Which Warbird??

Hi,
I currently fly a Wot 4 powered by an Irvine 53 and i am building a sig four star powered by a OS 65 la.
I am now considering what to get next i much prefer building from a kit.
What would model would be a good stepping stone to flying a 70"-80" warbird?
Is the best way to learn to fly a warbird to actually buy one and fly it under guidance?

I really want a Stuka but have come across some problems.
The BH one looks awesome but its ARTF and was hoping for a long term project Only passed my A test 2 weeks ago so want to have the skill to fly it!!!!
Complete a pac kits do one but reading various peoples opinions they are not held in high regard.
lastly Belair kits to a partial kit of the ziroli plan but adding all the extras on Retracts cowel etc. its very pricey.

Cheers Dean

I can't speak for any kits but I did have an 80 inch Mick Reeves Hurricane that was quite easy to fly.
Spitfires have a bit of a reputation for being harder to fly but I don't know how true this is.
The Mustang is always a favourite but they're very common.

Our Gallery should have a few pictures of warbirds from the BMFA nationals, why not have a look there for some ideas?

Pol.

Buy a low wing trainer like B.H. Speed Air, Travel Air, etc depending on which you prefer re u/c trike or tail dragger. Practice with one of these, until you are able to fly it without having kittens. Then buy your warbird, as large as possible, as small ones are more difficult to fly

Garry

I'm with Eric & Gary. Your first warbird needs to be big and preferably slow and stable. I'd like to point out that trainers and the like are also warbirds so what about a Tiger Moth or a Texan/Harvard in appropriate colour scheme? Example attached is a Texan but could be finished as a Harvard - and there are HEAPS of alternative colour/markings schemes.

Thanks for the advice,
I am building a low wing tail dragger at the minute. I looked at the BH super air thought it was a really good buy and i was very impressed when i saw your speed air flying Garry. the four star i am building looks very simular to it. picked it purely because i wanted to have a go at building.

Thanks Grumpy that Texan looks awesome, is it kit or ARTF, never thought about one of these before.

What my thoughts are, is to get a kit that i would build slowly over a couple of years even putting it to one side for other projects. good idea? or am i being an over eager newbie?

Thanks Dean

I totally agree with your last paragraph Dean. With this hobby, like most things in life,you dont have to do it at 100 mph. Take your time, and in the meantime go flying as much as you can, and dont be scared of flying in windy conditions. If you cant fly in the wind in this country, dont waste your time, take up another hobby. I draw the line at about 15 to 18 mph, especially if gusty. There is no substitute for stick time. Make haste slowly !!!!.

Garry

Thanks for the compliment Dean - BUT - ARF??? Aaaarrgh! Model was originally built from a kit - then it hung from the roof of a hobby shop for ten years. I bought it complete with a wasps nest in the rectract bay. Pulled it apart and rebuilt it from the ground up - new motor - new servos and a complete refinish - then the retracts hung up - belly landing on rough ground - Model is now being refinished (again) as a RNZAF Harvard. What was it some one said about Sod's Law????

Dean M wrote:
I really want a Stuka but have come across some problems.

Complete a pac kits do one but reading various peoples opinions they are not held in high regard.

Cheers Dean

Must admit I love the looks of the Stuka.
What are the complaints about the "Complete a Pac" version?

If the complaints are about it not being scale then fair enough.
If they are about construction then I wouldn't worry too much.
You have some expert builders here that will give their advice about anything you should change providing you ask them before you glue it together.
For example ... if a bulkhead or firewall looks weak, they'll suggest you reinforce it as soon as they see the picture .... If it's going to be a long term project then there's no problem.

Pol.

The complete a pac version ticks all the boxes its one i could build over a good couple of years and its fairly big.
But, i carried out a search on google and the same things keep coming up that they use old building techniques and haven't changed in 15 odd years making them very heavy and so not flying that great.
Would it be possible/easy to modify it making lighter?

Dean

Not quite sure what they mean by 15 yr old building methods, but would think they are using thick heavy ply without lightening holes etc. Any kit can be made lighter if you know what you are doing, and dont weaken the structure. Can you elaborate on the 15 yr old building methods Dean?
Any chance of a link ??
Garry

Hi Garry,
This is one of the threads that came up when i done a search on google www.rcmf.co.uk/4um/index.php?topic=78617.0
The 2nd, 3rd and 4th posts in perticular.

I will be going ic. If it is built with a lot of ply could it be substituted for balsa?

Dean

As bloop says, you can if it is not loadbearing. The ARTF kits use liteply, which is much lighter, If you went the speed air route, you would see how they do it, and where. Be carefull not to weaken the structure though, as that is easy to do when you substitute. However , take note of what bloop says as he is our resedent build expert, and i am NOT kidding

Garry

well after a lot of thought and advice i have decided to build a stuka from John Carpenters plan its a nice size at 78" and i'm planning on it being at least a 2 year build so by then hopefully i will have the skill to fly it.
Sounds like i could be asking a lot of questions that Blooper will be able to use his building knowledge to answer.
I will do a build blog on here of it.

Dean

Good choice Dean.

Please do a build blog , cant get enough of them and dont be afraid to as questions.

Garry