Question 97: "Hi George: I’m looking for a scale cockpit kit for my Yellow P-38. The only one I can find is the kit from Dynamic Balsa. Do you know of any others? Danny"

Twinman: "Hi Danny, If you are an artist, go with the Dynamic, but I am not. Check out http://www.planesplus.com/. I personally have not seen the kit, but sounds like a good contact. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 98: "Hi Twinman, I have been flying a Wings Mfg. Kit A-26, that i have put 5 flights on. "Nothing like a twin". My question is this. When i am flying from straight and level and begin to make a turn the plane starts to drop a little and looks like its kind of "Squatting" thru the turn then looks fine going back too flying straight and level. I'm not sure if it's the loss in airspeed or something else? The plane balances right on the money according to the plans. It is fixed tricycle gear, O.S. LA 40's. 8x7 master airscrew 3 blade props. Thanks, Ed "

Twinman: "Hi Ed, You really have a beautiful plane. Wish mine was even close to looking that good. From your description, I would worry that you are close to a stall in the turns. I am very glad that it is balanced well and apprently you are an accomplished flier or by now you might have found this to be true!!!
Try this, change to two blade props. Perhaps 10x6 or 11x5. The OS LA's will not pull 12x4's well. I am concerned about the power of the OS LA's in this application and the three blade props are really not a help. Yes, I use three blades for scale appearance, but I tend to over engines to compensate. I understand that some of the OS FX carb's will fit, or try 15% fuel, for more power.
Good Luck and ALWAYS do the vertical test with a helper before every flight!! Twinman"

Back To List

Question 99: "hi george, i have built a b-17 but the plans did not show flaps so i did not include them. after reading your article on multi engine flying, you recommend flaps so i'm thinking of cutting them into the wing before i paint. are you familiar with the royal kit and do you think i could get by without flaps ? i am a successful pylon racer in district 3 of the NMPRA flying q-500 and q-40 aircraft. i have also been flying a .60 size p-51 Dago Red with flaps and retracts since 1987. what are my chances flying the b-17 successfully? i have been building this thing in between race planes since 1988 and have cockpit detail with interior lights, landing and wingtip lights. it also has retractable landing gear and 10 scale 50 cal. machine guns. i plan on competing in scale contests with this plane. your article has made me more nervous but alot more enlightened as to what to expect from this project, thanks. cecil"

Twinman: "Hi Cecil, I have flown the Royal B-17 without flaps and really did not have any trouble landing. Watch the balance. Did see one that was too tail heavy..not pretty!! I am not sure of your weight, so compare it to the wing area to figure the wing loading. As you approach 30 oz per foot, the landing speed really builds quickly. If it is around 20-25 make sure you have long runway, if concret or shorter if grass. I really do not like "Flaperons". I find they cause you to lose too much control of the plane at slow speeds. The planes you are talking about that you fly now, probably have much light wing loading than this project. Good Luck, and send pictures. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 100: "Hello George I would like to build a 1/6th scale Dehavilland Twin Otter. The wingspan would be 130" and the wing chord 14" for about 1800 square inches of wing area. I believe I can keep the weight at 20 lbs. max. This would put the wing loading around 28oz per square foot. I want to power it with two OS FS-120 Surpass III's. They are pumped, which would increase their reliability and weigh about 1 lb. less each than a gas motor like a G26. Do you think I should use the scale airfoil which is a symmetrical NACA 63A516? What about using the same airfoil for the horizontal tail? I would appreciate your opinion on this project. Thanks Dan"

Twinman: "Hi Dan,I will admit that this is out of my league, but my resident expert on Vancouver Island BC aswered you this way.

