UPDATE: Micro Power Pack 1 🚨 Unfortunately, due to supply issues from China, we are currently unable to supply the same micro power pack featured in this video. Sorry about this! The good news is there are plenty of places you can get the same or very similar electronics. Please visit the model product page down below for up to date info on where to get some R/C gear for these planes. 👇 Spitfire Kit ▶ www.vintagemodelcompany.com/supermarine-spitfire-mk-vb.html
Hi there I am looking for the micro power pack components but cant seem to find them listed on the page linked, could you point me in the right direction please?
Great idea! In case of flight characteristics, I recommend to put some weight into the nose (or use a bigger battery). It seems to me, that your Spitfire is tailheavy. The result is that wavy (difficult controlable) flight. Add some more powerful engine. These engine performance is not realistic for a warbird, like a Spitfire.
Yep, people always seem to put the brick where it's convenient, versus fully forward. Never use 0.032" pushrod in a micro, drilling new holes if one has to for lighter gauge wire. Anyone can slap some gear into a model, versus being 100% efficient. May as well add motor and/or batt for ballast, versus lead. I used a lower kv 3s motor on the Spitfire, after being disappointed with two 2s 24" warbirds. The Spitfire can do steep climbs, inverted flight, and easy loop/rolls. With the Spitfire I mount all gear far forward including the tail servos, on the side keels. Battery hatch is on the front fuse bottom where it doesn't look unsightly, and the battery is a tight fit. The result is a 24" sheeted Spitfire with 6 grams of ballast in the forward cowl and the ideal CG of 22% chord at the fuse joint. www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=46355217&postcount=2
Did similar with your Hurricane kit, unfortunately made it a bit too heavy with reinforcements (sheeting front and leading edge) but undergoing diet over the winter.
@@iancox7874 I actually have one of these in the build pile. Mine won't fly, though, as it was a gift, and I would feel bad if something happened to it - so I'll buy another to convert instead!
Before your first flight, how should you test whether your centre of gravity is "spot on" For example should I be able to balance the plane on my finger if I place my finger right in the centre point of the wings? Or at the the front of the wings? What am I looking for?
To test your centre of gravity (CofG), balance the aircraft on your finger tips. Your finger tips should be near the wing roots and between 1/4 to 1/3 back from the leading edge of the wing. If the plane sits perfectly level, then your CofG is spot on. If the plane leans back, then it is tail heavy and will need a small amount of weight added to the nose. If the plane leans forward, then it is nose heavy. A slightly nose heavy aircraft is generally more desireable than one where the CofG is spot on, as nose heavy is more stable.
Its a little tail HEAVY... I NEVER put it exactly on the Center of gravity, I ALWAYS move it up a little.... Much better off NOSE HEAVY THAN TAIL HEAVY!!!🛩
How come you did put aeron servos in the wings? Spectrum 2.3 gram linnier long throw servos fit great in the wings. They work good too! Making aerons is not hard.
@Gregory Dahl I bought a cub s umx? It has a mainboard similar to the one used here and includes 2 servos on the board for rudder and elevator. Also has two additional servos for ailerons and an on board brushed esc. It also has built in stabilization that can be turned on and off from a fifth channel usually the gear switch.... Would be perfect for this set up.
@Gregory Dahl yes I have built airplanes out of just about every material you can think of and even flew stick and tissue paper with dope u control models with Cox .049 gas motors. We used to fly combat with 3-4 guys all standing in the middle of the circle trying to cut paper streamers off the tails of each others planes while trying to climb over each other and not get our lines tied up..... I used to race u control models too. We flew with only one wing and half a tail to save weight and cut down drag... I even had a car with a Cox motor on it that went so fast it made me throw up everytime I ran it and I'd be "car sick" for hours after I got home.
@Gregory Dahl "?!" I use a 7.4 volt 2 cell battery in the RC airplane I have. That's it. What the heck are you talking about? The 7.4 battery only weighs 7 grams. I don't have U Control airplane. I use micro electronics. Mine is electric battery RC.
