British turnbuckles?

[nmroberto]

Hi, just ordered a WNW SE5.a today and decided to make my own turnbuckles using twisted wire and tube. 

So...........am I correct in assuming that the  buckles would have a eye on only one end, with the other going directly into the wing?  And the turnbuckles should be on the bottom wing only with eyelets on the top? 

The pics I have been reviewing are unclear on the buckles. 

I wish someone made affordable resin turnbuckles.  I admit...the Gaspatch buckles are very nice but they're also  pricey. 

[Des]

I have heard rumors that someone was playing around with resin turnbuckles but they were not strong enought, the same issie applies to injection moulded turnbuckles.

The SE.5a had RAF aerodynamic rigging which was a flat type rigging metal. They did not have turnbuckles as such but a connector that the turned end of the flat rigging screwed into, top and bottom. The flat rigging is available from a few producers but I have yet to see it applied in such a manner that it look real, the wing connectors are the problem. Most modelers just use turnbuckles, I did, and from a normal viewing distance it looks perfectly okay.

Here are two photos from the TVAL website showing the flat wires used on their SE.5a and the connectors used.





Turnbuckles were fitted only one per wire and usually in a place which was easy to service by the mechanics, close to the bottom wing was the ideal position.

Des.

[Ian from Doncaster]

I think with British types you can get away with eyelets only at both ends for structural rigging.  The eyelets won't look exactly like the connectors Des describes, but would provide a perception of there being something there.

I thought I read on a thread here the other day that the British only used turnbuckles, or tensioners, on control wires?  I don't speak authoritatively on that issue, in general or for specific aircraft.

[Jim]

...I thought I read on a thread here the other day that the British only used turnbuckles, or tensioners, on control wires?  I don't speak authoritatively on that issue, in general or for specific aircraft.

I think you might be referring to the hints & tips that wnw recently added to their website that a member (Jamo?) posted. See page 4:

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/hintsandtips#

[Ian from Doncaster]

Quite right Jim, well spotted

[uncletony]

I like the part about the "self-proclaimed experts on the Internet" -- turnbuckles bad! 

[Des]

I don't think it is a case of being a self-proclaimed expert but more the case of just trying to help out a fellow modeler. We all have our own special technique of doing things, what works for one does not necessaily work for anyone else, but we try to give advice when it is asked for. I have never "proclaimed" to be an expert at anything but I do the best I can with the knowledge I have acquired over the years and most of that has come from experience. Wingnuts (Richard Alexander) with his statement that that we should view opinions expressed by self proclaimed experts with a healthy dose of scepticism is virtually accusing modelers of being wrong and Wingnuts as being correct, I for one would not follow too many of the hints and tips offered by Wingnuts as they are not the way I do things and from what I have seen with some of the brilliant builds on the forum other modelers use their own techniques and do not follow what Wingnuts claim to be gospel. There are hundreds upon hundreds of building tips on the internet and all have merit to some degree, but for one man to stand up and state that what is said by thousands and thousands of modelers should be viewed with a healthy dose of scepticism is extremely arrogant, in other words "I am the best, listen only to me".

Des.

These are my thoughts on what I think is a very arrogant statement by Wingnuts and I don't want this to turn into any sort of feud.

[Des]

Have a look at this link, it gives a lot of pictures of turnbuckles and the flat rigging wire, it gives you a really good insight to the uses and positiion of turnbuckles.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=WW1+british+aviation+turnbuckles&biw=1654&bih=937&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=MzV1Vb-8DoLx8gWPrIDoCA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=1#imgrc=_

Des.

[Jim]

Not sure if this will be of interest, but while conducting "research" at work (i.e. taking a break), I found this rather interesting patent that the Sopwith Co. filed in Nov, 1916 showing a connector for stay (rigging) wires...it would be interesting to know if these went into production and if other British manufacturers (e.g. RAF) used this design as well?

BTW: I included the drawings but not the written description since the file size was too large and a picture is worth a...well, you know the rest 

[Jim]

Red Baron - are you referring to the photos of the SE5a that Des posted?  If so, this is a reproduction isn't it (i.e. the connectors may be similar, but not quite what was used)?

[Jim]

Ok - I had a look through the period photos of SE5.a as well as the Pup and Snipe and couldn't find any evidence of the connectors being manufactured from sheet metal as shown in the patent diagrams. Rather, all the connectors look cast, as seen in the SE5.a photos that Des posted...I wonder if the sheet metal connectors were prone to failing where they were bent/stressed?

[Jim]

Hmmm, are you meaning the connector on the bottom wing that is adjacent the aileron and running diagonally towards the fuselage?

BTW: Here is another drawing from a patent filed by Sopwith Co. in Jan 1918 of a turnbuckle. Again, not sure if this made it into production...

[tcraftpilot]

Not sure if this will be of interest, but while conducting "research" at work (i.e. taking a break), I found this rather interesting patent that the Sopwith Co. filed in Nov, 1916 showing a connector for stay (rigging) wires...it would be interesting to know if these went into production and if other British manufacturers (e.g. RAF) used this design as well?

BTW: I included the drawings but not the written description since the file size was too large and a picture is worth a...well, you know the rest 

I know an old topic, but i just found it!  I don't know to what extent Sopwith used those style of flying wire connectors, but would guess they are for tail brace wires.  My 1946 Taylorcraft, and 1955 Piper Pacer have the same style of tail brace connectors...

[macsporran]

Might there be a market for somebody to offer hollow connectors here? Perhaps they would require too fine casting for the smaller scales, but I would think they would be viable in 1/32 scale.
I'm thinking here of a cast unit representing an RAF-type connector or indeed the various LK options. The unit would look like the complete apparatus from attachment point to bare wire or RAF wire, but with a small diameter hole through the middle.
You would thread two of these onto fishing line, microline, or eaziline and then run the line between holes in wings etc. You could use the old technique of going right through the wing if preferred. Once the line was fixed you would just slide a connector to each end and secure with a drop of thin CA.
I think this would be much simpler and quicker than current methods. Only drawback would be that the line would be continuous with no visible space in turnbuckle where appropriate, but this might be rectifiable and anyway these usually cannot be seen even in good quality photographs.
I'm really thinking of solid connectors with a fine guide hole which could be drilled out. Since there would be no need for any strength, they could be moulded from standard plastic or resin.
If any of the after market guys think there is any mileage in this idea, please feel free to use it - but I'll happily accept a few free test shots!
Sandy