I designed this 24" span Fairey Barracuda for rubber power a few years ago; it started out as a simple 1.5x enlargement of my Dime Scale plan that was covered on HPA2, but it eventually turned into a more-or-less complete redesign. I've done it as FAC "Simplified Scale", so it's relatively simple and some of the finer details are missing, but I've tried very hard to make the overall outline shape as correct as possible, given that it's meant to be a flying model.
Getting the outlines correct has been difficult because some of the existing drawings are not very good (e.g. Hall Park Warpaint #35). I've gone with the (very small, quite basic) drawings from "The British Bomber since 1914" by Peter Lewis (pub. Putnam), simply because it seemed to have outlines that matched the available photographs.
One of the main areas of disagreement between drawings and photos is the leading-edge at the wing root – some drawings show a discontinuity in the leading-edge shape but I can't convince myself that it shows up in a "proper" top view; there is a discontinuity but I think it's basically an increase in the (already significant) wing thickness around the wing fold break. Needless to say, I haven't found a photograph that is sufficiently close to directly-above or directly-below to resolve the issue. There isn't an existing airframe available to examine, although I think one of the well-known museums (Hendon/IWM/FAA Yeovilton?) has plans to re-build one from various donor airframes and parts.
There have been the usual minor increases in area and dihedral because I want it to fly for as long as possible; I hope these changes don't change the character of the model too much - they'll probably pale into insignificance when set next to the much-thinner-than-scale airfoil that I've had to use.
All that's done so far is the tail surfaces that you see here, but I'm going to try and focus on this for the next few weeks and we'll see how long it takes; I'm not a quick builder, but as the thing has made it to the front of the build queue I might as well get on with it.
And about flamin' time too. :)
Quote from: TheLurker on Mar 28, 2026, 09:25 PMAnd about flamin' time too. :)
Hahahahaha!
Mea Culpa.
But I suppose this'll be similar to your peanut Hurricane, won't it? You started that at about the same time I started this, but I don't think anyone has ever seen a completed plan... ?? Or any plan, come to that. :)
Quote from: AndyB...But I suppose this'll be similar to your peanut Hurricane, won't it?...
It's going to be my retirement project. :)
Don't plan on having too much time in retirement Lurk ;) It didn't work for me!
You might just win this race Andy!
Interesting subject anyway.
John
Started on the wings which will plug into the centre section using a couple of 1.6 mm carbon rods in 3/32" aluminium tube. At some point I realised that the wing attachment ribs weren't going to be strong enough to resist the pull of the covering, so had to re-draw and re-cut a couple of ribs; this is usually the way of things, everything looks fine when viewed through my rose-tinted designer glasses, but reality usually hits when handling the actual parts.
I am, however, prepared to admit that I might now have over-specified them - they're the two really thick (1/8") ribs in the picture below.
Got the wings finished and joined, although I do still need to do the flaps and flap runners before moving on the the fuselage.
I haven't weighed anything yet because there's nothing I can do about it when I find out that it's turned out a bit heavy...
Very nice Andy. I like your removable wing mounts, very neatly done
Are you using bent joiner wires in the aluminium tubes Andy? It seems to be indicated in your pics but you mentioned using carbon rods?
Regardless - light and clean structure as with all your builds.
John
Quote from: OZPAF on Apr 05, 2026, 03:33 AMAre you using bent joiner wires in the aluminium tubes Andy? It seems to be indicated in your pics but you mentioned using carbon rods?
<snip>
John
It's actually four straight 1.5 mm carbon rods (slightly doctored, see below) running in 1/16" ID aluminium tubes; I did think about using 1/16" wire but the weight penalty was fairly horrific for a 24" span model. As it is, there's about 10 inches of tube and a little less carbon rod, so the penalty should be 2-2.5 grams depending on how much rod gets used and whether the selected magnets are up to the job of keeping the wings in place.
The carbon rods are wiped with a bit of thin CA and then carefully sanded back, I think I'll probably give them a quick (very thin!) coat of waterproof acrylic varnish to make a better fit in the tubes; might be able to do without the magnets.
A.
