I've started this build and am noticing what seem to be some gross errors in the first couple steps. I'm wondering if any has bult this kit and can offer advice?

The first two part names don't match the plan (which is no big deal) and the plan does not show the piece instructed to install in the written instructions or pic? This one concerns me. The piece is not dotted as in it's behind the piece shown on the plan. It's just not there.

For example the instructions say to install 3/16 sq vertical longeron while on the plan it shows a 1/4 ply firewall and tri-stock against it. No 3/16 sq to be found. This kit has been out some time so I was hoping the issues were corrected. I'm not one to be on the bleeding edge .

I've buit many kits so I'll just go with what I think is best. Just wondering if anyone has built this and can I expect more of the same
Mike

1:15pm.. missing tail post

Made a tail post for each fuse side from my balsa stock. Going better...
Mike

I can't speak for the 1/6th scale N-17; but, my 1/4th scale N-28 was well drawn and everything well described in the instructions. Did you consider going to Balsa USA with your questions? How would they know they have a problem if it's not reported to them? Good luck with your kit and enjoy yourself, Mike!

Thermalin,

Up in Scale Electric there's a build thread that's going on right now.

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1193961

schoonerj started on his a little over a year ago but is still plugging away.

Hope it helps.

-Mike

Thanks.. I've been looking at that one though he's electric. I have not gone to BUSA yet but will I think when I'm done with a laundry list of suggestions.

For example, some pieces seem over or undersized slightly when compared to the plan. I'm not sure which is correct, the plan or part b/c of things like this; The side view which I built both sides from, when they are place on the top view to begin adding formers, etc.. looks to be 1/2" short. The top view is longer than the side view when measured. Just nuisances, but makes things a bit wierd. The cross member placements line up between side and top but the length is long on paper. The width is also about 3/8" wide as well beginning about where the bend starts on the way back. It's no big deal as I'm just splitting differences on frameup where applicable but just putting it out there for others.

I usually don't read a manual first but am reading what I hope to accomplish on the following day so my mind subconciously chews on it. There seems to be a bit of vagueness ins some of steps at times. This is my first BUSA kit and am hoping to pickup the DR-1 next. On a good note, the quality of wood is very nice with a complete hardware package, pre-bent gear, etc. I know this is one of the newer kits (two yrs old maybe) and I don't think many have been purchased per thread posts so maybe I'm on the bleeeding edge.

It's not uncommon for the parts to be a different size than the plans. Plans can change size do to variances in humidity. When in doubt, go with the pre-shaped or pre-cut part.

Thanks.. thats what I've been doing.. going with the part. Coming along nicely, the basic box-ish fuse is done. Getting ready to add the pieces to bring it life.
Mike

The current issue is one aileron on the plan is almost 1/2" longer than the other. Noticed this when both were built and sanding together. . The upper wing is mostly built as are the ailerons so I think I'm just going to go with it.

So far the rest of the upper wing has gone without incident. Almost done with it.

Upper wing complete however plans show no wing joiner, instructions say just to butt glue the root ends together?. I assume both wings will offer strength to each other however this seems like a bad idea so I decided to add joiners on the front and rear of the main spar from 1/8" ply scrap. The blind nuts for the rear wire cabanes in the upper wing on the plan are depicted smaller than actual size which makes them fit better in the drawing. So I needed to file down one side. On to the lower wing.
Mike

Dear Thermalin:

The PIPE Here...I'm HOPING that someone at the "Vintage & Old-Timers" thread notices that latest post of mine earlier today concerning the 1974 vintage RC Sportsman magazine article on converting a Sig 1/6th scale J-3 Cub to an L-4...should it not be gaining any sort of interest "over there", I may just re-post it at the Scale Fuel Planes thread instead...but to your question from earlier in this thread...

Originally Posted by Thermalin

I'm not sure which is correct, the plan or part b/c of things like this; The side view which I built both sides from, when they are place on the top view to begin adding formers, etc.. looks to be 1/2" short. The top view is longer than the side view when measured. Just nuisances, but makes things a bit wierd..

