arun

Well, she balances nearly perfectly with no lead added and all the electronics provisionally in place. Good news, but bear in mind I installed a hunking Saito 82, I hate to think how much lead you'd need up front with a lightweight 2-stroke! I think it will probably end up with a small amount of lead at the tail to put it bang on the "standard" CoG and then we'll see how it looks after trimming flights. I have to say that the Great Planes balancer is worth every penny, lovely to work with. [attachment=0]photo.JPG[/attachment]

Great work Shane! I just tested out the latest version and it seems you have really mastered the tools to shape the environment - I loved flying behind the fir tree! I think this mastery is key as to be quite honest the tools are sub-standard even compared to a modern but low-budget 3D graphics tool chain used for games (Phoenix is really just a very simple game with physics from programming perspective), I'm surprised the developers put up with them to be honest!. With better images and your new found skill I see no reason why this can't be a first class flying site. A+

Might go that route, will try some K&S bending springs otherwise out comes the blowtorch.

I had a read Peter, it looks great - but also very involved. I might take some of the basic ideas for the pilot I still new to paint.

What's the secret to bending the alu/copper pipes in a fuel tank without them collapsing!? I've tried putting solder wire and silicon wore inside the tube, and am using a proper bending tool. Sure I didn't have this issue last time...

As Dave says, this wasn't done with a proper pano gear. I basically just put my SLR on a tripod (hence the too low angle) and systematically shot the sky in sections. I then stitched it into a distorted pano using software called Hugin. At best was experimental when I had too much spare time (oh, those days!) - I probably wouldn't waste too much time on it ... need to get proper gear, wait for right day in terms on lighting an do it properly from scratch.

Not sure I still have them ... But I think the bigger problem is that the pano was taken from slightly the wrong (too low) position which makes it hard to accurately put objects into the scene. What's your graphics background? You'd be surprised how many of us are programmers and graphics engineers

Got the throttle linkage done... Went for a ball link on the engine end attached by soldered thread to some thing gauge piano wire. Simple z-bend at the servo end. Due to servo positioning the side on angle of the linkage is fairly large, which coupled with the need for the solder extender to pass through the firewall, has meant opening a fairly large hole in the firewall to clear the linkage at all positions. Once has been fuel-proofed with some epoxy it should be fine, although could let oil/fuel into the tank bay ... but probably no more so than the central firewall hole for the fuel fe

Ok, I've finally sobered up (thanks Trevor ) and managed to make some progress on this. Been distracted as usual by other interesting (Magnatilla) and not so interesting things (work). I dare say people have hardly been able to concentrate in anticipation of this next update, so here it is... All the control surfaces are wired up. I replaced the stock linkages with some carbon fibre ones I made myself as described above (elevator) and better quality hardware from SLEC (all around). [attachment=3]photo 1.JPG[/attachment] [attachment=2]photo 2.JPG[/attachment] [attachment=1]photo

I'm having trouble to get it started, but power to weight is out of this world...

... just a bit of fun really. I needed to size up a model for an engine change - planning on one of the 40 sized Irvines. Managed to scale the engineering drawings available to 1:1 using Photoshop, stick them to a piece of breakfast cereal box and then build a cardboard profile model. Job done

Remove the loose bits. Clean the joint on the fuselage so is a true surface. Cut a new piece of the right size and glue and pin it in place? The important thing is to make a clean well-fitting joint.

More info here on the build. If you use Google Chrome browser it will auto translate to OK English, but the pics are multilingual anyway http://www.rusjet.ru/articles/proekt-yak-130

Amazing stuff. I think I can only ever dream of the level of ability (and funding) in that video

That is nothing Shane as Dave says!

I often don't bother downloading the updates for a while even though it tells me they are there. But in this case, I hadn't used the sim for a long time until we had that online session the other night

The Pulse flies very well, I have nothing bad to say about it except that it is not the cheapest model on the market. That said with Hangar 9 you get well designed, proven models with decent linkages etc. I will PM you a scan of the review from RCM&E that will tell you all you need to know! Eventually I sold mine to Jonathan who I think had a similarly high opinion of it, but maybe he'll chip in. One final thought about a second model -- it's better if you don't have to get a third in quick succession. I don't mean crashing. More that the second model should be able to take you way int

If you haven't tried this new model (in the latest update), you should. It's an absolute blast to fly and really realistic handling, esp. with a nice breeze. [attachment=0]pawnee.png[/attachment]

Pulse XT 40 - I wouldn't recommend it if I hadn't tried it They are easy enough to get, but more expensive than Seagull - try here. A decent set of retracts such as the EFlite 40-size come in at 100g per leg, so I would say that is a reasonable amount of additional weight given it can't be moved around to help balance the 'plane. Maybe pneumatic retracts could be made a little lighter but not sure. I imagine they could be a lot of fun...

Personally I would recommend the Pulse XT 40 as a nice low wing trainer. Good wing area, bit of dihedral for some self-righting and very well made being H9. The Wot4 is also an excellent choice, don't be put off by the high-wing - it is an immense aerobatic machine with the right setup. Both those models are easily capable of the BMFA 'B' schedule which I personally think is a good check against a second model. All that said, without knowing it, the Seagull model you linked appears to tick most of the same boxes and so given it is pretty cheap might be worth a shot. Just my opinion on retr

Good news! I think one of the artists who works with me *might* with a bit more persuasion be willing to paint the pilot for me One of the many advantages of working at a games company! However, they also pointed me at this site which looks excellent if you ever need acrylics or Humbrol enamels in the full range at cheap prices and free delivery. http://www.artifolk.co.uk/index.htm Also, from a technical standpoint they recommended liquid/fluid acrylics as against the "normal" ones as these don't show brush strokes which can be a problem in figure painting in their experience. The

Your flying was looking great on the sim last night Shane. Keep up that level of practice and B will follow A in short order!!

Will join shortly

Any takers for a session 8pm or later tonight?

I'm about to embark on painting my "Albert" pilot for the Magnatilla refurb. Any recommendations of paints to use and what to fuel proof them with? Also any tips on making it "look right" without using 100 different colours (which most of the guides on Internet seem to mandate) would be gratefully received! I've got acrylics handy, but have a feeling Humbrol enamels or maybe even artists oils might be better.