[RCSE] Epoxy Question Again

[ScrollSander]

Gentlemen:

I have been watching the exchange regarding this question and I agree with
Chuck about re-wetting the cups.  In general, the densities of the catalyst
and hardeners are close enough to consider them equal for the weighing
measurements.  If you weigh the parts in separate cups before you mix them
together, the remaining coat of resin in the cup from which it is poured can
throw off the mix ratio, especially in smaller amounts.  Often I will pour
the combined mix between mixing cups to ensure the ratio still remains the
same.  Personally, I  agree with those who express the problem with partial
pump strokes, and I have seen the problem when they are not correct.  A
postal scale works well, and is great for measuring other items, like parts,
small planes etc.  I would recommend that you get a scale with a plug in
power supply as the use of 9V batteries can give problems if the scale
current drain is high.Most scales will go to 60+ oz, which is nearly 2
kg, and represents nearly 2 liters (or 2 quarts) of epoxy.  At this amount
of epoxy the accuracy is close regardless of wetting.

I use a postal scale for my micro HLG wings and fuses, with epoxy weights
bewteen 15 and 25 grams total, and it works well.

Chris

http://www.scrollsander.com

>I have used West Systems for years with the pumps, but I've always been
>concerned about making 'partial stroke' batches. Weighing out the
components
>is the way to go, but does anyone know if the specific gravity for the
>components are equal? That would make the 5 to 1 math easier.
>
>Martin Brungard
>Tallahassee, FL
>
>"Meandering to a different drummer"
>
>
>__
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] Gram Scale

[philip pearson]

Cole-Palmer Instrument Company sells many types of scales.  I prefer the
mechanical Ohaus for its dependability and weight range.

Phil Pearson
Seattle

www.colepalmer.com

Ohaus mechanical triple beam  LM-01012-00
Attachment weight 500 gm  LM-01014
Attachment weight 1000 gm  LM-01016

Ohaus portable digital 400gm  LM-11010-10
Acculab digital 400 gm  LM-11321-02
Cole-Palmer Economy digital 400 gm  LM-1-02


-Original Message-
From: Doug Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: RCSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, February 19, 2000 8:10 AM
Subject: [RCSE] Gram Scale


-



RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] Lost Web pages

[David Whitaker]

I recently had the misfortune of having a hard drive failure.  Had to reload
most software.  Also lost all of my web pages, addresses and bookmarks.  I
can not relocate the web page for the Stratos SL sailplane and the foreign
web page featuring the Xantipa (called Le Xantipa)  Any help would be
greatly appreciated.  I am interested in any pages featuring molded
sailplanes, so if anyone wishes to contribute new additional pages that
would be welcomed

Thanks
Dave  

RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] QFI Website?

[AgentCD2]

Hi all,

Anyone know if QFI magazine has a website?

Thermals,
Eric Farmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] Soaring on windy days! (long)

[ScrollSander]

Mike Kovacs wrote:

>I have a hard time keeping the glider from stalling
>when it turns back into the wind and losing a great
>deal of altitude.  I have even reverted to watching
>the vultures fly in the wind.  I see what they are
>doing, but just can't seem to do it.  It looks as if
>they use their downwind speed to gain the altitude
>lost when they turn back into the wind.  I seem to
>have to keep my speed up on the downwind, but just
>lose too much .


Mike, this is a very good question for a new pilot, and even for us
experienced pilots to review.  There are many approaches and each pilot will
have his/her own technique.  I will give my opinions here and other will add
some with their experience.

The approach to thermalling in the wind may depend on many factors:  wind
speed, characteristics of the plane/airfoil, control surfaces with plane
responses, land characteristics ( wave production, trees etc), where you are
flying (upwind or down wind from your position), and your experience.
Blaine Beron-Rawdon has written about plane flying speeds in windy
conditions, as perhaps many others.