@Gregory Dahl Many many, and I might add another many years ago when I was a kid, my friend and I were really into anything aviation related. Of course electric airplanes didn't exist, and RC was not available for everyone, plus we didn't have money to buy any kit we wanted. So we made do. We built planes from anything available. (Not all flew, I may add) But my friend once took an aluminum cigar tube, built some fins for it and filled it with the material they used in "hot patches" for tires. He put a fuse in it and it shot up like it was supposed to. My point, just because something hasn't been done doesn't mean it won't work. With the small cheap radios/motors, etc available today, there is still a place for experimenting. For someone with an inquisitive mind, as you seem to have, the possibilities are limitless. Styrofoam and tissue? Why not. Anything you can think of can be possible. Go for it. The fun is in the experimenting.
The model is balanced with the finger tips under the balance point evenly on either side of the fuz on the model that is inverted No maybe....definitely...
She looks grate ! Can only imagine how shed run with a proper brushless setup... I hope to see some future revisions with built in provisions for such setups. 🍻 cheers 🥃
Anything that fits and is of a decent quality without braking the bank there are many multi rotor motors that have a tiny size with ridiculous power outputs that are really price friendly and esc's of a grate quality for price that may be suitable, I suppose the imagination is the limit well as far as size restarts allow...
@@jackdaniels7913 I suppose you could make it work but really the best way to fly a smaller plane like this and get the most out of it is to make it as light as possible. The benefit of being light and strong is lost with too much weight. These planes are best enjoyed flying close and tight and they are extremely nimble, like turn on a dime doesn't describe it, more like turn in place. A good 6mm brushed gear reduction drive like one out of an old Blade MQX will give these planes turn INSIDE a dime performance with really decent run times. Plus when you keep them feather light they are nearly indestructible. A small brushless outrunner will torque twist these little guys.... The additional weight in beefing up the airframe plus the motor esc and larger battery makes engine off performance in the like a rock category. Remember these guys are tiny. You have to fly farther when you fly faster and orientation can be a problem... I wouldn't fault you for trying it, but I strongly suggest you at least give it a go with a light setup. At least to experience what flying these things are really all about. You won't regret it.
All points well made and I nod to your understanding of there flight performance and I have enjoyed learning with a micro that had a brushed gearbox drive and just thought with today's equipment like what comes in the newer UMX line from HorizonHobby the power to be gained with little increases in weight wood be a fair triad off especially when it comes to run time and pure climes out potential but that's just a thought and I appreciate all your feed back and knolage they look incredible and seam to fly just fine in there current setup it was just a thought for those with a taste for over powered models like myself... thanks again for interesting the thought and responding with such a in depth response I can't wait to finaly get a few and try them out they look like a blast to build and fly or even just hang in the room. Good luck out there and may every flight be as enjoyable as the first.
Tail heavy and very under-powered. A brushed motor and gearbox might be cheap but a micro brushless motor can be bought for only a few quid more and it will outlast the airframe. OR you can also buy micro foam models with all electrics including a flight stabilizer and a Transmitter for around £60 ( a P-51 www.banggood.com/custlink/vGD3B4pPnL or an F22 www.banggood.com/custlink/vvGGnd82y6 or Cessna www.banggood.com/custlink/m3vmbr0Vvu ) which are definitely NOT underpowered and can handle a few heavy bumps. The market has changed alot since Balsa was the only viable material and there are a lot more of these planes coming ( Spitfire, P47 Thunderbolt, Mitsubishi Zero along with some new WW2 bombers )
Derek Rowe - yes... but this is the “Vintage Model company” not the “cheap Chinese knock off piece of foam crap company”. Much of the allure of these kits is the very fact that they ARE balsa kits that you hand build and experiment with power systems, radios and flight characteristics. Anyone can fling sixty quid at a ready to fly foam craft but I’m sure that isn’t the market these guys are after. The sole reason I’ve bought kits from these people is BECAUSE they are traditional ( well, vintage! ) balsa kits requiring a lot of TLC.