"Hi Dan, Mike Morgan here, way out in BC, Twinman forwarded your question to me about the airfoils, OK the 63A516 should be fine for wing, if you look it up you will notice the "mod" after it which as you know means they modified it slightly for the Otter, maybe blunted the leading edge slightly, as for the tail plane you need a fully symmetrical airfoil such as NAAC 0009, at 20 lbs those 120s should be tons of power Mike." Hope that helps. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 101: "Hi George, I was wondering if you can E-mail me some pictures of how the Inboard flap torque rods are mounted to the fuselage of a Yellow P-38. The plans don't help much in this area. I was also hoping that you can show me what the "Arrows" look like that control the rudders, I know they have to be made up and I can use alittle help on how and what to use. Thanks Ron"

Twinman: "Hi Ron, Have sold my White "Yellow" P-38 so cannot show pictures. The in board flaps on mine used one center mounted servo with the linkage "Y'd" to the two flap halves. The "arrows" are just that, either fiberglass or carbon fiber arrow shafts available at archery stores. There are several types of clevis ends that will screw and be glued into the ends of the shafts. These are very strong and do not bend. I also did not trust the wing mounting system......ok so I over powered mine " a bit". I used a long drill bit and inserted a carbon fiber rod fully the lenght of the wing and epoxied. I let it stick out approx six inches and inserted to a brass sleeve in the center pod for additional strenght. Probably not necessary, but I sleep better at night. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 102: "Hi Right now I'm at the stage of designing and building P-38 model (vesion L-5_LO) The model will be build in scale of 1:7, that is the scale of the model company VQ Model is offering. Because you are the only expierenced pilot I know I would like to ask you to help me with profil (airfoil) selection, wings rising angle and center of gravity. I red your articles about double-engine models, and I'm strongly decieded to build model P 38. I don't want to make mistakes in correct parameters selection, that's why I'm asking you for help. Maybe you know details of the model VQ Model or maybe based on your expierence you can propose
something more optimal??? I'll really appriciate any help and tips you could give me with the model building. Best regard Krzysztof "TTQ" Pick "

Twinman: " Hi Krzysztof "TTQ" Pick, I will really admit that I am not an airplane designer. There are many sites on the internet that give drawings of the P-38. I would really not suggest this plane as your first twin engine plane. It is beautiful in the air and one the ground, but is VERY difficult to handle if one engine goes out. You can contact VQ at http://www.vqmodelaircraft.com/ and address your questions to Mike. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 103: "I am looking for an aerotech p-38 kit. do you know where i can get one? are they still available? any info would be great. Thanks matt"

Twinman: "Hi Matt, Yes, I did own one of these. You can order from the UK at http://www.atimanufacturing.co.uk/. The plans leave a bit to the builders skill, but it flew on 60's like a rocket. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 104: "Hi Twinman, I am really impressed by the preview of VQ Models' P61. How would you rate this as a first twin? I'm very interested in twins, think with the larger wing area and rudders this may be a good twin to begin on. What are your thoughts?
Thank you, Mike."

Twinman: "Hi Mike, I personally have not seen the VQ -61 fly yet, but actually had the same thoughts as you, as to it looking easier to fly than a P-38. OK here is my two cents and thoughts. Don't use this or any warbird as a trainer. Twins are not considered as trainers. Just a warning. I made that mistake and it was not fun or cheap. Consider this,
1. You need twin experience before taking on a warbird twin. Even this VQ P-61, I feel will not fly like at lightly loaded trainer. It is a large plane, but much better control surfaces than a P-38.
2. Bash an ugly stick 60 and use the engines you think you will use in the P-61. This is a less expensive and easier to repair trainer.
3. Go to Northeast aero for a twin engine sport plane. You can see at www.ne-aero.com
4. You will have WELL over $1000 in this plane. Unless you are really independently wealthy, I would not risk such an investment until you are very confortable with multi-engine planes. ( Some of the costs, Two engines 60-90 two strokes or 90-120 four strokes, retracts and the complete control system, 12- 13 servos, possibly gyros, battery( Large), receiver, and a good radio, just to get this started.
5. Do you ALWAYS fly coordinated between rudder and ailerons? If not, LEARN. An engine out or imbalanced engines is not the time to learn.
Do not wish to drown your ideas. I have made most of the mistakes that are possible with multi's and do not want others to make the same mistakes. Take your time. I will keep you posted if I get the chance to see or fly the P-61. They are taking their time to get this one right. I have never seen such detail in any arf, or any plane I have ever built, and they want to do it right. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 105: "Hi Twinman. I'm building a Jerry Bates B-26 106.5" and am thinking of using Fema onboard starting systems for both G-38 engines. Are the fema systems reliable and make good sense or a waist of money? Also, should the G-38s be counter rotating? Thanks, Ray"