Thanks for that. I guess my head is still in the kG area of models and not the gm size as far as joiners go :)
John
It's always the detail bits that slow you down - the flaps are finished but are not as-drawn because apparently I'm still changing things as I go. Flap runners are also re-designed so had to print some more parts to be cut.
Off flying tomorrow and I'm busy on Sunday, so should get back to this on Monday.
Removable wing panels are sorted, pictures should be self-explanatory although I find sanding the ply end-panel facing down to match the wing section quite stressful - almost as stressful as drawing control surfaces, there are just so many ways it can go wrong. Wing root magnets are 3mm x 1mm which look to be just strong enough.
On with the fuselage tomorrow...
The only slight cloud on the horizon is that I've weighed everything and it's about 16.5 grams (of which about 2.5-3 grams is for the removable wings), so far; even if the fuselage doubles that total, there's a decent chance that the finished empty weight will be sufficiently low that it'll need a dethermalizer, which I was hoping to avoid.
The only sensible approach to installing a D/T is, I think, to break the stabiliser at the main spar and tilt up the rear half 90 degrees, as on Tom Hallman's Schweizer SGU 2-22. It's not a scale elevator break line but we do want the thing to come down on demand.
Finally, the fuselage sides are done; the problem has been that I've been changing my mind about how everything fits.
I've never been happy with the idea of a couple of large windows under the wing (it would have been possible to see the rubber motor which would have looked wrong, and it would have weakened the fuselage) so I've taken a sensible pill and the windows will be represented with paint or decal paper.
Finally got around to doing some building over the past few days after real life and various other interests kept getting in the way.
If you look carefully there's a repair to one of the fuselage diagonals; don't know how this happened because obviously, I would never have done this whilst pinning one of the jig triangles in place, and if I had I'd pretend I hadn't...
Looking again at the lower nose area, I suspect that it might need some more material on the inside to make sure that there's enough wood to carve and sand the nose to the correct shape.
The fin mount is now resolved and stringers are installed. I always seem to screw up a few stringer position and former shapes slightly. I'm sure this is perfectly normal...
As things stand, the parts weigh about 30 grams. There's some to be sanded off that, but there's also some infill required to the nose, a tailwheel and a canopy with at least one crew member; I have some suitably-coloured tissue from Wind-it-up Enterprises (thanks to The Lurker) so the finish shouldn't be too heavy, but there is a suspicion that my final weight target (45 grams) may be at risk.
Two peg positions? This is a Barracuda & not a Gannet, yes? :)
Nice bit of joinery old chap.
What a neat looking truss structured fuselage.
John
Great aeroplane - following with interest. many years ago I built the Earl Stahl version - a great flyer. The Barracuda has perfect proportions for a flying model
Quote from: THBThe Barracuda has perfect proportions for a flying model
I agree, except for the ludicrous 21% thickness-to-chord at the wingroot.
Quote from: Andy BI hope these changes don't change the character of the model too much - they'll probably pale into insignificance when set next to the much-thinner-than-scale airfoil that I've had to use.
I don't blame you for modifying it for 'simplified scale'.
I've always liked the look of the Barracuda - a kind of sullen menace about it.
Stephen.
Quote from: TheLurker on May 10, 2026, 03:55 PMTwo peg positions? This is a Barracuda & not a Gannet, yes? :)
...
That's because I want the longest possible motor and I don't know what I can get away with as far as rear peg position is concerned - if there's too much noseweight with the rear position, the forward position should work.
Quote from: Prosper on May 12, 2026, 01:48 PM... except for the ludicrous 21% thickness-to-chord at the wing root.
"Ludicrous" is a good description for the thickness of the original Barracuda wing :)
Quick update today. After spending quite a bit of time getting it to the stage where it can be assembled; amazingly, alignment was nearly right first time, requiring a just small amount of fettling. Lots to do still, it needs crew, canopy, tailwheel, flap mounts, prop/spinner and exhausts.
Oh, and it still needs the tailplane breaking for the D/T, the rear half will have to pop to about 90 degrees to get the required effect (might have to use stitched hinges), and I must remember to mount the D/T mechanism (viscous rotary timer) somewhere before steaming on with the covering.
Not 'alf bad that.
Beautiful building Andy
It has a nice well balanced look Andy - very neat construction as well.\
John