Lockheed P38 ARF

Lockheed P38 Lightning

Wingspan 90"
Wing Area 1085 Squ ins
Fuselage Length 67"
Power 2 x 60 size 4 stroke
Weight 5.5Kg

1. 4/04/13: I swapped my Ugly Stick Float Plane for this kit. It is ARF and only semi scale but is a decent size and could be worth upgrading it to a full scale model. To do that will require considerable modification and I will build it as the straight ARF first and see how it goes.

2. i'm spending a bit of time looking over the kit and checking for any weaknesses. So far the tailplane is a bit suspect and the hinges supplied for all surfaces are a complete bloody waste of time. I need to replace those hinges and find some decent servos. In the meantime I'll begin to prepare the model for assembly. There is a lot of trimming of the plastic bits required and I'll do that first.

3. I have several references on the P38 and I'm going to do a bit more research on the internet. I'm particularly interested in the P38s that were used by the RAAF as photo recon aircraft. As far as I know there were only 3 taken on charge.

4. 6/04/13. Started the build today and it's a typical early Chinese ARF - nothing fits exactly and there is poor quality in some of the components provided. The basic build isn't to bad but once again some things don't quite fit - biggest example - the wing joiners are not lined up and the wing - when the two halves are pushed together has about a 3/8" gap at the trailing edge. I'm also finding the plastic bits are poor quality - they crack very easily and vary wildly in thickness through out. Other complaint - why did they choose a bloody Clark Y airfoil for a fully aerobatic WWII Fighter Plane?

5. An inexperienced builder would be hard pressed to put this kit together and although its supposed to be ARF a lot of work will be required to get it to perform satisfactorily. The more I progress in assembling the model the more errors I am finding. Besides the previously mentioned wing joiner problem most of the dowels and corresponding location holes are up to half a diameter out in alignment. The instructions are typical Chinese - they don't give much information and seem to assume that the builder is able to work it out for themselves.

6. Fine if you are an experienced builder but I'd say some one with limited experience could not assemble this model satisfactorily without a lot of help from some one with a lot more experience. The problem is that this is a large model and failure to correctly set it up could result in disaster and possible injury to the builder or some one else.

7. 10/04/13. I'm continuing to assemble the model and, as I expected there are some problems that I've encountered during that process. One that I'm definately not impressed by is the main and auxilary wing joiners. In the first case they do not align the wings correctly - there is a diffence of just over one degree in the wing incidence of the two panels. The other problem is that the two panels do not align - when the leading edges meet there is still a gap of some 3/8th of an inch at the trailing edge. This is probably due to the fact that the outer tubes - those fixed in the wing - are made of thin cardboard tubes!


This is the gap at the trailing edge - 3/8th of an inch.


And the bloody rear joining tube - outer tube is 7/8th of an inch to short for the joining tube to go all the way into place.

8. Quite frankly this kit leaves a lot to be desired. The accuracy of fitment is practically non existant and quality control at the factory must have been a process yet to be implimented. Because of the size of the model assembly at the flying field will be, except in very rare circumstances, mandatory. This brings me to the next problem. The tailplane, elevators, rudders and fins are permanently attached to the booms. Therefore the model must be transported in two or possibly three separate components.

Component one is the tailplane, booms etc with two lumping great weights of engines permanently hanging off the front of the booms. The integrety of this assembly relies on the strength of a rather flimsy tailplane to hold it all together. It would be very easy to have this component collapse into a heap if the tailplane is twisted or other wise breaks. My solution is to make a rigid brace to clamp across the front of the booms where the wings affix when I'm transporting the model. Hopefully this will provide enough rigidity in the structure to minimise transportation breakages.

The second and/or third components are the wings and pilot's nacelle. To make this a single component depends on whether or not you can transport a 90 inch wing in one piece! If you can't fit a wing that size into your vehicle in one piece you end up with three seperate bits. Two wing halves and the Pilot's nacelle. This restriction introduces it's own nightmares. My inspection suggests that little if any thought was given to the need to repeatedly assemble and break down the bits. The wing tubes rest in cardboard outers and the alignment is not accurate at all. Repeated assembly and disassembly will very soon result in all sorts of slop and missalignment. On top of this the supplied plastic bolts to bolt everything together soon stretch and bend. I am fortunate in that I have a vehicle that I can fit the wing into in one piece and I have permanently assembled the two wing halves and the pilot 's nacelle. Even so a very careful check that everything is aligned after assembly at the field is vital.

could you PM me with the kit makers name?

now then, the flat bottom wing, nothing wrong with that, some of the best flying warbirds on the circuit are from Meinster plans, all are flat bottomed, they are recognised as being the better flying ones out there,

the tube, i doubt very much they are cardboard, more likley phenolic, this stuff looks like cardboard, but is much tougher,

the hinges, i suspect these are cyno hinges, furry type, try soaking one in cyno, and breaking it, done properly, cyno hinges, even for a model of this size, are adequate, but, i suspect you, like me, are an old school type, so, robarts or kavan leaf and pin hinges it will be,

assemble, for me, it would have been plug in outers, leaving the wheels down, to roll it into the estate car,

good point about the incidence angles of the assembly, i have found when assembling ARTF models, that at least 3 incidence meteres are needed, 2 on the wings, and 1 on the tailplane, with the tailplane set at 0,

plastic parts brittle? put them in boiling water brefore you cut them,

Sounds like you are up against it with an early kit, best of luck!!! dont forget, please let me know the maker

I'm with Alan on this one, the Clark Y section when set at zero incidence is quite aerobatic though I doubt that it will be (at zero) with this model but I'm sure that you will be pleasantly surprised.