Twinman: "Hi Ray, Let's relay the on board starting question to our resident engine expert. I have not personally used or installed such a system, but is definately a "WOW" factor at the field. As to the counter rotation. I do not believe the B-26 had counter rotating
props. As a general rule, this, while neat and scale on a P-38 ( Which did have counterrotating props), on this size model makes little to no difference in the flying characteristics. Send pictures and remember that just because these are gas engines, does not make certain of reliabilty. Make sure these things are absolutely reliable. Good luck, Twinman "

Back To List

Question 106: "Hi, TwinMan. It's been awhile. Hope all is well with all the twins at home. I finally got back to my VQ P-38 and am getting closer and closer to the maiden. I hope to fly her before I have to pack it all up for the movers when I retire from the Army this summer. My question is about the rudders and flap channels. Do you use two separate channels for the rudders and flaps, as I do the engines or is one channel each ok? Also, I remember reading some where about the brakes (they work really great!!) being tied into the down elevator, so I'm working on mixing in the brake servo in with the elevator to save a channel. Sincerely, Robert"

Twinman: "Hi Bob, Use one channel for the rudders and "Y" the servos together. Use a separate channel for the flaps and "Y" together. You do not have to use a separate channel for the brakes. I "Y'd" the elevator to the brake servo. Up elevator on the brake valve is not restricted movement due to linkage setting, so the servo moves but does not take much power. I then adjusted the brake servo to engage the brakes progressively as the down elevator is commanded. This also saves a channel. Good luck and let us know how you come out. PACK UP A P-38?? Can you say Crate??? Twinman"

Back To List

Question 107: "Hi there, I too am looking to delve into the dark world of twins. Specifically, the P-38 as it's easily the most gorgeous plane ever made. I was reading your advice on twins and why they are never a good idea and I wanted to know if you had ever made a P-38 with a connecting rod between the engines so that both motors spin both propellers. I can't imagine it's that hard to do and it would seem to fix a lot of the problems associated with the engines being so far apart. Jamo"

Twinman: " Hi Jamo, There have been many attempts at this, but consider cooling, torque, speeds, lubrication, bearing supports, gearboxes, ECT. Do not think I have not thought of this myself, as has many other multi-engine modelers, but as of yet, I know of no workable or affordable system. If you find, it PLEASE LET US KNOW. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 108: "George I have read your report on the VQ Kit, many good suggestions. I note the instructions state that the engine offset is already built in by the factory:however in measuring the firewall appears to be straight rather than approx 3% outboard on both firewalls like the Hobbyco Twin Star and Top flight DC-3. Did you offset any more on your test plane?
Next question I have a matched couple of 30 four stroke engines would they be enough to fly this bird. I also have a B.T.A. Automatic piloting System to use on the twin, has been successfully used on single and works fine but have not tried on twin. Would appreciate your response. Enclosed is picture of my Brian Taylor DeHavlin Mosquito that has not yet been flown---80" wing with two YS-63 (not yet broken in). many thanks for your help Bob Snyder"

