[paulellis]

I've bought the plans and I've bought the laser-cut short kit from Key Publishing, so it looks like I'm finally committed to this. I have no idea when either the plans or the wood will arrive - I think Key use the tradtional barefoot-man-with-cleft-stick method of delivery, so I might have been a little previous with a) tidying the shed and b) announcing this project.

The reason for going public with a build thread is that this will be my first proper scale model  build (although not the largest airframe I've built - see G-MYKZ), and I'm going to need a lot of guidance. Please   I plan to use a Laser 180 oop front and build it exactly as per plan. As I've posted elsewhere, the area that I'm most nervous of is the metal work, especially the cowling. I will be modelling CDXU because I think it looks ace 

That's it for now .....

[Pup Cam]

Looking forward to it Paul

Subscribed

Alan

[clive]

I've got the plan and short kit but I'm a fair way off starting the build so I will be following with great interest.

Regards

Clive

[paulellis]

.... and I forgot to add:  a request from my wife that  I find a "proper" looking 1/3 scale pilot and not, as she put it "some zombie who looks like David Cameron on smack"  I think what we both have in mind is something like one of the the crew if the 1/3 Tiggie ....

I kn ow that I have to build the model first, but She Who Must Be Appeased has different priorities 

[BrianB]

I think I'll be popping in from time to time too..........

[p51p47]

Subscribed........my 2nd favourite aircraft of the period after this.



If it flies anything like my little 1/6 version of 8-9 yrs ago, it'll be lovely.



Phil

[paulellis]

Yes, there's quite some similarity between the Miles aircraft and the Train/Walter Mikron-engined Chilton. How big is your Hawk Six?    Whatever, it's a beautiful bird.

I've been clearing and reorganising the shed, and I only have about 2 metres x 80 cm of actual building board, so I'll have to carve up the plans - something I hate doing. Key Publishing have confirmed that both the plans and the wood kit have been sent. So the first job when the plan arrives is to do an inventory of what (if any) sheet and strip I still need to buy.

[p51p47]

Yes, there's quite some similarity between the Miles aircraft and the Train/Walter Mikron-engined Chilton. How big is your Hawk Six?    Whatever, it's a beautiful bird.

It's a 10% enlargement of the 1/4 scale Phil Kent plan........so 92" span. It's actually been built by my Dad, I've been tasked with the final finishing, painting and a little extra detail here and there. It's all done bar application of some beautiful 'Miles Hawk' water slide decals from Nigel at Flightline Graphics.....after that, final clear coat and it's ready for all the bits & pieces to be bolted back in. I have a short thread running over in the 'Fighteraces' section which will be updated as and when I get the chance to complete................

Phil

[paulellis]

Good news: White Van Man has delivered the cut parts    Although both plans and cut parts were ordered through Key Publishing they come from different suppliers.  The cut parts are via Belair and look fine at first glance. Unfortunately I still have not received the plans  , so I can't gauge the accuracy of the cutting or start making a list of extra strip and sheet I'll need.

I have large quantities of balsa stock, but I need to know whether the stuff I have is the right density/hardness.
I think I'm looking forward to this build ... but it's quite an undertaking.

UPDATE:  Rafale (Nige) has copied off a set of plans for me    So I don't need the Key ones. Top Man 

[Steve_r]

I'm subscribed too!

I haven't built one...but I did purchase Keith Buckhams version for running in my Saito 36FG. The model was superb, crisp and responsive. The stall could bite if you forced it but landings were really no trouble as long as you kept a little speed in reserve.

Though I sold this one on after about 50 flights due to leaving the country...I still have the plans and some parts for another!

I think you'll enjoy yours!

Steve

[Steve_r]

A few motivational shots.......

[Pup Cam]

And a few more .....





I think I'm still suffering Chilton withdrawal symptoms!

