1/10th scale Blackburn Beverley.

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Hello again folks,

I am progressing well with my drawings for this proposed model. I have gleaned my info from several sources and making millions of mistakes, occasionally having to restart a drawing. Having been 15 years in the Royal Air Force and over 30 years in the building industry, I know all the appropriate expletives that fit well with draughtsmanship. I suppose this is the best place to make the mistakes rather than cutting materials only to chuck it in the bin?

I have been to Fort Paull and photographed the sole example there which is helping enormously with my drawings. I am working out proportions from these and other photos on the internet, as well as a 1/72 scale drawing someone emailed to me, but I am not sure that these are in any way accurate. Once I have made several cross references and calculated proportions, and made several mistakes on the drawing board, rubbing out and redrawing lines, it eventually makes sense. One of the things I do is to work out the positions of one thing in relation to another, such as the line of the rear doors at their junction with the fuselage and the positions of windows etc, cross referencing gauged measurements several times until it all fits. I have also obtained a set of drawings from Ivan in Canada. These are 1/15.5 and have been of some help, but my concept is totally different to this and somewhat larger of course.

I believe that my model will be a good representation of the real thing, it is clearly possible that I may get some small things out of proportion, but it will in essence be airworthy and clearly a Beverley. I hope to be meeting up with Richard Hughes at some point to discuss the wing structure that I have designed and possibly doing some laser cutting to save a bit of time.

I will constantly be on the search for info, so if anyone wishes to contact me regarding this project, please PM me on here as I have a new email address but cannot change my details for some reason?

I have attached a photo of part of the wing drawing with my car key for scale. This is in fact 1/20th, therefore half of the finished model size. I do have some adjustments to make to these drawing though!

[stuart knowles 1611]

Hello Malcolm,
Nice choice of subject, What span does that translate to? I saw that Bev campained a few years ago (Gordon Nichols?) with 4 x 38cc motors and always liked the look of it and the layout which made for a very practical, if cumbersome aeroplane!

Oddly enough I was reading a story about a RAF Beverley only the other night. Apparently it was making its way up through France, into a fierce headwind the crew watching various French trains as they sped past. In due course it was handed over to UK Air Traffic control.

After a while AT came on the radio, "RAFAIR, please confirm aircraft type"
RAF " Blackburn Beverley"
AT, "Thank God for that, we thought you might be a Zepplin."

Good luck with your project and please keep posting.
regards,
stu k

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Hello Stu,

The real thing is 162 feet wingspan, so this at 1/10th is just over 16 feet. About big enough I thought? The length will be a smidge under ten feet and as you suggest, a bulky beast with the main part of the fuselage being about 22 inches by 14 inches. Preparing the drawings is a massive task on its own. I have been doing some jobs around the house which has given me a much needed break from the headaches gained from continually working out measurements, then only to discover that the whole lot is wrong and having to go over it all again. I am certain it will be worth the agro in the end?

When I start the build, I will make the undercarriage as the first project and will produce the olios from hardwood dowel initially until I discover a better material that will give strength as well as weight advantages. This is a voyage of discovery for me, as in the years of absence from any kind of modelling, the materials now available are vastly different and varied, but there will be a lot of plywood and balsa in the basic structure, as you might expect.

I will keep you all updated on this post from time to time, especially when I need to pick a brain or two? It will be quite some time before I actually start on the physical build, I do have to finalise the drawings sufficiently to advance the build, but feel certain that the drawings will need updating as the build progresses, based on empirical revelations? I will also jot down some notes and take photos for the magazine should this be of sufficient interest to members?

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Although I am not really ready to start the build, I have been experimenting with some pieces of ply that I happen to have in the workshop. I made these pair of basic frames for the main undercarriage. I don't know if I will actually use them, but it was a good exercise in cutting ply and learning just how careful we need to be! There are some slight inaccuracies that need to be trimmed out if they are to be used.

[Tinus Nielsen]

Cutting ply? Use one of these fellas!

Sorry, couldn´t resist. :-)

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

You are obviously getting too much of this Tinus? https://www.facebook.com/Clutchband

The brain becomes a mush if we are not careful!

[Tinus Nielsen]

Can´t have too much Clutch.... Best live band I have ever seen by the way. :-)

On the serious side though. For cutting and drilling plywood I use, well - before getting the CNC mill that is, a bandsaw to cut out the parts and a disc sander to get them to spec. Then it´s possible to make very accurate parts.
For drilling I prefer to use a a step drill. This will produce very nice holes in plywood, even rather large ones, and will also camfer the edge slightly.
http://images.palcdn.com/hlr-system/Web ... 110847a5a6

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Hi Tinus,

Thanks for that. Had a listen to "Clutch" on YouTube. One saving grace, they are better than "The Templars"!

I have seen the step cutters on tools pages and thought they might split the grain on ply, but you seem to think it's OK? Perhaps I should get one? I have ordered this set of small auger drills: - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/191089152193? ... EBIDX%3AIT

The above picture of the undercarriage frames shows the good side. At the bottom of the other sides the grain has frayed a little, which I will experiment with some filler to rectify. I should have put a knife cut across the grain first I guess. I have to glue on a strengthener across the inside bottom olio gap and drill a couple of holes to glue in a couple of location pegs. These holes need to be very clean with not a lot of space to drill them, so there is a danger of splitting the grain very easily. Perhaps I should have drilled the holes before cutting out the frames? This is the first time I built a model using ply, so a few things to learn. These frames may end up good enough to actually use?