Twinman: "Hi Bob, Do not worry about offset. Many people talk about it, but it really is of little help in engine out. You would have to put the engines out to 30 degree angles to actually do any good. All my twins fly straight on. Now, I have changed the vertical on one or two, but was to correct a climb or dive tendency on vertical climb.
As for the 30 four strokes on the VQ A-26 .NO WAY!! DON'T DO IT, NO NO NO!!!
Not enough power, by almost one half!! I don't think that would work with 50% nitro!! NO!!!
I built the bird in the review for a buddy in my club, to do the review, and it originally had Magnum 52 four strokes and Grapner three blade props. It was scary to take off and was flown only at full throttle. Lose an engine and you have NO chance to stay in the air!@!!!!
We changed to Master Airscrews and Magnum 65's and the world was good again. I have also flown one with good TT 46's and ST 45's and that power level works well.
Love the Mosquito. Please remember to always do the vertical engine test for at least 5 seconds before EVERY flight.
Good Luck and send pictures. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 109: "Sir, my name is Joe Hash , I am a retired Senior Chief Petty Officer and have been into Rc for a lot of years. I have been flying VQ's P-40. I ordered their P-38. I am really impressed with your knowledge of this type of aircraft. I have always went to the man for info. I hope you can help. I would like your recommendations on engines/retracts. I have a Futaba T7CAP radio in my 40 now. I read about buying new engines and getting them matched. I was a engineer in navy and run my on automobile restoration shop now here in Virginia so I understand a lot of the basic engineering in this. Thanks for your time. Joe Hash"

Twinman: "Hi Joe, First, I would thank you for your service to this country. The official retracts for this model is from Spring Air. You can get from VQ or Spring Air, The nose gear is a special 105 degree rotation. Use the 7/16" oleo's on the mains due to weight.
Engines, of course are up to you. RELIABLILITY is the main concern. Do not go below .60 size in two stroke and possibly .90 in four stroke. Mine has two ST 90's and 13x8 three blade props, but I am nuts.
I would not kill yourself on matching the engine. For the most part, the engines will be close as they are. One will always be stronger though. Richen the strong one downt to the weak one. If you can, mix the two engines together on separate channels. This makes adjustment easier. If your radio has exponential, you can also use this to Match the engines together all the way up and down the curve, but this is optional.
Warning, VQ may have fixed it, but replace the rubber plug for the fuel lines and the plastic part that the screw goes into in the fuel tanks. Several have gone bad. There is a very good series of building this bird on the twins forum at rcuniverse and was done side by side with the KMP, with is not so scale. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 110: "Twinman Dear George, One of our club members is building a KPM P38. It is a first warbird, first retract, and first twin. But he is a good builder and flyer. It is not a sane idea but no amount of conversation is going to deter him. He is not an Internet person so I have printed all of your articles and twin instructions (warnings) that were found. If possible Bill Garner, High Point NC (336-869-3431) would like to establish a dialog with someone building or flying a KPM or similar P38. Any contacts or other KPM builder/flyers that you could furnish would probably be helpful to both parties. Twins are an incurable disease. Just reading the articles rekindled the disease in me. Once I put OS 25 helper engines on a 35 lb. Ugly Stick because the main 25 cc engine would not fly it. Later the 25’s were mounted hammer style on a 40-size airplane. Never did overcome fuel foaming as a result of the cantilevered beam mounting. Later the 25’s were mounted in engine boxes and attached to the bottom of the wing. Never had a twin crash however all engine outs were treated as dead sticks.

After eight years of twin remission I will be cutting into the wing of a Kadet Senior this week to reinforce the structure to accept the old engine boxes. Looks like a perfect platform for twin/triple ongoing experimental work. Wing loading is light, airframe is stable, dead sticks well, fuselage has room for feeder tank, and the engine boxes will mount under bays two three or four. It helps to be a little crazy. I’m off to ruin a perfectly good airplane with 26 flights. Thanks for listening. Bill "

