Fancy a new motor?

Quite impressive:

formatting link

Reply to
John Rumm
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
brass monkey

Reminded me of the little steam engine in the book "Trustee from the Toolroom".

Reply to
Bob Eager

Odd. No ignition.

And the camshafts were 1:1 takeoff so its a 2 stroke?

My guess is it runs off compressed air or something.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

That was a petrol engine and dynamo

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

It does - says as much in the comments...

Reply to
John Rumm

So it was...memory failing!

Reply to
Bob Eager

one of my all time favourite Neville Shutes...

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

I think it was the first one I ever read. I enjoyed his autobiography too.

Reply to
Bob Eager

He scores,

and suddenly it's Euro 2012 or whatever its called

Reply to
geoff

All that work and it runs off compressed air? IMHO that is not really that much of a an achievement compared to the small scale Rolls Royce Merlins and Bentley BR2's that were built in the 1980's that actually ran under their own power and in the case of the Bentley even 'fly'

formatting link
?v=HadB-uK4-G0
formatting link

Reply to
The Other Mike

In article , The Other Mike writes

A few too many anoraks around the actual flight but impressive nonetheless, a very smooth flight.

Reply to
fred

1220 hours. Every afternoon for a year?

Andy

Reply to
Andy Champ

Not really the same thing is it, Mongo

maybe this reciprocating device is more your style

formatting link

Reply to
geoff

[snip]

Gosh you mean all those Airfix models that I built had functional jet engines and avionics? The wind tunnel models that I used to use were also fully functional? Or perhaps you talk ignorant crap? The latter, clearly.

So not "fake" as you alleged.

Reply to
Steve Firth

harry wrote: [snip]

[Model aircraft]

Astonishing. Whenever you get a chance you can't wait to demonstrate your absolute pig-ignorance. A flying scale model cannot be a true model of an aircraft. The Reynolds number is not the same for the full sized aircraft and the scale model, hence model control surfaces and wing dimensions cannot be an accurate scale representation if they are the model cannot fly.

Perhaps you should try to talk about something that you understand. Is there any subject that you do understand?

Reply to
Steve Firth

Yes, and haven't you ever been to a planetarium and seen a model of the solar system, complete with a tiny - but fully functional - Earth? If you look really closely, it's just possible to make out a miniature harry, talking out of his arse again.

Reply to
Jules Richardson

Kill harry and we could cure the hole in the ozone layer and global warming in one; given the volume of toxic emissions that spew from his arse when he speaks.

Reply to
Steve Firth

We all know that you live on a different planet harry, but thats just not true

So does a model aircraft have to have a fully working armament system - a spitfire having operational browning machine guns for example or a model passenger plane have miniature stewardesses serving miniature meals and alcoholic beverages to the miniature passengers ... and ... would the alcoholic content of the drinks be scaled down as well?

first dictionary definition I cam across on google

"1. a standard or example for imitation or comparison.

  1. a representation, generally in miniature, to show the construction or appearance of something. ..."

nowhere does it make any claim of functionality

Rather rules you out then, doesn't it

Reply to
geoff

Actually I expect their orbits to look like Spirograph. Lots of scribbling around in a confused mess of going nowhere, slipping a cog from time to time.

Reply to
Steve Firth

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.