@@portlyoldman Totally agree. Balsa kits are a great way to train your hand-eye coordination as a model builder. Not a very productive way to acquire actual RC flying skills though. Maybe use cheap chinesium for that. :D
UPDATE: Micro Power Pack 1 🚨
Unfortunately, due to supply issues from China, we are currently unable to supply the same micro power pack featured in this video. Sorry about this! The good news is there are plenty of places you can get the same or very similar electronics. Please visit the model product page down below for up to date info on where to get some R/C gear for these planes. 👇
Spitfire Kit ▶ www.vintagemodelcompany.com/supermarine-spitfire-mk-vb.html
Hi there I am looking for the micro power pack components but cant seem to find them listed on the page linked, could you point me in the right direction please?
I could never make this in a million years but damn its cool to see.
Looks nice and respect for the building skills. Hoping it will fly better with some tweaks, it seemed to be porpoising a lot.
Great idea! In case of flight characteristics, I recommend to put some weight into the nose (or use a bigger battery). It seems to me, that your Spitfire is tailheavy. The result is that wavy (difficult controlable) flight. Add some more powerful engine. These engine performance is not realistic for a warbird, like a Spitfire.
Yep, people always seem to put the brick where it's convenient, versus fully forward. Never use 0.032" pushrod in a micro, drilling new holes if one has to for lighter gauge wire. Anyone can slap some gear into a model, versus being 100% efficient. May as well add motor and/or batt for ballast, versus lead. I used a lower kv 3s motor on the Spitfire, after being disappointed with two 2s 24" warbirds. The Spitfire can do steep climbs, inverted flight, and easy loop/rolls. With the Spitfire I mount all gear far forward including the tail servos, on the side keels. Battery hatch is on the front fuse bottom where it doesn't look unsightly, and the battery is a tight fit. The result is a 24" sheeted Spitfire with 6 grams of ballast in the forward cowl and the ideal CG of 22% chord at the fuse joint. www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=46355217&postcount=2
Great video for newbies like me. Keep them coming please.
Looks under powered to me.
didn't look like it flew too well.. maybe a bit larger, brushless motor, and make a lancaster in same scale. Love the concept though.
It also looked a tad tail heavy
Did similar with your Hurricane kit, unfortunately made it a bit too heavy with reinforcements (sheeting front and leading edge) but undergoing diet over the winter.
Fair build but doesn't really fly ...tail heavy and under powered
So you simply add nose weight and up the power if needed.
@@DazDaMan simply.. you don’t build, do you??
@@iancox7874 I actually have one of these in the build pile. Mine won't fly, though, as it was a gift, and I would feel bad if something happened to it - so I'll buy another to convert instead!
Bealtiful air plane model
Hey just got your corsair kit in 460mm.
Will elevator and rudder be enough to fly it?
Pretty beautiful little airplane, dude! Really nice! 😃
Great fun kit to build just not sure what colour ... either silver or blue ...
Blue would look great!
Looks fun.
Before your first flight, how should you test whether your centre of gravity is "spot on"
For example should I be able to balance the plane on my finger if I place my finger right in the centre point of the wings? Or at the the front of the wings? What am I looking for?
To test your centre of gravity (CofG), balance the aircraft on your finger tips. Your finger tips should be near the wing roots and between 1/4 to 1/3 back from the leading edge of the wing. If the plane sits perfectly level, then your CofG is spot on. If the plane leans back, then it is tail heavy and will need a small amount of weight added to the nose. If the plane leans forward, then it is nose heavy.
A slightly nose heavy aircraft is generally more desireable than one where the CofG is spot on, as nose heavy is more stable.
Hello. in the supermarine spitfire MK.kit vb
It is possible to convert it radio controlled.
thank you
So, is there an upgrade to full four channels??
Step 1 buy kit step 2 read instructions step 3 build plane
imagine having the patience to build one of these
can you use normal 3.7g servos for rudder and elevator
your cg is way too far back!
Umm... I like to call it "CoM" instead of "CG".
I like o csll it center of gravity
I like o csll it center of gravity
I have 2 questions.