Twinman: "Hi Bill, While your friend my not be into the internet too much, suggest you send personal message to the guys who did the side by side building of the VQ and VMP P-38's in the twins forum on rcu. I have met both guys and they are great. I do not have the KMP, but have the VQ.
THE P-38 IS NOT A TRAINER!!!!!!!! YOUR FRIEND WILL CRASH!!!. Been there done that.
Have also tried the hammer style mounting of twin engines. I think I once saw this idea in a magazine. Like you, never got it to work right. You will love the twin Kadett. One guy at our field have done it and I have flown it. Engine out is a none event. Consider to enlarge the rudder surface a bit, but not manditory. Yes, we have done the twin kadett and triple and yes five. You can see this insanity at rcu in the twins section. Do a search for Kadett King. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 111: "Hi, I hopw you you are the right person to ask the following question: I am going to build a Cant Z1007bis (Italian WWII bomber) with three engines. What is a clever and reliable way of setting up the 3 servos for the throttles?

1: A servo synchronizer; Futaba sells one, couples up to 4 servos, each is
adjustable, the unit plugs into a single Rx channel
2: Plug each throttle servo in 1 channel in Rx and mix them together to
throttle
3: 2 Y-harnesses
4:??? Other suggestions???

Thank you very much for your input!"

Twinman: "Hi, Three servos on a tri engine? Ok, here are my two cents in order of complexity and interest. One. Yes, the two "Y" harnesses work and that is how I originally configured my Junkers JU 52. Only draw back is additional manual setting of the engines to match idle and full throttle settings Two. I then changed to the outboard engines on the main channel and the center engine on the slave channel. Note, this does take a computer radio. The neat part of this is that you can kill the outboard engines upon landing and taxi back on only the center for a "wow" factor. Less matching of engines is necessary, as only two have to match rpm and the radio can set the center one. Three. If you have enough mixes, you can put all three on separate channels and mix together. Suggest the center one as master and the other two as slaves. Now, you can do the above and have an easy time to set the idle and
high idle throttle settings on all engines, due to independent control of each engine. I am not familiar with the Futaba mixer, but sounds like it should work, but will have to set everything up with the wing off. Good Luck and send pictures. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 112: "Hi George, I must say that I find your column very interesting and informative. You were instrumental in my going with a twin finally. I know you don't recommend a P-38 as a start, but I decided to go with the Wing Mfg. version due to it smaller size. I should be done with it in about a month or so, but no where on the plans could I find a reference to incidence. Maybe I'm going blind in my old age! Do you have a recommendation on the angle? Your help is appreciated. Sincerely, Frank F"

Twinman: "Hi Frank, If I remember my Wing P-38, Aerotech,VQ, Yellow, and the plans for the Zeroli, all are zero elevator to wing. The KMP, at least the early ones were produced with a positive 5 degrees on the wing and 3/16" down elevator was necessary.
Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 113: "George, i flew my frist twin this weekend a ziorli b-25(118")at52#. It had g-38s with zinger 18-10 props. the motors were set at 6800 and within 75 rpms, high and low. we fly off a sod farm and the grass was wet andfairly high. after reading your articlesits a wonder anybody would want to fly twins period. the plane flew very heavy and slugish along with very little rudder. What i mean is the rudder seemed very inactive(not much authiroty). M ade a couple clearing passes and soom real nice photo passes then set up for landing with about 25 degrees flap, second try perfect landing in front of tooo many family members and friends. Thanks for taking the edge off of this flight. Are you going to the thisstle town fly in in ohio next weekend! FRANK FELS DISTRICT 2 DIRECTOR IMAA. THANKS "

