Guillows B-17 Flying Fortress Conversion - Page 3 - WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight

Scratch and Kit Built Aircraft Discuss and share your scratch built or kit built aircraft as well as building techniques, methods, mediums and resources.

Guillows B-17 Flying Fortress Conversion

Old 12-30-2009, 05:41 AM
  #51  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

I tested and installed the servos. And made a control arm for the tail wheel. I ordered some parts from Heads Up RC. I really like these Y36 servo easy connectors and the B6 9G TP SG90 servos. The servos were cheap ($5.50 ) but they should be fine. Something interesting though was a HS-55 9g servo I had weighed 12g and these cheap-o servos weigh 9g.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04036.JPG
Views:	321
Size:	52.0 KB
ID:	116912   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04037.JPG
Views:	352
Size:	57.0 KB
ID:	116913   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04039.JPG
Views:	360
Size:	56.2 KB
ID:	116914   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04040.JPG
Views:	384
Size:	56.5 KB
ID:	116915   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04041.JPG
Views:	383
Size:	54.1 KB
ID:	116916  

Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04042.JPG
Views:	344
Size:	56.5 KB
ID:	116917  
park is offline  
Old 01-03-2010, 04:44 PM
  #52  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Getting things back out into my build area on the porch and decided to just fit things together and get a couple pictures as proof that the there is a planned end point to this.

Started looking at how the wiring will fit in and decided that the ESCs I had were going to be too big physically to fit into the nacelles so am dropping to 10 a ESC for each motor which should be plenty to cover current draw, but am stuck on doing any further work on that until they get here, middle of the week or so. Have plenty of other fitting and sanding details to work on until then.

Too cold to fly so may get some work done this afternoon
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF1136.jpg
Views:	493
Size:	143.7 KB
ID:	117321   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF1137.jpg
Views:	582
Size:	139.7 KB
ID:	117322   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF1138.jpg
Views:	515
Size:	127.4 KB
ID:	117323   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF1139.jpg
Views:	487
Size:	128.4 KB
ID:	117324   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF1140.jpg
Views:	568
Size:	153.8 KB
ID:	117325  

dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-03-2010, 09:52 PM
  #53  
Bill G
Super Contrubutor
 
Bill G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: West Central PA
Posts: 4,422
Default

Originally Posted by park View Post
I got an idea to run by you guys,,,,when this model is built as an RC it has a reputation of being a little heavy. What if I put fixed flaps? My gear is going to be fixed and why not fixed half flaps?
These will never land dead slow, but flaps tend to over complicate these models. The very weight of the flaps themselves eliminates a good part of the benefit. Flaps also cause more crashes than easy landings, unless they are sorted out and working perfectly. There's little info on these planes, compared with ARFs, when it comes to these mods. You can always experiment, but you're adding to the complexity.

They are also not that bad to land with some weight. My 19+oz Guillows DC3 hand launches and lands at low speeds, considering the small size and heavy sheeted fuse.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DC3_Guillows11_bl_outrunners.jpg
Views:	314
Size:	136.1 KB
ID:	117335  
Bill G is offline  
Old 01-03-2010, 11:42 PM
  #54  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Bill

Very nice DC-3. Did you use the plastic nacelles or did that kit come with them?. The B17 kit comes with a lot of plastic pieces, among them 4 large chunks of plastic to cover the nacelles. I am thinking of not using the nacelles, just doing them out of balsa and plastic iron on the same as the wings. Evan if I need to add some balsa to get a smooth curve I think it would be lighter and not too much work. I think I will try to use the cowls, trying to match that nice smooth curve would be tough and I think the motors I am using will look pretty good inside the cowls. Probably going to leave off the fake plastic enegine cyliders to improve the air flow through the motor and ESC

Park

What are you planning for the nacelles?
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-05-2010, 02:58 AM
  #55  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by dumo01 View Post
Getting things back out into my build area on the porch and decided to just fit things together and get a couple pictures as proof that the there is a planned end point to this.

Started looking at how the wiring will fit in and decided that the ESCs I had were going to be too big physically to fit into the nacelles so am dropping to 10 a ESC for each motor which should be plenty to cover current draw, but am stuck on doing any further work on that until they get here, middle of the week or so. Have plenty of other fitting and sanding details to work on until then.

Too cold to fly so may get some work done this afternoon
Looking very good! I see your way of securing the control tubing to the formers I started working on that this morning. Your hatch gives you acess to the servos, I glued mine to the spar box and of corse if they need replacing I'm in for it. My hatch idea keeps moving but now it may be the cockpit and top turnet, just enough room to put in the battery.
park is offline  
Old 01-05-2010, 03:05 AM
  #56  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by Bill G View Post
These will never land dead slow, but flaps tend to over complicate these models. The very weight of the flaps themselves eliminates a good part of the benefit. Flaps also cause more crashes than easy landings, unless they are sorted out and working perfectly. There's little info on these planes, compared with ARFs, when it comes to these mods. You can always experiment, but you're adding to the complexity.