[Stuart Solomon]

For clean holes without any tear out or splintering, use Forstner bits. You can get them from 6mm upwards but always use a backing piece. Solly

[stuart knowles 1611]

Just a couple of thoughts Malcolm, both of which you may have covered. Have you registered this build with Tony Hooper? At the size you are talking about you will end up in the over 20kg bracket. A side benefit of the registration is that you will be assigned an Inspector with experience of large models who will be able to support you design and build.

Have you considered looking at an existing plan of the Bev? Even if you plan a more accurate and comprehensive airframe, checking with an existing (and proven) plan might give you a steer on construction.

Apologies if I'm teaching Granny how to suck eggs

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Hi Stuart,

Yes indeed, the project has reached the initial reporting stage, and I have been allotted John Rickett as my inspector. I look forward to my initial meeting with him. I am also going to visit Richard Hughes in Burnley to discuss my wing design and learn stuff from him no doubt. He has a wing design programme that will be useful. I am fairly confident with my basic ideas but may need to change some details? I am not too sure if I need to incorporate any wash out on the wings?

I recon this will be in the region of 50 lb for sure, but we will see. I do have a set of drawings from Ivan in Canada. This is a bit smaller than my proposal, and is a totally different concept to my plans, but there are a couple of ideas I can modify and use. I doubt that my airframe is anything like the real thing. For starters it has to be designed to come to pieces for transporting, it is a very bulky thing with those high fins and fixed under carriage, and this is where my design differs from the others, as you will discover in the fullness of time on these pages and elsewhere with any luck. What matters is that it all fits together in an airworthy fashion, and looks like a Beverley. My long term plan is to build it (without too much detail) to prove the design and perhaps get the certificate, then to add in the detail in the fullness of time. Things like the cockpit glass and passenger window etc can be painted in black gloss. The various air intakes and other odd bits can be added later on?

As for the egg sucking, I am open to suggestions and any sensible advice from anyone. If I heard it before or if I believe that my idea would be better, then there is nothing lost, but you can bet your boots that someone will give me inspiration on some aspects that will be useful. In the fullness of time I will need to learn a bit more about the electrical aspects of this, but there is no need to get into this just yet, plenty of other things to concentrate on.

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

We need to remember that the scale refers to the dimensions. If we were to go by scale weight at 1/10th, this model would weigh over 790 lbs unladen. It's not even going to be 1/1600th weight.

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

I had a lengthy conversation with John Rickett yesterday regarding this project, and he suggested that this will weigh in at 100 lb or more. Therefore the weight ratio to the real thing will be 1/800th???

[Dave Berry 2911]

Remember that weight is directly related to volume; the latter is a cube function, therefore instead of 1/10 scale the weight will be of the order of 1/1000.
Not dead accurate of course, but in the right ballpark.

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Thanks for that Dave. Going by that premise, this will be about 80 lb? We will find out in a couple of years or so?

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Been busy this afternoon. I made the first fuselage frame from 1/8th ply. I decided that each main frame should be made from a single piece rather than lots of bits stuck together. This frame is not finished, it needs to be fettled to the line on the curves and a little trimming hear and there, otherwise it is suitable to use. There are a few more slots and holes to be added to this, otherwise I am very happy with this so far. I cut the straight cuts with a Stanley knife and steel straight edge. This does take a little bit of time but works well and need less trimming. The curves and longeron slots cut on the band saw. There are three of these frames to be made from 1/4 ply for the wing/undercarriage attachment area. I may not be able to cut these with the knife and will take longer to make as they will require more trimming time.

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

Had a busy day yesterday. It is surprising how little things gobble up the time. I spent most of the time fettling, cutting the remaining slots, then making the front wing root spar, and gluing this in place. I must examine my methodology as it appears to be very slightly off centre. It is a very small error (about 1/32" or less) but will need some thought as to how I will deal with this, I have a couple of options. It is not exactly crucial structurally, more a stiffening role. Perhaps I will remove the joint nib each end and butt joint with some gussets either side.

When I did the drawings, I really did not notice the two joints crossing each other at the top. This requires the two little bits to be glued back in place once assembled. No stress happening here thankfully. The two long vertical slots are for the inner wing former. These do not have a structural function, but merely to take the balsa sheeting on the wing stubs through the side of the fuselage. The sheeting is one of those "sort it as you do it" empirical jobs.

I also will be making some weight saving holes in appropriate positions.

Soon I'll be running out of my small stock of ply, must get some materials ordered up, loads of balsa as well as more ply and loads of glue!


ADDENDUM:-

Just had a careful measure and have got away with it this time! I measured both sides from the centre line and one side is spot on and the other side is a tad long. Can't imagine how this happened, I suppose I should be more careful with the initial cutting and fettling?

[MalcolmDouglasPorter]

I expect you lot are bored to death with this frame? Had a little bit of spare time today, so drilled these weight saving holes.

Perhaps the more experienced among you could give me some advice. The sides of these frames are 1.1/2 inches wide. Would any of you drill small weight saving holes down the sides, and possibly along the bottom?

[Rob Buckley]

I wouldn't bother, there's a really big hole in the middle & that former looks about right to maintain some strength.

[stuart knowles 1611]

No Malcolm, Keep posting, It will be interesting to see how your design develops and how you deal with issues that come up. No-one has to read the thread if they don't want to and, to be honest, this forum is not that busy.

Looking good so far