1. Is it possible to make you’re kits brushless power?
2. Is it also possible to make the front wings to have steering?
I can't find your power pack in your store for your rc plane help me find it
Its a little tail HEAVY... I NEVER put it exactly on the Center of gravity, I ALWAYS move it up a little.... Much better off NOSE HEAVY THAN TAIL HEAVY!!!🛩
its not tail heavy... Just underpowered.
Nose heavy? Nose heavy cg would pull the plane down when you try to pull up. Perfectly balanced cg is the best
@@mhalokikon4941I DISAGREE, SORRY
needs a lot of down thrust set for the motor
How come you did put aeron servos in the wings? Spectrum 2.3 gram linnier long throw servos fit great in the wings. They work good too! Making aerons is not hard.
@Gregory Dahl I bought a cub s umx? It has a mainboard similar to the one used here and includes 2 servos on the board for rudder and elevator.
Also has two additional servos for ailerons and an on board brushed esc. It also has built in stabilization that can be turned on and off from a fifth channel usually the gear switch....
Would be perfect for this set up.
@Gregory Dahl yes I have built airplanes out of just about every material you can think of and even flew stick and tissue paper with dope u control models with Cox .049 gas motors. We used to fly combat with 3-4 guys all standing in the middle of the circle trying to cut paper streamers off the tails of each others planes while trying to climb over each other and not get our lines tied up.....
I used to race u control models too. We flew with only one wing and half a tail to save weight and cut down drag...
I even had a car with a Cox motor on it that went so fast it made me throw up everytime I ran it and I'd be "car sick" for hours after I got home.
@Gregory Dahl "?!" I use a 7.4 volt 2 cell battery in the RC airplane I have. That's it. What the heck are you talking about? The 7.4 battery only weighs 7 grams. I don't have U Control airplane. I use micro electronics. Mine is electric battery RC.
@Gregory Dahl I'm sorry. I went to my girlfriends birthday party last night. I'm still sleepy. I didn't sleep well and I missunderstood. "OOPPSS!!"
@Gregory Dahl Many many, and I might add another many years ago when I was a kid, my friend and I were really into anything aviation related. Of course electric airplanes didn't exist, and RC was not available for everyone, plus we didn't have money to buy any kit we wanted. So we made do. We built planes from anything available. (Not all flew, I may add) But my friend once took an aluminum cigar tube, built some fins for it and filled it with the material they used in "hot patches" for tires. He put a fuse in it and it shot up like it was supposed to. My point, just because something hasn't been done doesn't mean it won't work. With the small cheap radios/motors, etc available today, there is still a place for experimenting. For someone with an inquisitive mind, as you seem to have, the possibilities are limitless. Styrofoam and tissue? Why not. Anything you can think of can be possible. Go for it. The fun is in the experimenting.
where do we find your power packs
Use clear tape for hinges!!!!
will there ever be a tutorial for making the sopwith tripe rc?
When you make one, there will.
@@RR67890 ahhh
Curious about that very metallic looking tissue. Can it be shrunk and what is it called? Is it available in the States? Hi from San Diego 😊
calown I don’t know what he is using, but in the USA, Easy Built Models has a good silver option.
Its likely white tissue with tissue "Dope" applied, its a sealer and available in silver. I have some made by Aero Gloss, silvair aluminum
Wow
What battery did he use
Oh, I want to make a fpv one!
3dprinters are greates
Ther are plenty of vids here showing you how to tissue cover.
I read: "HOW TO SPITFIRE" when it read "MAKE THIS"
I have that exact transmitter
So it didn’t fly well?
The link for the electronics doesn’t work, does someone know where to find them?
AMAZON SHOULD HAVE THEM...
Salue escuse moi de dire ton spi est mal centré.
beau travail quand-même j'adore les petit modèle
It is far easier and more accurate to balance a low wing model with the fuselage inverted.
And because it is so light..It is more accurate to ballance inverted ..as the weight is below the point of balance....just basic aeromodelling.
The model is balanced with the finger tips under the balance point evenly on either side of the fuz on the model that is inverted
No maybe....definitely...
She looks grate ! Can only imagine how shed run with a proper brushless setup... I hope to see some future revisions with built in provisions for such setups.