They are also not that bad to land with some weight. My 19+oz Guillows DC3 hand launches and lands at low speeds, considering the small size and heavy sheeted fuse.
Thanks for the input about the flaps, I think you're right. Nice looking DC-3 !!
park is offline  
Old 01-05-2010, 03:08 AM
  #57  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by dumo01 View Post
Bill

Very nice DC-3. Did you use the plastic nacelles or did that kit come with them?. The B17 kit comes with a lot of plastic pieces, among them 4 large chunks of plastic to cover the nacelles. I am thinking of not using the nacelles, just doing them out of balsa and plastic iron on the same as the wings. Evan if I need to add some balsa to get a smooth curve I think it would be lighter and not too much work. I think I will try to use the cowls, trying to match that nice smooth curve would be tough and I think the motors I am using will look pretty good inside the cowls. Probably going to leave off the fake plastic enegine cyliders to improve the air flow through the motor and ESC

Park

What are you planning for the nacelles?
I thinking of going with the same motors as you, will the stock nacelles fit around them?
park is offline  
Old 01-05-2010, 03:17 AM
  #58  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

I got the stringers on from the bottom to the sides, thought that would be a good place to stop so I can install the rudder and tail wheel push rod/ cable
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04043.JPG
Views:	290
Size:	58.0 KB
ID:	117481   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04045.JPG
Views:	307
Size:	54.2 KB
ID:	117482   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04044.JPG
Views:	322
Size:	57.6 KB
ID:	117483  
park is offline  
Old 01-06-2010, 03:20 AM
  #59  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

I've installed the elevator, rudder cable and the tail wheel push rod and tubes. Now back to the stringers.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04052.JPG
Views:	314
Size:	57.4 KB
ID:	117551   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04053.JPG
Views:	335
Size:	58.6 KB
ID:	117552   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04054.JPG
Views:	321
Size:	57.6 KB
ID:	117553  
park is offline  
Old 01-06-2010, 04:08 AM
  #60  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Looks good. Spent the past couple evening sanding and doing a little reinforcement here and there, mostly were the control surface hinges will fasten in. Hope to get the shipment from Heads Up tomorrow so i can assemble and test the power and electronics systems, hunt for all the things I have missed and start to think about covering.

I think the nacelles and cowls are big enough to hold the motors etc, just thinking about trying to save a little weight and still keep the looks.

I see your grandson took back his building blocks
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 02:01 AM
  #61  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by dumo01 View Post
Looks good. Spent the past couple evening sanding and doing a little reinforcement here and there, mostly were the control surface hinges will fasten in. Hope to get the shipment from Heads Up tomorrow so i can assemble and test the power and electronics systems, hunt for all the things I have missed and start to think about covering.

I think the nacelles and cowls are big enough to hold the motors etc, just thinking about trying to save a little weight and still keep the looks.

I see your grandson took back his building blocks
I see your grandson took back his building blocks

I was wondering if someone would see that. Yep, since the model got heavier I had to get out the big guns
park is offline  
Old 01-10-2010, 02:31 AM
  #62  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default Power system problem

having a problem with the power system I am trying to lay out for this. Posted pictures and details in the power systems forum under 4 motor power system problem If anyone has an idea that would be great
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-20-2010, 02:05 PM
  #63  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

I got the fuslage stringers installed and was putting on the window frames and unless I'm missing something the plans have you putting the nose machine gun windows at the same fuslage station on both sides. The B-17G had the left side toward the front of the nose and the right in the middle. To build it to scale I will have to cut three stringers between formers B2 and B3 and also cut some of B2 and the side keel.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04076.JPG
Views:	299
Size:	58.2 KB
ID:	118619   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04075.JPG
Views:	311
Size:	57.7 KB
ID:	118620   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04074.JPG
Views:	294
Size:	57.9 KB
ID:	118621  
park is offline  
Old 01-20-2010, 02:23 PM
  #64  
texasclouds
Super Contributor
 
texasclouds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,375
Default

lookin good. how long is that fuselage? this must be bigger than i had imagined. looks to take up the table width.
texasclouds is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 12:01 AM
  #65  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Originally Posted by park View Post
I got the fuslage stringers installed and was putting on the window frames and unless I'm missing something the plans have you putting the nose machine gun windows at the same fuslage station on both sides. The B-17G had the left side toward the front of the nose and the right in the middle. To build it to scale I will have to cut three stringers between formers B2 and B3 and also cut some of B2 and the side keel.