I view the plane circling in the wind.  The plane looks like it is flying
faster downwind versus upwind because we use ground based objects as a
reference.  Going upwind, the speed we observe is the plane's flying speed
minus the windspeed.  Going downwind the plane's speed is the flying speed
plus the wind speed.  Often times, we think that we need to slow down the
plane going downwind in order to reduce the sink rate.  However, we often
have to give down elevator to speed up in order to get the surfaces of the
plane working better to get it to turn.  When we turn back into the wind the
plane is often going faster than it needs to go to remain in level flight
going upwind, hence the plane balloons up and we feed in down elevator.  We
can take advantage of this later.  This is a short explanation but is
sufficient.


In practice, we can fly either in circles, or we can fly in an S pattern,
always turning upwind.  The latter flying is like a flying on the slope and
allows you to never really gain speed or loose control.  While the addition
of ballast helps with penetration, you can add it an still have problems.
The main problem I found was that in windy condition we do not have as much
down elevator as we really need.  For years, I used to fly in the wind by
just adding an oz of lead to the nose, to move the CG further forward.  My
controls were better, and by not adding ballast you still have a plane that
flys like it always does.

Anyway, if you fly the S pattern you have to allow for downwind drift of the
thermal and as your plane goes crosswind you let it drift downwind through
the center of the thermal.  When you exit the thermal you will be downwind
of its center.  When youthen turn upwind you are slightly ahead of the
center yet outside of it.  Then you repeat the process you go crosswind,
drift through the center of the thermal.  You go on with this.  The
advantage of this pattern is that you are nearly always in control of the
plane and its speed.

You can fly circles, and it this case you have to concentrate on drifting
downwind with the thermal.  Sometimes, if the thermal is big enough, fly in
the thermal.  In this case, the thermal as a whole is traveling/drifting
downwind, but you see the air inside the thermal bubble.  It is alot like
the old question of birds flying in a Boxcar.  While you are in the thermal,
the air you are flying in is the thermals air not the exterior air.  Really
a closed system.

If you are trying to fly in a small thermal in the wind, you will be
entering and exiting the thermal and the air around it. In these cases you
need to have either good control surface responses, or be able to "lead" you
ship anticipating what it will be doing.  If you fly in this pattern, you
can be going upwind.  Your plane will balloon up, depending on its speed and
the rising air of the thermal.  As it balloons up you can either give down
elevator or turn the ship.  If you give it down elevator the plane will be
upwind of the thermal and you have to then allow the plane to fly more
downwind on the downwind leg before you turn it upwind to get back into the
thermal.  If you turn yo convert the energy of balloning up into altitude,
at the expnese of flying speed.  As you reach to top of the ballooning path
and turn downwind in the circle, you have to add some down elevator to keep
your speed up so that your control surfaces remain effective.  If they are
not effective you will flounder downwind with the wind and end up downwind
of the thermal.  You will then have to add down elevator to regain speed for
the turn, or after the turn you will need to add down elevator in order to
penetrate back up into the thermal.  Ideally you can time the downwind leg
and the balloon such that you stay in the thermal.  That is the trick.  I
add noseweight to my plane because Ihave found that adding noseweight keeps
me in 

Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.

[Aerofoam]

West epoxy is good stuff, but highly overated in my opinion and
the mixing ratio is a pain.
My favorite is System Three, it has a 2 parts resin to 1 part hardener
ratio and 3 different hardeners.
I have also been using epoxy from CMI (1-800-522-2599)
I use the slow B-27 resin with A-40 hardener. It is good stuff
and only costs about $15.00 for a 2 quart mix. The bst part is the 1 to 1
ratio. The downfall is that it takes longer to reach full hardness.
You cant easily sand it for a day or 2 if the temps are low and
it takes a week or 2 to reach full hardness unless you cook it.
(most epoxies do this)
They do have faster hardeners too, but in AZ I haven't found a need for
them!

 Mark Mech
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.aerofoam.com

- Original Message -
From: "Rodger Hamer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2000 6:14 AM
Subject: Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.


>
> Can somebody give me a website for West Systems epoxy? Is there a way to
use
> good epoxy without buying huge quantities if one is just getting into this



RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] Spray Varnish

[Patricia and David Stack]

All;

Came across Varathane (I think) water-soluble varnish in a spray can (both semi-gloss 
and high gloss versions).  Has anyone tried this on their wood-sheeted wings instead 
of wiping/brushing on the traditional liquid version? Seems like it would be possible 
to get a lighter coat; or am I missing something?