Get cracking Paul

Alan

[paulellis]

Don't expect a short build - this is my first true scale project.  I just finished a Ben Buckle Falcon to get comfortable with large airframes. That part I'm not too worried about ... it's that part where you turn a model into a credible and worthy replica of the original aircraft that I'm not comfortable with.  I haunt this forum looking for builds that nail that elusive quality ... that something that makes a model look completely real and at home in its element. There are many. You know who you are 

Perhaps I'll just build the airframe and pass it on  for finishing

[Pup Cam]

Perhaps I'll just build the airframe and pass it on  for finishing

Practice makes perfect Paul.   

Long builds - a very, very, very good way to keep a build going is too do something, no matter how small every day. 
It keeps the momentum going which, if  lost can be very hard to get back.   
What a shame I seem  incapable of doing it!

Alan

[paulellis]

Long builds - a very, very, very good way to keep a build going is too do something, no matter how small every day.

Yes, that worked with the MiniMax - it was about 24 months from laying out the first pencil marks on the building board to flying it for the first time. It used to make smile, how similar building a full-size aircraft was to building a model.  But I still got someone else to paint it!

[Pup Cam]

It used to make smile, how similar building a full-size aircraft was to building a model.  But I still got someone else to paint it!

Actually, I've thought about that in reverse a couple of times.  The plans are available from Roy Nerou, it's basically all wood, I have some background in aerospace engineering so how hard can it be?

Alan

[paulellis]

Yep, been through that fantasy too. Problem is that, while the airframe build is not massively expensive, all of the firewall-forward stuff is. I think I spent about 2k alone on new instruments. Until or unless I can sell my white elephant farm in Pembrokeshire full-size flying remains ... how shall we say - unofficial 

[paulellis]

Nige (Rafale) has just confirmed that the plans have been sent  .... so we might even see a start made this week.

Meanwhile I've solved the pilot problem.  But because of budget cuts it's going to be a skeleton crew 

[Rafale]

Paul

Hell!! what have you done to him? he looks scared to death!!

Have a good evening.

Nige.

[paulellis]

I've collected a large file of photos and drawings of the Chilton - amongst which is an excellent three-view of the DW-1 and DW-1A, in Portrait format, with a ton of airframe detail. Or it would be excellent if ti wasn't so small. The original file is a 110 kb PNG and it won't blow up to anything usable size-wise before it pixilates. The drawing is by Scale Planes in Australia and has the drawing number SP1298. Mr Google can't shed any further light on Scales Planes in Oz or the drawing.

Does anyone know of this, or a similarly detailed 3-View which will blow up to .... well, ideally A3.

I now have the Phillip Kent plans courtesy of Rafale, but those alone won't get me to where I want to be.

tks
Paul

[rcfanuk]

I have a nice book on the Chiltern which is full of workshop drawings





Steve

[paulellis]

Scale Model Building 101:  "You can never know too much about your subject" 

[paulellis]

It now looks highly unlikely that the Chilton DW-1 build is going to happen. The system whereby a builder sources the plans from vendor A and the cut parts from vendor B is deeply flawed. Especially when neither side takes ownership of, or responsibility for the combined package.

I bought the plans from Key Publishing (who presumably either bought the rights from Phillip Kent or pay him a royalty), and the cut parts from Belair - for £130. I have no idea where Belair got the CAD files from. Put simply, the parts don't fit the plan, and not by the odd milimetre either.

Sure, I could build directly from the plans and cut my own parts, but with the disparity between plan and what Belair in good faith has supplied, I have no idea which might be correct.

So, I am planning to put the whole mess onto the bonfire, walk away from a wasted £150+,  and in future stick to kits from long established manufacturers. 

If anyone wants this pile of porridge then by all means come and take it away. It's free. But I live in West Wales.

Caveat emptor.

[Norfolk'n'Good]

  that's rotten.  Any chance you can get Leon? Belair to print out the plan from which he cut the CAD parts from perhaps the CAD plan is correct assuming it's an actual GA plan rather than just bulkheads etc 

[paulellis]

I tried that route, but Leon was not particularly forthcoming. Neither Leon or Key accept responsibility (I can understand why, but it's annoying). 