Shoot you are right. Guillow did not do quite as good a job there as they might have. The pictures I was able to find comparing the left and right nose do show a stagger which since I thought about it I had heard of; the fuse was not wide enough to allow the guns to be placed back to back was what I heard. it looks to me though that the stagger is not so much as not need to place the right side gun port behind bulkhead B2. It looks more like the gun ports are placed with the left gun port at the front of the space allowed between B1 and B2 and the right port is at the back of the space

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-17_Flying_Fortress

Scroll about half way down, there are pictures showing the left and right front of a G.

The plastic pieces Guillow's included for the ports are still not quite accurate to allow that, at first glance they appear to be dead even. Maybe there is a way to trim them to allow the offset, will have to look at that for a while. If not I will probably just allow a little artistic license on mine.

Good to hear from the wilds of Texas, was going to post tonight and see how you were doing on it. I started covering mine on Sunday. have the tail feathers done, starting on the wings next, than the fuse. Figured I would start by doing the easiest, least observable parts first to get a little more experience before doing the bigger pieces that will show more. Seems to have worked out, the vertical stab is the last piece I did, actually looks pretty good. Sounds like you are moving along pretty well also.
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 12:03 AM
  #66  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Originally Posted by texasclouds View Post
lookin good. how long is that fuselage? this must be bigger than i had imagined. looks to take up the table width.

Don't have the plans here in front of me but I think the wingspan is around 45 inches, the fuselage is around 41 or 42 I think. Not huge but big enough to make a satisfying thump if I crash it
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 04:52 AM
  #67  
Legacy
Crash Test Dummy
 
Legacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tallahassee, Flordia
Posts: 57
Default

Been looking at doing this kit for a while. I just ordered one and am interested in your thoughts about doing retracts. Have yall done anything to lighten the airframe or are you keeping it pretty much stock. I have to admit I have a hard time not modifying even RTFs so I know I wont be able to leave this kit stock. Looking forward to her arrival in the mail. Great job on the builds. Here is a video I found of a flying conversion, looks like a pretty fast landing is in order.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnsuRs4lEmE[/media]
Legacy is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 12:18 PM
  #68  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Originally Posted by Legacy View Post
Been looking at doing this kit for a while. I just ordered one and am interested in your thoughts about doing retracts. Have yall done anything to lighten the airframe or are you keeping it pretty much stock. I have to admit I have a hard time not modifying even RTFs so I know I wont be able to leave this kit stock. Looking forward to her arrival in the mail. Great job on the builds. Here is a video I found of a flying conversion, looks like a pretty fast landing is in order.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnsuRs4lEmE[/media]
Been a fun build, I am keeping mine pretty much stock am expecting it not to be a floater, hope I do not regret that but maybe if I were to do it again sometime in the future I might spend more time looking for way to lighten it, if only using different wood. My kit is pretty old ( 15 years or so) so it might be that the stock in yours is better, but the reaction seems to be that you can get a good start by looking for new stock to build with. The plane in the video does seem to come in pretty fast, but I guess he also had the weight of the camera added in there so that did not help. Retracts would be sweet, not much space for extra equipment in the wing, maybe the new ones that just came out from Horizon might work well to keep the weight and space needed down?
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 02:09 PM
  #69  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by park View Post
I got the fuslage stringers installed and was putting on the window frames and unless I'm missing something the plans have you putting the nose machine gun windows at the same fuslage station on both sides. The B-17G had the left side toward the front of the nose and the right in the middle. To build it to scale I will have to cut three stringers between formers B2 and B3 and also cut some of B2 and the side keel.
Also the waist gunner stations are not staggered either (on early models they were not), I noticed that last month but I'm leaving those as is. You're right, the purpose of staggered gun positions both in the nose and the waist was to keep equipment or personal from getting in each others way. It's my understanding that the radio operator on some B-17's did not have much to do so they went up to the nose and manned one or both of the side nose guns.
park is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 02:10 PM
  #70  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by texasclouds View Post
lookin good. how long is that fuselage? this must be bigger than i had imagined. looks to take up the table width.
34",,,,,,,,,,,,,Your Cub's looking good!
park is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 02:30 PM
  #71  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by dumo01 View Post
Shoot you are right. Guillow did not do quite as good a job there as they might have. The pictures I was able to find comparing the left and right nose do show a stagger which since I thought about it I had heard of; the fuse was not wide enough to allow the guns to be placed back to back was what I heard. it looks to me though that the stagger is not so much as not need to place the right side gun port behind bulkhead B2. It looks more like the gun ports are placed with the left gun port at the front of the space allowed between B1 and B2 and the right port is at the back of the space

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-17_Flying_Fortress

Scroll about half way down, there are pictures showing the left and right front of a G.