Thanks for your collective wisdom.

David Stack
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] Gram Scale

[Ben Diss]

One of the problems of digital (electronic) gram scales is that they are
prone to interference.  On mine, if I use a cordless phone near it, it
whigs out.

-B

Doug Turner wrote:
> 
> While on the note of weighing epoxy, I have been shopping recently for a
> gram scale and would like some recommendations of what kind to get.  Any
> suggestions would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Doug
> 
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
>"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.

[philip pearson]

David you make a good point... perhaps you could check my math.  West System
pumps are available in sets only, as I understand, one for resin and one for
hardener @ $8.30.  Since I use two hardeners and one pump failed in the
middle of a lay-up...  I used four sets for a total of $33.20.  We could
discuss the loss of the wing...  Also I have a friend that had a pump break
in half during a lay-up, that was messy.  West System is only one resin, I
use four different resins for different purposes.  I haven't mentioned the
measured inaccuracies of the pumps yet have I?  You need a scale for that.
Perhaps you need to build a few more wings to find out what can go wrong...

Phil Pearson
Seattle

-Original Message-
From: David L. Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: RCSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Saturday, February 19, 2000 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.


>Reviewing my own experience the money spent on
>pumps would be better spent on a good scale that weighs at least 400 grams
>at 0.1 gram accuracy and has a tare function.

Yeah but pumps cost only a few bucks each but the scale you describe costs
>$100, and for doing wings, where several 1oz batches have to be prepared,
pumps are far easier and faster to use. To use a squeeze bottle in the
middle of a layup, don't you have to either get the squeeze bottle covered
with resin (yecchh) or put on a new pair of gloves? A wrist or forearm
(presumably not dripping with resin) can be used to dispense resin from a
pump, thus saving $$ you would spend on extra gloves---this will pay for
the pumps before you know it :-).

David
Berkeley CA USA
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] Looking for Foamie Warbird

[Ptmccleave]

Hi Gang,

I am looking to buy a foamie warbird for the upcoming festivities at the MWSC 
at Lake Wilson Kansas.  My question is as follows, if you could only have one 
warbird for both combat and foamie warbird racing which one would it be?  
Also, if anyone has a foamie they are looking to sell that is still solidly 
airworthy please let me know.

See Ya,

Pat McCleave
Wichita, KS
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] Delta airfoil, QFI Website

[Bill & Bunny Kuhlman]

Eric,

The EH airfoils do well on deltas if you use a small amount of up 
trim to make the pitching moment slightly more positive. The up trim 
will be negligible when flying at high speed, but more substantial at 
slower speeds. Inverted flight will not be a problem with an EH 
section.

Any of the EH series should work well for you. Pick the camber you'll 
need based on the design lift coefficient, and the thickness based on 
structural considerations. You can find the EH sections at 
.

Once you've found the MAC, use a static margin of about 7.5% to 
start. This setting will force you to use more up trim than will be 
required once you have the CG moved to its proper location. You'll 
probably find that you'll like a static margin of around 5% once the 
'ship is trimmed out.

For a good MAC and CG location, plug your planform into the Panknin 
formula. This can be done with a scientific calculator using the 
formula at .

If you have any further questions, please ask!

>Anyone out there have an airfoil suitable for a small delta flying wing?  Any
>CG (in relation to MAC) recommendations?

Try . However, Traplet is once again redesigning 
their web site, and so the information regarding QFI may not be 
readily accessible.

>Anyone know if QFI magazine has a website?

B^2B2Streamlines
Bill & Bunny Kuhlman  'specialty books for aircraft modelers'
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.halcyon.com/bsquared/
P.O Box 975 P.O. Box 976
Olalla WA 98359-0975Olalla WA 98359-0976
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.

[Jill and Rick Brown]

philip pearson wrote:
 Also I have a friend that had a pump break
> in half during a lay-up, that was messy.

You guys must be some ham fisted bruts. Slow and easy on the pumps. Just
like a good woman. Everything will go smooth...  