As for the hinges, they are very easy to use but be sure that the slots are not too loose and flood them with cyano whilst assembled and you should have no bother.

As for the other parts I cannot say but I know that the fixtures and fittings can leave something to be desired.

looks an interesting project squire nitro.
rather you than me.

alan cantwell wrote: could you PM me with the kit makers name?

now then, the flat bottom wing, nothing wrong with that, some of the best flying warbirds on the circuit are from Meinster plans, all are flat bottomed, they are recognised as being the better flying ones out there,

the tube, i doubt very much they are cardboard, more likley phenolic, this stuff looks like cardboard, but is much tougher,

the hinges, i suspect these are cyno hinges, furry type, try soaking one in cyno, and breaking it, done properly, cyno hinges, even for a model of this size, are adequate, but, i suspect you, like me, are an old school type, so, robarts or kavan leaf and pin hinges it will be,

assemble, for me, it would have been plug in outers, leaving the wheels down, to roll it into the estate car,

good point about the incidence angles of the assembly, i have found when assembling ARTF models, that at least 3 incidence meteres are needed, 2 on the wings, and 1 on the tailplane, with the tailplane set at 0,

plastic parts brittle? put them in boiling water brefore you cut them,

Sounds like you are up against it with an early kit, best of luck!!! don't forget, please let me know the maker

G'Day Alan - in answer to your questions: -

1. I haven't got a clue who the kit maker is. There is no indication on the box or the "instruction" manual. The kit is a few years old and was apparently sourced from a LHS which of course has now gone out of business.

2. Sorry mate - I know the difference between phenolic and cardboard and these are definitely cardboard - thin soft cardboard at that!

3. Yes you are right about the hinges and right about me being old school but I'm using Dubro pinned hinges - they are easier to find - and cheaper- than the other brands down here.

4. Unfortunately the wings are two halves - join in the centre right undernieth the cockpit nacelle. It would be a major nightmare to modify them so there are three pieces - that is so you could take the outer panels off and slide the complete centre section into a vehicle. Oh - and it's a fixed undercarriage although if I rebuild the thing to scale I'll fit retracts.

5. I'm setting the model up with incidence meters on all horizontal flying surfaces - when I get the bloody thing under control and reasonably straight.

6. I tried boiling water - I think the plastic is made from recycled shitty nappies!

7. Yes it appears to be an early kit.

8. On the subject of flat bottom airfoils I agree BUT it's not scale! OK - I'm a bloody fanatic and a pain in the arse, AND it's nitro.

This kit has taught me one important lesson - NEVER buy a bloody ARF kit made in China. Besides the previously reported litany of problems with this kit I've also found the following: -

1. The booms, when bolted to the wings provide FOUR degrees of left thrust on the starboard engine and SEVEN degrees of left thrust on the port !!!!

2. In addition the port engine has 1.5 degrees of UP thrust and the starboard NINE degrees of DOWN thrust.

3. The provided hinge mounting slots for the flaps result in both flaps being at least half an inch to high. What do they think they are?? - bloody turbulators?? - if so wrong position fellas.

4. The alignment of the provided hinge mounting slots for the ailerons is so bloody bad the ailerons bind and refuse to move! AAAAAAAAAAAAARGH !!!!!

5. the elevator is a flimsy piece of junk and has to be totally replaced. Mutter, bloody Mutter.

6. The provided and pre installed wire in plastic tube control push rods are crap and have to be totally replaced.

7. the provided pushrod for the nose wheel steering is a piece of thin wire about 16 inches long and has no support along it's entire length. With the nose wheel on the ground there is NO controlled movement of the steering. The bloody wire bends, twists and then SNAPPED !!!

8. Out of the mountings plates provided for the nine servos to be mounted in the wing or booms - only one was the right size. The other eight were oversize !!! SNARL.

What surprises me is that there are several reviews on the internet on what seems to be the same kit . The reviews praise the kit as an excellent model. Yeah - right! These reviews allegedly originate from the US. Either they get a better quality kit or what I have is a ripoff of the kit they get OR some one is getting paid to write a lot of bullshit. the only other explanation is that - as my kit seems to be an early production some one in China finally found out there is such a thing as quality control.

I've also learnt that it's not a good idea to sell a quality plan and decide to build an ARF version to save time and money. I've found out that "ALMOST READY TO FLY" is almost as big a lie as the words - "I love you". If some poor bastard without extensive building experience and a bloody minded attitude bought this kit it would end up in the bin - not the bloody sky !!

Sooooooo reading your last post, are we to assume you are less than pleased with the kit ???

Garry

Garry Pollard wrote: Sooooooo reading your last post, are we to assume you are less than pleased with the kit ???

Garry

Well Gasser, I suppose it could be worse - the bloody thing might have been driven by hair dryers. AAAARGHH the bloody smileys aren't working

I have assembles several kits from China and none of them were that bad.

Grumpy42 wrote:

Garry Pollard wrote: Sooooooo reading your last post, are we to assume you are less than pleased with the kit ???

Garry

Well Gasser, I suppose it could be worse - the bloody thing might have been driven by hair dryers. AAAARGHH the bloody smileys aren't working

Well Mick , every cloud has a silver lining
ps Similies only work for electric men . The Dark Wizard strikes again

Gasser

Well they still work for me.

LONG LIVE THE ENGINE.

Dont tar all chinese artf products with the same brush, youve bought a pup, i have an interest in this model, because the only 2 models i know of this size are the nitro models one, and the ESM/YT one, but i think the YT one is shorter in span than 90" the YT ones are generally well in alignment, indeed, thre P38 flys great, but they are not for beginners, both in flying, and build, there are many others that are great to build and fly, just dont put them in the same context as this piece of crap,