The bulkhead and formers  look to be just about correct, or within acceptable limits. However, the various spars, some ribs, the beautifully cut 0.44 ply aileron webs (all one piece) are wayyyyy out. It's like they're for a different-scale Chilton.

I tried to contact Phillip Kent via Brighouse MAC, who are his gate-guard, asking whether there has been a re-draw of the plans since 2007 (the copyright  date on the plans I bought from Key) but never received a reply. Since I spend more time building than flying (two smashed vertebrae makes standing .... difficult) I was looking forward to a long and rewarding build.

Sorry, not in the mood for smileys 

[Rafale]

Sorry to hear this Paul, the whole thing stinks if you ask me and as I have the plans this is aggravating the hell out of me

I shan't be buying any parts for this build but neither will I be buying anymore plans from Key, I know this plan was marketed before they took over but as a customer of Key publishing from the very first Flypast I expected better customer service from them.

Hope it works out with someone taking responsibility for this mess, Leon has already said that he was working from the updated plan, so logic says that Key are not, sadly logic does not always have a place in reasoned argument

Sit on for a while until someone hopefully comes to their senses, I can't help thinking you will be missing out on a great toy!

ATB

Nige. 
 

[paulellis]

I think I'll go for something a little less challenging. I have drawn the plans for a 1/4-scale Bristol Brabazon on the back of an HMRC final demand. I'll send it off to Leon for cutting today.

[Rafale]

I think I'll go for something a little less challenging. I have drawn the plans for a 1/4-scale Bristol Brabazon on the back of an HMRC final demand. I'll send it off to Leon for cutting today.

At least, my friend, you will have more of a chance of the parts fitting!

I can't help thinking that you have bought parts (or plans) that are not fit for purpose (pun intended) I feel that the plan is the problem, it would be good if Phil Kent could comment if he is able, as there are now 2 editions of this plan, the latter one accomadates the Laser 180 IIRC, I am sure Leon would not have mentioned the updated plan if this was not the case.

Good luck with the Brabazon

Nige. 

[paulellis]

I feel that the plan is the problem, it would be good if Phil Kent could comment if he is able, as there are now 2 editions of this plan, the latter one accomadates the Laser 180 IIRC, I am sure Leon would not have mentioned the updated plan if this was not the case

.

I think not, Nige. The plans that you and I have are almost certainly the latest version. They are clearly intended for an inverted Laser 150 (it says so on the plan). Because the plans weren't CAD-drawn, the parts would have to be traced off the plan to produce the cutting file. Some of the parts are spot-on, many are not, which suggests that the problem is with the tracing.

TBH I'm done with this for the moment. Life's too short and I have other projects to pursue. Including the Brabazon, of course   I am first-in-line for Roger's (Sequoia) new Goldfinch 138 two-seat monoplane kit. If you recall Greg's build thread for the Greenfinch 234, you'll know that there's some absorbing building to be had there.  Which is just as well since I can't fly at the moment because my back's as wrecked as David Cameron's political future 

[Rafale]

Well that is even worse than I thought Paul.

On the subject of the Goldfinch, Roger is a top guy and you will not have problems with fits with his work

Get him to do the Brabazon   

[paulellis]

Hello Mods,

This thread has run its course, so please delete it entirely. Or better still, tell us how we can delete our own threads when their course is run.

[Pup Cam]

Paul - Sorry to hear this.  You know I have a soft spot for the Chilton and was really looking forward to your build.

As somebody else might have said, I too think this situation stinks whoever was responsible  (I'm not going to try to say who's to blame in this case because I don't have the facts so that would not be right to even try).  However, speaking generally, it seems that this situation is far from unique and thus I would suggest that there is a significant problem that all concerned should take a long hard look at and then, more importantly, attempt to prevent it re-occuring.   Having customers shell out hundreds of pounds on items that are basically not fit for purpose and then to ignore the individual or collective responsibilities is simply not acceptable.