  I haven't mentioned the
> measured inaccuracies of the pumps yet have I?  You need a scale for that.

I have a gram scale (0.1 gram inc's.) and measure just about every batch
that I have dispensed from the quart size pumps, just to verify the mix.
All have been within about 2 tenths of a gram of each other.

> Perhaps you need to build a few more wings to find out what can go wrong...

I know of a few guys from the Carlisle, PA area (BAR/CSS Club) that have
laid up a few HUNDRED (read 200-300) handlaunch wings over the past 2
years and have heard no bad reports about the West System pumps in
question.

These pumps are accurate, simple and hassle free, I think I'll keep
using mine..
> 
> Phil Pearson
> Seattle
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: David L. Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: RCSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Saturday, February 19, 2000 8:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.
> 
> >Reviewing my own experience the money spent on
> >pumps would be better spent on a good scale that weighs at least 400 grams
> >at 0.1 gram accuracy and has a tare function.
> 
> Yeah but pumps cost only a few bucks each but the scale you describe costs
> >$100, and for doing wings, where several 1oz batches have to be prepared,
> pumps are far easier and faster to use. To use a squeeze bottle in the
> middle of a layup, don't you have to either get the squeeze bottle covered
> with resin (yecchh) or put on a new pair of gloves? A wrist or forearm
> (presumably not dripping with resin) can be used to dispense resin from a
> pump, thus saving $$ you would spend on extra gloves---this will pay for
> the pumps before you know it :-).
> 
> David
> Berkeley CA USA
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and
> "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
>"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] West System Epoxy Question.

[David L. Stone]

> I haven't mentioned the
>measured inaccuracies of the pumps yet have I? 
No, but please do! This type of pump has been around for decades and seems
to be adequate for chemists/biochemists and other applications requiring
better than the +/-10% of some resin systems, so it would be interesting to
hear how bad yours are.

>Perhaps you need to build a few more wings to find out what can go
wrong...
Mebbe, but my pumps cost less (as I recall) and have never broken (could be
how well they are treated, no?), and I do use fewer epoxies than you (like
most folks, I think).  

David
Berkeley CA USA
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [RCSE] Looking for Foamie Warbird

[Dan Borer]

> Hi Gang,
>
> I am looking to buy a foamie warbird for the upcoming
festivities at the MWSC
> at Lake Wilson Kansas.  My question is as follows, if you
could only have one
> warbird for both combat and foamie warbird racing which
one would it be?


Pat--

Check out what Patton Aircraft has to offer. All of them fly
great! Steve recently entered his 60" TA-152 in the F3F
series put on by Tom Copp and was able to finish in 12th
place. That was not a bad finish considering all of the
composite and molded ships entered. Here is the post listing
results:

>Hey guys, I am missing a few entry fees from the last race.
You know who you
are! So I will turn out the lights and you can leave the
money on the
table
Get back to me or Mike Robinson with your entry
fee...please.
Tom
 1.Doug Reel - Apex II
 2.Brian Laird - Cavazos Blitz
 3.Tom Copp - F3F Kobra
 4.Mike Robinson - F3F Blitz (the "yourapeeon" one, oops
that's European)
 5.Ray Kuntz - RG14 F3F Eagle
 6.Mark Gatti - super V
 7.Bruce Beddoe - Yukon (early Eagle/SD8000 version)
 8.Augusto Arevalo - Hades
 9.Jerry Craft - Brisk II
10.John Stossel - Ellipse 3cam
11.James Turner - Yukon (newer Fletcher version)
12.Steve Patton - Focke-wulf TA-152 60" EPP
13.Robert Adomeit - Shrike
14.Robert Cavazos - Ginsu 60"
15.Brian Buaas  - Hades
16.Nathan Woods - Renegade 60"
17.Dan Field - Psyko
18.Colin Craft - Brisk II
19.Larry Jolly - F3B Eagle
20.Rob Burr - Synergy V
21.Mike Sheridan - Sierra

Steve's Spitfire is also a fast flyer and looks great. Take
a look at his product line at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pattonacft/ .

