Guillow's Typhoon 900 series

I think this will work! I intend on using as much kit wood as possible. I think most of the fuselage/bulkheads may be ok. But the wing will be straight up a clone wing:

The tail will be scratched from scab lumber. It should remain about the same size as the stock kit.

But I still needed a bit more substance before jumping into a kit bash. A bunch of paper-covered foam sheet was being tossed at work. An hour later, I had this:

from dumpster to airplane

getback wrote:from dumpster to airplane

From dumpster to airplane to dumpster...……………

I'm not sure what your going after here Jim, but I'm lovin it.

Paper covered foam sheet airplane to get you back in the swing of things before tackling the Guillows I guess. Going to fly it?

Bob

Nope, not a flier.

The foamboard is a one-to-one mock-up model of the finished product. Since the 900 series kits are considered too small for the engine, I thought of ways to build the kit around the bigger engine.

First thought was to just scale the kit up...but I wanted the more toy-like look of the smaller plane.

Then I thought, "hmmmm, I should stick with the same size, but with another wing." My first take was a mock-up side view on a Lil Satan...this was in the Wido Satan that OhBee got. It really looked workable, except for the non-tapered wing looking kind of, well, obtuse.

A quick review of other planes had me thinking of the Baby RingMaster. That wing looks good for a Spitfire, but not so much the Typhoon. From there I took a peek at the Lil Jumping Bean because the wing shape looked enough like the Typhoon wing (but bigger).

To me, this looks about right. The trick is to use as much of the kit as possible so it doesn't look too far from "normal." I wasn't looking to build a flying characature. We'll see how it goes.

So, with the mock-up in sight, time to start thinking this through.

All ribs were printed/glued/cut. Leading edge mitered and slotted for the brace. Then I started thinking about how to handle the fuselage. Then back to the wing. I know I need the wing done so I can fit the wing saddle in the fuselage.

I remembered seeing a rib-centerline tool online, and realized it is time to own one. I have about 6 kits that all have symmetric ribs.
I imagine I'll be making some mini-incidence meters too. Considering mass-production on a micro-scale, I also made a wing jig just big enough to smoothly handle up to a 20" wing or fuselage.

The rib jig was fun to knock out:

Jim, if your don't get a straight wing out of this, it's not because your not trying.

Looking good and waiting to see the final product.

Soooooo...

Remember the all white foam mock-up?

Update:

WoW thats looking good Jim ! what's the WS and engine your planning on using ?

Thanks.
This is a Lil Jumping Bean wing. I "grafted" the wing in on the stock kit plan (top and side) and thought "this may work!" The BRM wing looks more like the kit wing than the Lil Satan wing I first considered.

The stab and elevator are scaled up 125% to approximately how he same area as the LJB part, but cut on the Typhoon hinge line.

The rudder and side view are stock sizes, since I wanted the profile to stay in the 900 series size (small and cute). The fuselage is about 1/8" wider to fit the engine backplate between the fuselage sides. This will require cutting new formers/bulkheads just a bit wider...hopefully the canopy will flex enough to fit the slightly larger compound curves of the wider fuselage.

Expect a custom single vent tank (I'm a glutton for punishment) just above the LE, between the firewall at LE and the single former in front of the canopy. This may change as I hope to finish my Scientific Red Tiger P-40  with another custom single-vent tank that must be vetted (really only needs paint at this point).

The engine will be standard horseshoe-backplate. Any mods may be considered as I optimize power for loops, high wingovers and inverted (the reason for the LJB wing in place of stock).

Apart from (hopefully not so obvious) changes, the landing gear may be mounted right behind the engine on the firewall. I considered wing-mounting the LG too late into the wing construction and missed a golden opportunity to reinforce the LE for landing loads. I do like the idea of blacked-out (open) wheel wells and doors on the gear, especially if the LG looks like it is wing-mounted.

I expect to build the engine cowl to enclose the engine inverted, with the needle valve top-side. The scoop will hopefully be open at the back under the wing to allow exhaust/oil to escape rather than pool/collect inside.

More to follow!

Some pics:

Inverted engines are neat but prone to putting out the fire when cold start primed through the exhaust ports. I had two of them (Black Widows or Golden Bees depending on the times) on my P-38 and flipped the plane over to start them.

Like my P-38 that Typhoon lends itself to inverted engines.

coming along , How did you do the elevator hinging Looks Good !!

Tailplane moment looks too short to me with that wider wing chord....?

Ever since I was a kid the Typhoon and the Tempest have been favorites of mine, so much so that when I saw this 1200mm x 800mm (47" x 31") framed Typhoon print in a shop I just had to have it. Very cool looking aircraft.

Gentlemen,
Thanks for your posts. I appreciate the comments/support.

For Eric,
No connection yet. I glued shishkebob skewers to the mating edges for a hard point, stitched hinge line...stitching to be done after I get wood sealed. I had this method described on StuntHanger when one of the SH members called my P-40 hinges "FrankenHinges," and they were! I spread them out across the hinge line to minimize tear-outs.
The skewers were described as being able to take a beating while having very little linear hinge line. I expect the hinges to be no more than 4 or 5 hinges at about 3/16" wide each. We will see how it turns out shortly!

For RSV Bob,
Thanks for the inverted start hint...I expect to need it. The big Mossie needed to be started on edge a time or two too.

For OhBee,
Yup...really short when compared to the original placement. Even looking at a Lil Jumping Bean the moment looks kind of a bit short. I did leave the leading edge of the stabilizer starting at the stock bulkhead and moving further back (it is 25% larger), and up a bit higher (hopefully for cleaner air).
I did note there are a lot of short-coupled airframes.out there...
(Example: Baby Clown)

For DaveNZ...thanks for the Ghost View! This one is going to be printed and stuck to my Hobby Closet wall. It will help me keep track of some of the Typhoon details so I can minimize the cartoonish appearance!

One man's "Frankenhinges" Jim, may be another man's Marilyn Monroe's.

I may be old school and a minority of one here but I have always used Dubros small, standard, and large hinges in my builds be it R/C or C/L and have never had one fail. I don't think there is another hinge or hinge system that gives the freedom of movement or ease of installation that these offer when installed properly.   Stitched hinges, now that's Franken.  

The Dubro hinges on my P-38 have held through countless flights for almost exactly 50 years now.  For some reason I secured them with clipped common pins, guess I wanted to ensure they would not come loose.  The Bipe that many of us built a few years ago was about my last build still using Dubros.  


 
Someone has to clue me in to the advantages of stitched hinges, they stick out like a sore thumb IMHO.  Pardon, my prejudice is showing.  (:  But I do remember a picture that I think roddie posted of stitched hinges that accepted a 90 degree bend.  To each his own.

Edit add: Just two airplanes that I happened to have handy. The F-100, look Ma, no hinges.

rsv1cox wrote:Someone has to clue me in to the advantages of stitched hinges, they stick out like a sore thumb IMHO.

The advantage of thread sewn hinges done in Figure-8 has to do with being almost totally frictionless. This is why we used them on single channel Ace R/C Pulse rudders. The Adams actuators were low powered. The thread hinges gave the least amount of resistance.

They are not as pretty as other hinges, but where frictionless action is desired they do wonders.

Kari, the difference when I do them is, I don't double back through the holes to give a nice zig-zag appearance. Then it acts almost totally frictionless (within limits).