Twinman: "Hi Frank,Welcome to "Twinsanity". Hope you sent Paul here are rcwarbirds the pictures. Are your hands still shaking?
As for scaring people about twins. Sorry, but that is not my plan. I have made most of the mistakes possible on these things and I only want to save others the experience and hardship, buy sharing those experiences to keep others from making the same mistakes.
Consider, on your B-25, to increase the throws on the rudders to as much as possible.If they are not effective now, then they would be little to no help on an engine out.
Perhaps you can ask our engine expert about those props. I am not familiar with the power band on the G-38's and perhaps you can get more speed and authority with 18-8 or 20-6. Twins fly "Heavy" due to higher wing loading, but your description makes me nervous. Good Luck and thanks for the kind words. Send pictures.......if they are not too blurry from shaking hands on the camera person. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 114: "George The P-61 Black Widow has always been my favorite twin engine fighter. I have put a deposit on VQ's P-61 after reading your review of the test flight. I am a pretty good pilot and after reading that the "61" will fly fairly well on one engine to bring it home, as opposed to the horror stories of the P-38, I felt comfortable enough to purchase it. This would be my first twin. Can I handle the "61" as a first twin or should I train on something else? I am also thinking about using electric motors to lessen the threat of flameout, however I don't know anyone to talk to figure out what I would need. Do you know anyone I could contact to ask about what I would need to electrify the "61"? Thanks and I love the warbird site. Tom."

Twinman: "Hi Tom, I was very impressed with the P-61 and the "horrors" of the P-38 are only if one engine quits. All twins fly fairly well....as long as both are turning. I must admit that I am watching electrification of multi warbirds, much closer, but have not taken the plunge. I would suggest visiting our sister site at rcu and the twin forum. Less stuffy bunch than the scale guys and much more willing to experiment. It is called "twin sanity". On set of posts if discussing just these projects at http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_441960/mpage_3/tm.htm and one person is solving the P-38 horrors at the last pages of http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_1280094/mpage_7/tm.htm.
Sorry I could not help more, but help others, including myself as you progress. If the above posts will fly the P-38, then there will be NO PROBLEM with the P-61. Much larger wing for less wing loading, larger rudders and tail booms for more control, ect.
Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 115: "Greetings: I am about to start construction of an A20 Havoc. Power will be two sweet running Enya 46-4C engines. Airfoil will be semi-symmetrical. Can you give me the basic incidence measurements for the horizondal stabilizer, wing and engines? My first twin was a Sig Kadet set up similalar to a Partenavia P-68 Victor. A very nice plane for a first attempt. Thanks.
Ted "

Twinman: "Hi Ted, Personally, I set everything to Zero, including the engines. Yes, I know that some trainers use outboard thrust in the idea that it will aid single engine flight. To actually do this, the engines would have to be out approximately 30 degrees. I have flown the converted twin Kadet and yes, it really does fly well. Keep us posted and good luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 116: "Dear George, Engine out on a twin is critical. From the descriptions engine out on a P38 is super critical. Experience years ago indicate ALL my engine outs were a result of fuel foaming due to the many harmonics generated by twins. What type of foam do you use? Simply wedging the tanks in with foam as with singles seems ill advised. How is the tank firmness in the foam being controlled? Have the rocket scientists who visit here determined which foam is best at dampening vibrations? What methods are being used to test for foaming? The destructive testing method is obvious and well used. The dampening characteristics of airframe vibration with wheels on the ground are very different than in air dampening. Watching the fuel line for bubbles is not adequate since the tank can be full of bubbles with only a few occasionally entering the fuel line. Is anyone decreasing/increasing the rigidity of the airframe based on fuel foaming testing? The gyros described make good sense but they approach the problem after it has gone critical. Thanks for the inspiration. Bill"

Twinman: "Hi Bill, Personally, I really have not had much trouble with fuel foaming. Yes, you should put foam around the tanks as in any model. Could I suggest very carefully checking the propellors balance. If you are using wooden props, I have seen big variations in the amount of clear coating put on the props. You could have badly balanced props. One other possible test. Fill the tanks only 1/3 full. Foaming is worse if the tanks are not full. Using a helper, run the engines up and down with the plane being held in the air and rotate to verical positions. This is also the best way to check engine reliability, as fuel lean out can get worse as the fuel level drops.
Yes, the harmonics change in the air. Just listen to the engines go into and out of sync as the plane flies.
The most important part is to make sure that the engines are reliable. I do not know if you are using two or four strokes, but always do the verical test before each flight and set the engines a bit richer than you would with a single engine plane.
Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 117: "Mr George I'm Brazilian R/C Pilot I construct F7F 1:6 in http://casadabalsa.ww.com (webCam the construction R/C F7F) Is NECESSARY the Gyro for this model? Mr. Clair "