Disclaimer: I regularly help Steve produce these fine kits
and maintain his web site, so I have an interest in
promoting his kits. However, take a look and I think you
will like what you see.

Dan

- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2000 12:06 PM
Subject: [RCSE] Looking for Foamie Warbird


> Hi Gang,
>
> I am looking to buy a foamie warbird for the upcoming
festivities at the MWSC
> at Lake Wilson Kansas.  My question is as follows, if you
could only have one
> warbird for both combat and foamie warbird racing which
one would it be?
> Also, if anyone has a foamie they are looking to sell that
is still solidly
> airworthy please let me know.
>


RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[RCSE] Attention LSF Members

[James C Deck]

I am posting this in this forum as I noticed some of the names on the
list I mention later appear from time-to-time here.
If you qualify for  a mailing of the newsletter, Shortlines, but have
not received it of late, we may have a problem with your mailing address.
Attached is a text file with a list of member names and LSF numbers that had
the last Shortlines mailed returned with an address problem.  I fixed those
that had a good forwarding address, but couldn't do anything with those on
this list.  If you think you fall into this category, check the attached
list and email me your corrected address.  Please include your LSF number.
Thanks in advance,
Jim Deck  Secretary, League of Silent Flight
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


M.MCCARTNEY   49.00 
G.TILDON  55.00 
R.R.  HOLZAPPLE   56.00 
D.VOLDER  71.00 
JAMES M.  ROSS94.00 
R.THAYER  115.00
MIKE  PUCKETT 121.00
D.MEIER   164.00
OTTO  HEITHECKER  170.00
M.L.  REAGAN  173.00
R.E.  MCDONNELL   213.00
N.MATERYN 218.00
DUANE SIMPSON 285.00
DICK  LEE 310.00
R.H.  STAMM   344.00
P.H.  SEALE   373.00
ROBERTGERBIN  384.00
R.G.  DODGSON 388.00
JERRY R.  MRLIK   396.00
J.S.  MRLIK   458.00
PETER RAMBO   469.00
LINCOLN D.MACARTHUR   516.00
TOM   WILLIAMS534.00
STEVE WORK571.00
R.W.  GARDNER 575.00
G.TUCKER  607.00
E.A.  HOPPE   622.00
F. H. JR. SPEARMAN805.00
BENARD K. SIMPIER 833.00
CRAIG M.  FOXGORD 882.00
EMIL T.   SCHMID  906.00
E. MICHAELCARLIN  933.00
STANLEY W.PFOST   960.00
STEVE CHELDELIN   1007.00   
WAYNE W.  CATTO   1053.00   
DAVID PELTZ   1127.00   
JAMES JANTZEN 1186.00   
WILLIAM   MELESKE 1227.00   
LAWRENCE JRICE1341.00   
ROBERT P. BARRETT 1368.00   
CHUCK GRIMES  1491.00   
JAMES E.  HOWARD  1507.00   
ROBERT L. COLEGROVE   1514.00   
MARVINQUALLS  1639.00   
WILLIAM F.MUELLER JR. 1699.00   
SKIP  MILLER  1704.00   
CLARENCE  NIKKER  1762.00   
ROBERT E. THORNBURG   1794.00   
DAVID W.  JOHNSON 1804.00   
DAVID W.  EDMONDS 1820.00   
CARL M.   SMITH JR.   1975.00   
LEROY SATTERLEE   2013.00   
BRIAN FOSTER  2016.00   
DAVID H.  NOYES   2031.00   
JACK  HOWARD  2109.00   
KENNETH J.SCHOLL  2217.00   
EARL  KENNEDY 2300.00   
GARY M.   PRIBBERNOW  2354.00   
MATT C.   SHELDON 2358.00   
RALPH MJELDE  2368.00   
SCOTT M.  WHITNEY 2374.00   
NOAL R.   ROSSOW  2398.00   
JOHN  GUNSAULLUS  2409.00   
DENNISGERLACH 2448.00   
PAUL  WEDEKING2540.00   
MYRON COLEMAN 2642.00   
ROBBIEBARRETT, JR.2660.00   
PAUL  TRIST   2700.00   
RICHARD   BREGAR