The plastic pieces Guillow's included for the ports are still not quite accurate to allow that, at first glance they appear to be dead even. Maybe there is a way to trim them to allow the offset, will have to look at that for a while. If not I will probably just allow a little artistic license on mine.

Good to hear from the wilds of Texas, was going to post tonight and see how you were doing on it. I started covering mine on Sunday. have the tail feathers done, starting on the wings next, than the fuse. Figured I would start by doing the easiest, least observable parts first to get a little more experience before doing the bigger pieces that will show more. Seems to have worked out, the vertical stab is the last piece I did, actually looks pretty good. Sounds like you are moving along pretty well also.
Yeah, I havn't been able to touch the B-17 in a while. That how my build is going to go, hot and cold.
park is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 02:42 PM
  #72  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by Legacy View Post
Been looking at doing this kit for a while. I just ordered one and am interested in your thoughts about doing retracts. Have yall done anything to lighten the airframe or are you keeping it pretty much stock. I have to admit I have a hard time not modifying even RTFs so I know I wont be able to leave this kit stock. Looking forward to her arrival in the mail. Great job on the builds. Here is a video I found of a flying conversion, looks like a pretty fast landing is in order.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnsuRs4lEmE[/media]
I'm using the stock wood. I thought about leaving some parts off or trimming some of them down but decided not too, after all a B-17 needs to be built like a "flying fortress"!

I am going to try and save most of my weight with short flight times. The first batt I'm going to test is a ThunderPower 1320Mah 2C 13S that weighs 2.5 oz. I plan on flying just a few minutes. If I need a long flight time fix I'll get out my Apprentice that is able to stay up for 30 minutes!

My biggest concern is the location of the C.G. I can not find that info.
park is offline  
Old 01-21-2010, 02:46 PM
  #73  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

BTW, that guy with the camera in the turret did a great job! It's hard enough to find room for the required equipment.
park is offline  
Old 01-22-2010, 01:31 AM
  #74  
dumo01
dumo01
 
dumo01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 775
Default

Originally Posted by park View Post
I'm using the stock wood. I thought about leaving some parts off or trimming some of them down but decided not too, after all a B-17 needs to be built like a "flying fortress"!

I am going to try and save most of my weight with short flight times. The first batt I'm going to test is a ThunderPower 1320Mah 2C 13S that weighs 2.5 oz. I plan on flying just a few minutes. If I need a long flight time fix I'll get out my Apprentice that is able to stay up for 30 minutes!

My biggest concern is the location of the C.G. I can not find that info.

Take a look at Plan A near the top of the sheet. The side view of the fuse shows a " balance point " at B6 so I am taking that as the CG. Looks kind of far forward to me, I had always heard the the CG typically was about 1/3 of the way back from the leading edge and this looks more like 1/4 but I guess its a place to start. That may account somewhat for the tail heavy reputation this model has. That should though I think keep the motors in front of the CG. Will be interesting. I am planning on going with a bigger battery, thinking a 3S, 1800 to 2200 maH. I am planning the battery to be as far in the nose as I can get it. I think it will need the weight up front to balance, and if it will need the weight may as well be useful weight.

I weighed my airframe before I started to cover it. With the wiring in the wings for the power and aileron servos in wing and no motors or battery it was about 12 ounces as best I could judge. May have to break down at some point and buy a better scale, but overall I thought that was OK. Will see how much the covering adds.

The turret was very cool. I assume it was in place of the top gun turret?
dumo01 is offline  
Old 01-22-2010, 03:59 AM
  #75  
park
Clear !
Thread Starter
 
park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 652
Default

Originally Posted by dumo01 View Post
Take a look at Plan A near the top of the sheet. The side view of the fuse shows a " balance point " at B6 so I am taking that as the CG. Looks kind of far forward to me, I had always heard the the CG typically was about 1/3 of the way back from the leading edge and this looks more like 1/4 but I guess its a place to start. That may account somewhat for the tail heavy reputation this model has. That should though I think keep the motors in front of the CG. Will be interesting. I am planning on going with a bigger battery, thinking a 3S, 1800 to 2200 maH. I am planning the battery to be as far in the nose as I can get it. I think it will need the weight up front to balance, and if it will need the weight may as well be useful weight.

I weighed my airframe before I started to cover it. With the wiring in the wings for the power and aileron servos in wing and no motors or battery it was about 12 ounces as best I could judge. May have to break down at some point and buy a better scale, but overall I thought that was OK. Will see how much the covering adds.

The turret was very cool. I assume it was in place of the top gun turret?
Yes, it looks like the camera was mounted in the top turret , amazing.

Thanks for the C.G. info, I found it on the plans!

I own Gillows an apology, on plan G there are provisions for cheek and waist gun off set mods.
park is offline  

Quick Reply: Guillows B-17 Flying Fortress Conversion


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.11169 seconds with 33 queries