🍻 cheers 🥃
What would you recommend?
Anything that fits and is of a decent quality without braking the bank there are many multi rotor motors that have a tiny size with ridiculous power outputs that are really price friendly and esc's of a grate quality for price that may be suitable, I suppose the imagination is the limit well as far as size restarts allow...
@@jackdaniels7913 I suppose you could make it work but really the best way to fly a smaller plane like this and get the most out of it is to make it as light as possible. The benefit of being light and strong is lost with too much weight. These planes are best enjoyed flying close and tight and they are extremely nimble, like turn on a dime doesn't describe it, more like turn in place.
A good 6mm brushed gear reduction drive like one out of an old Blade MQX will give these planes turn INSIDE a dime performance with really decent run times.
Plus when you keep them feather light they are nearly indestructible.
A small brushless outrunner will torque twist these little guys....
The additional weight in beefing up the airframe plus the motor esc and larger battery makes engine off performance in the like a rock category.
Remember these guys are tiny. You have to fly farther when you fly faster and orientation can be a problem...
I wouldn't fault you for trying it, but I strongly suggest you at least give it a go with a light setup. At least to experience what flying these things are really all about.
You won't regret it.
All points well made and I nod to your understanding of there flight performance and I have enjoyed learning with a micro that had a brushed gearbox drive and just thought with today's equipment like what comes in the newer UMX line from HorizonHobby the power to be gained with little increases in weight wood be a fair triad off especially when it comes to run time and pure climes out potential but that's just a thought and I appreciate all your feed back and knolage they look incredible and seam to fly just fine in there current setup it was just a thought for those with a taste for over powered models like myself... thanks again for interesting the thought and responding with such a in depth response I can't wait to finaly get a few and try them out they look like a blast to build and fly or even just hang in the room.
Good luck out there and may every flight be as enjoyable as the first.
What about if I wanted to add ailerons?
If you want to add ailerons you need to put them on the wings.
@@RR67890 I understand that, just meant if they could show how
Use your imagination.
Also consider that extra components means extra weight, and the flight characteristics of the model will change.
@@DElkan just in general with balsa builds not necessarily this model... imagination is great but for a noob visual reference is gold !
looks tail heavy get the cg forward
Bro I want to work with you
Kindly give me job in your company
please sell in india
Tail heavy and very under-powered. A brushed motor and gearbox might be cheap but a micro brushless motor can be bought for only a few quid more and it will outlast the airframe. OR you can also buy micro foam models with all electrics including a flight stabilizer and a Transmitter for around £60 ( a P-51 www.banggood.com/custlink/vGD3B4pPnL or an F22 www.banggood.com/custlink/vvGGnd82y6 or Cessna www.banggood.com/custlink/m3vmbr0Vvu ) which are definitely NOT underpowered and can handle a few heavy bumps. The market has changed alot since Balsa was the only viable material and there are a lot more of these planes coming ( Spitfire, P47 Thunderbolt, Mitsubishi Zero along with some new WW2 bombers )
Derek Rowe - yes... but this is the “Vintage Model company” not the “cheap Chinese knock off piece of foam crap company”.
Much of the allure of these kits is the very fact that they ARE balsa kits that you hand build and experiment with power systems, radios and flight characteristics. Anyone can fling sixty quid at a ready to fly foam craft but I’m sure that isn’t the market these guys are after.
The sole reason I’ve bought kits from these people is BECAUSE they are traditional ( well, vintage! ) balsa kits requiring a lot of TLC.
@@portlyoldman Totally agree. Balsa kits are a great way to train your hand-eye coordination as a model builder. Not a very productive way to acquire actual RC flying skills though. Maybe use cheap chinesium for that. :D
Trop centre arrière mais va vole bien
needs more power mate !
Entirely missed (didn't do) the tissue shrinking Shame, as it would have looked much better.
build
That does not fly well
Looks like underpowered and aft c.g.
Stodoys is a good solution for every woodworker.
honestly this is just a rubber band kit, might as well buy a guillows, comet, dumas, midwest, etc
Looks extremely underpowered.....