Twinman: "Hi Clair or Senor Gonzalez, Gyros are really not necessary for any model, except helicopters. I do use them on my warbirds for the extra safety and control in the event of engine failure. I do not use them on my high performance twins, as I know they will fly on one engine well. I would suggest them if you have concern that this model cannot fly on one engine. I have not flown the F7F, and so cannot make a judgement. It appears that it has fairly close engine spacing and a large rudder. Both of these are very important for single engine operation. The gyros will not hurt the flight characteristics and for me, I find that they are good insurance. One question. Do you always fly making coordinated turns? By this I mean, do you ALWAYS use aileron and rudder together on ALL turns? If you do not, the rudder gyro will fight the turn. If you do use both, the gyro will be invisible and only make the turn smoother. Good Luck and send final pictures. Twinman"

Back To List

Question 118: "yo george i have been in this game now for about a year and have always wanted a p38 and have ordered a KMP green sharkmouth model was excited up until i read your thoughts sure wish i had found you first anyway it is on its way to my hanger was hoping for a good review and now not so excited about your thoughts don't wish to return this plane as you may as well know i am alittle bit bullheaded was planing to use OS 46 ax engines give thoughts on this now i am also thinking on the line of satio four strokes please advise knowing that there is all kinds of problems ahead still planning to go forwards in closing i wish you would put me on your email address as i may have abunch of problems to solve as they may come up looking forward to hearing from you later DUNK"

Twinman: "Hi Billy, I personally did not build the KMP. I only saw the kit and have seen it fly verses the VQ. I would seriously reconsider the .48's as too small for this plane. A P-38 is not pretty in a snap roll due to under power. You can also go to our sister site are rcuniverse.com.. Go to the twins forum and there is a side by side building of both planes. I was lucky enough to see both these planes fly at the Twin Fly-in in Iowa earlier this year. Personally still think the VQ is a better plane, if you have any wish to consider scale. Wait until you see their P-61 that is also reviewed here at rcwarbirds. I must risk your anger to get on my soap box and warn you, that the P-38 is not a beginners plane, I don't care who builds it. I would strongly suggest that you get some time with twins before attempting this. Been there, done that....don't do it. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 119: "George: Would two OS 46AX motors be an over kill on the A-26 Invader? Thanks! Ken"

Twinman: "Hi Ken, NO absolutely not would it be over kill. Would actually be a lot of fun. You could also consider three blades for more scale look with the power. You really do not want to under power a twin. No chance to hold it in the air on one engine.
Remember, this is a warbird and the wing loading is higher than you could be used to. Do not just chop the throttle. Fly it to the ground. Good Luck, Twinman"

Back To List

Question 120: "Recently, I've been very intriqued with the DeHavilland Mosquito. I am considering two Mosquito kits. One is from JR Models (http://www.jr-models.cz/english/aera.html). The specs on website say 64" wingspan, 7 lbs, 2 x 0.25 engines, almost-ready-to-cover. The other is from GiantScalePlanes (http://www.giantscaleplanes.com/Mosquito_73.htm). The specs on that website say 73" wingspan, 11.5 lbs, 2 x 0.32 engines, almost-ready-to-fly. My question is… Would two RCV 60SP engines (http://www.rcvengines.com/specifications.htm) be too much for these kits? These engine will be able to turn scale size 3 bladed props. Thanks in advance, Josh"

Twinman: "Hi Josh, I have been luck enough to see these fantastic engines operate. Yes, the prop shaft rpm is low, but with scale props and high torque the combination sounds great. The engines listed on the two sites you post are two strokes and the RCV is "Kind of a Four Stroke". I think this idea will look, fly and sound great. Let us know how you progress. Twinman"

Back To List