Mods - In my opinion this thread should not be deleted or even locked, if nothing else, it serves to warn others not to waste their money on this particular combination of parts.   Looking at the description on the Belair website it does suggest that plans are available from Phil Kent (implying direct).   Of course, if the cut components don't match the Phil Kent drawing then that is a different story.

Perhaps it would be most appropriate to start a new thread on the general underlying problem in order to prevent this thread going OT?

Alan

[clive]

+1 on Alan's comments. Having spent a lifetime (over 40 years) in the retail trade this whole situation is unacceptable. If you take money for a service then you also take on the responsibility for dealing with any problems that arise!

I guess I'm just very disappointed as I was really looking forward to following the build.

Regards

Clive

[paulellis]

OK, this is the last word from me on the subject and then I'm done with this.

When you buy a plan and a set of cut parts from either a single or two separate vendors there MUST be:

1) A common Issue Number, Version Number, or some such that ties the plan version with the cut parts version - i.e. a direct and traceable relationship between the two;
2) An accurate bill of materials from the kit cutter that tells you exactly what cut parts you will receive, related to unambiguous part numbers or text descriptions of components on the plan. It's not difficult to do.

As an example: the Chilton rudder comprises a balsa core with riblets on each side. Said riblets are anchored to the leading and trailing edges of the rudder by neatly shaped 0.4mm ply gussets. Logic requires that you need TWO sets of gussets, one for each side. Cut kit includes just one side. I'm sure there's a good and valid reason, and no blame attaches blah blah blah.

I suppose the obvious thing to do is to take the plan as gospel, cut my own parts, and build a stonking good Chilton.  I may still do that. 

[Pup Cam]

I suppose the obvious thing to do is to take the plan as gospel

Even that needs caution.  There are some very good, well known plans out there and there are some really poor (I was going to use a different word ...) well known plans out there.  The tricky thing here is to know which group any plan fits in.   In this particular case I'm afraid I have no experience as to the quality  But spending a little time up-front checking the consistency between views is effort very well rewarded.  For example: Will the drawn turtle deck formers for the fuselage actually provide the correct shape & support for the expected (i.e. correct) turtle deck shape.  I have recent experience which clearly shows that this is not necessarily the case.  If someone then cuts the formers accurately to the drawing, be they laser cutters or an individual with a scaple, the result will be a pile of wasted wood.

and build a stonking good Chilton.  I may still do that. 

Excellent  . I'm still looking forward to it!

Good luck.

Alan

[albert0147]

Hello Paulellis,
I live over here in Arizona.  I want to get a hold of the cut kit from Mick Reeves (Spitfire at 70'').  What say you guys about his ability to deliver a well cut kit?
Take care,
Albert

[paulellis]

Albert, I've not heard anything negative about Reeves's kit cutting. Comments on this forum are generally positive about his products.

As well as the Reeves Spitfire, you might also look at the slightly larger (81-inch span) Spitfire 1A from DB Sport & Scale here in the UK - http://www.dbsportandscale.com/spitfire.htm.  I've had first-hand experience with his products and would rate them extremely highly. The kits are well thought-out, the quality excellent, and the after-sales service up to U.S. standards 

Have fun

[BrianB]

Another vote here for D B Sport & Scale.     Excellent kits, and Eddie always answers e mails promptly and knows his stuff.

[falcon]

Paulellis,I am a member of the Brighouse Model Flying Club,and i have built two models from Phillips plan.The last one being 42% ie.
120" wingspan.I had the plans enlarged from 33% to 42% at my local drawing shop,no problems were encountered building either model.I flew the 42% one for four years and it was superb.
Both models i cut all the parts myself direct from the plan.
The 42% Chilton i built as G-AFSV with inverted engine, which was
a ZDZ 80cc turning a 26"x10" menz prop,the model weight was
42 Ibs.Picture is landing on Southport sands LMA flying in.
Brian Rawcliffe. 

[albert0147]

Hello Paulellis,
Mongo prefers 81'' too.
Take care,
Albert