to expose some (hopefully)
better material.

And it's just a nose ring, which has other sources of strength that being
glued to the butt end of a maple stick...

Signature

www.wescottdesign.com

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.