I KNOW I've seen this "problem" accomodated before on model construction plans, I think, possibly when Gee Bee great HENRY HAFFKE drew up a set of long-ago RC plans for the "flying silo" R-1 Super Sportster, and did what could be called a separate "true-view" side view plan that's strictly ON the plans, for one reason only-to directly build the fuselage sides over. Such a separate "true-view" construction side view takes into account the FACT that the "side view drawing" of the completed fuselage will ALWAYS be "shorter" than the curved shape of the three-dimensional fuselage "side" when it's all framed up.

I've included the MS Word 2003 version of the text from a post I long-ago wrote on the RCU forum to our friend "Abufletcher" who's in the RCG Scale Fuel Planes forum, and whose latest scale effort is a 1/6th scale S.E. 5a. The "Creating a Tru-Vue Side View" document describes how I CAD-draw up such a "true-view" side view, completely separate from the "side view" of the completed fuselage, to be able to build a fuselage side with a great deal MORE accuracy than most kits' construction drawings ever give thought to !

I'm doing that exact sort of thing lately (when I'm NOT wrapped up with my online college courses!) for my scale-structure version of the RCM January 1982 Gordon Whitehead 1/6th scale Bücker Jungmeister, to be powered with a Saito FA-40a four stroke mill.

The whole CAD method of creating a "true-view" side view CAN sound a bit involved if one's never had CAD software on their monitor before, but it IS one of the best ways to be able to manage in getting the fuselage "sides" to just about MATCH the length that they should be when everything IS brought together for the fuselage framing, and it's something I'll be doing even for sport ships that I'd be CAD-designing!

Give it a good read...nowadays I'm using DesignCAD 3DMax v.17 instead of DesignCAD 3000, but any version of AutoCAD can do that too, I'm quite sure...it's just that the DesignCAD software I'm using is only about $13.00 from Amazon's page for it at http://www.amazon.com/IMSI-00D3MX17C.../dp/B000HLT5IU , while my needed-for-WORK-practice copy of AutoCAD 2009 LT on my home PC (so I can stay in practice for GETTING BACK TO WORK someday!) cost much, MUCH more than DesignCAD could ever cost!!!

Yours Sincerely,

The PIPE....!!

Thanks for the info. Very interesting. Though I would think the side view on the plans though "flat" should match the eventual curve of the completed top view. I know in the past I have seen the top and side views lined up top / bottom nose to tail which would lead to a shorter fuse but these were offset somenot directly underneath each other so I assumed when curved the length would match the top view. Didn't think to measure them first. The difference isn't much so since it's all built and I'm getting ready to add the add'l hardwood tail pos I think I will just use a bigger piece to extend it the 1/4 to 1/2" length needed to help fully support the horiz stab, etc.

I'm not complaining about the kit though it seems I am in previous posts. Just pointing out issues as I come across them for anyone else who may want ot build one. I enjoy the building process and the trials and tribulations of making things fit, etc. The wood and materials are top notch in my opinion.
Mike

I'm new to the forum, but longtime user of AutoCad (since Release 10) and some 3d modeling programs.

while my needed-for-WORK-practice copy of AutoCAD 2009 LT on my home PC (so I can stay in practice for GETTING BACK TO WORK someday!) cost much, MUCH more than DesignCAD could ever cost!!!

You may want to investigate "Google Sketchup".

http://sketchup.google.com/intl/en/

The basic/intro package is free. (The Price Is Right!) Additional tools/plugins/advanced packages are not expensive.
Another moderately priced 3d modeling software I have used is BricsCad.

I hope this is helpful.

Bill

Man, does all of this nostalgic stuff bring back memories. I remember the days, when in order to "reasonably" use AutoCAD, it was essential to have a digitizer tablet, and pre programmed title blocks, screws, bolts, hardware of all sorts, etc., etc.

Les

Since the clipped cub has been completed and flown "successfully" ...... I've picked up on the N17 again. I'll periodically post progress here. Major structures are mpostly done for the most part - fuse (80%), top wiing (90%), bottom wings (need joining), tail group (90%). Need to do the mounting, cabanes front and rear, landing gear and all the details.