Jump to content

Seagull Boomerang or Arising Star - any difference at all?


Jonathan M
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thanks Jonathan,  I had initially thought about putting a fourstroke on the Boomerang but decided on my OS 46ax.  The trouble is, it's gone missing and I can't find it but know its somewhere close at hand.  I have two spare 46fxs doing nothing, so will use one of them.  I've always used an 11x6 for this engine, but thought about trying 11x5 to slow down for landings, but as you say it's too slow for normal flying.  Hopefully the cg will come out OK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/07/2020 at 19:30, Jonathan M said:

Cheers.

Just to say its not for me to learn on, but to use with the buddy-lead to introduce potential new fliers and to train beginners etc.

Our club field is exposed, usually with a bit of slope lift/sink on two of the four sides and can be a bit turbulent due to trees upwind - so the usual modern lightweight foam trainers don't really help novices gain early stick-time or confidence.

Sorry for all the questions Jonathan on this Boxing night .  We're you happy to use the plastic clevis that came with the kit or did you swap them out for metal ones?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries Aidan.

 

I used the clobber supplied in the kit, which is robust enough for the job.

 

The only mod I did for IC was to fuel-proof thoroughly in the open engine-bay (on top of whatever the manufacturer used) and all around inside the tank-bay as far as the wing-seating, then I used silicone sealant to (semi-permanently) bond the tank-bay (i.e. Lipo-bay) hatch in place, including replacing the nylon screw and wooden-block inside with a metal self-tapper etc, as the original block and protruding screw was fouling the front of the tank.

 

It will be nose-heavy unless you position your 4.5v NiMh as far back behind the servos as possible.

 

Flying-wise, I reckon a 46 pulls it around absolutely fine for a medium-heavy trainer-type.  I estimated mine (pre-obesity due to crash-repairs) to be about 135 W/lb, with a wing-loading of 23.5 lbs/sq in.  (For comparison my Wot4 with an Irvine 47 comes out at about 165 W/lb and a loading of 21 lbs.sq in.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/07/2020 at 10:08, Denis Watkins said:

The flat bottomed wing will gain height more readily into wind

Where the semi symmetrical wing will penetrate more easily without gaining height from the wind

Big advantage with landing, the flat bottomed wing

Can be flown more slowly for arrival

But in the UK, I think the Boomerang can be flown on more days considering wind speeds

Denis, what measurements are best when mounting the 46fx two stroke on the Boomerang from the firewall out?  In the manual it states 110mm, but this looks to me a bit short

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Denis Watkins said:

There is nothing critical about the motor mounting Aidan, as there is no cowl.

Just align the motor in the middle of the mount, so As not to interfere with anything.

The main needle

Always needs clearance making, when fitting the motor, so cut out a little of the side cheek.

Thanks Denis.  Main reason for asking this question is to keep the cg within reason.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a perfect flying day here in central France yeserday 15C and light winds. Seven of us turned out.

 

The Boomerang fitted with a Thunder Tiger 46 PRO and sporting an OS carburetter, (thanks Don,) flew very well but it requires a long take-off run, which is something a beginner would struggle with.

 

It was probably the last occasion I will have to go flying for some time. My sister has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer so I'm going back to Blighty next week to see her, Covid restrictions allowing..

 

Sometimes aeromodelling has to take a back seat.

1st January 2022 2.jpg

1st January 2022.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, David Davis said:

It was a perfect flying day here in central France yeserday 15C and light winds. Seven of us turned out.

 

The Boomerang fitted with a Thunder Tiger 46 PRO and sporting an OS carburetter, (thanks Don,) flew very well but it requires a long take-off run, which is something a beginner would struggle with.

 

It was probably the last occasion I will have to go flying for some time. My sister has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer so I'm going back to Blighty next week to see her, Covid restrictions allowing..

 

Sometimes aeromodelling has to take a back seat.

1st January 2022 2.jpg

1st January 2022.jpg

So very sorry David to hear about your sister , my thoughts and prayers are with you and your family.  Our health is our wealth.   I spent 9 days in hospital after being rushed in by ambulance before Christmas.   I was discharged on 23rd December.   Things can happen very quickly.   I love the two photographs you have on here.  I've started working on my Boomerang again.  I got the vertical and horizontal stabilizer epozied into place yesterday.   I have the fuel tank set up and the engine mount holes drilled for the OS 46fx.  I normally use hex bolts and nylon nuts for securing an engine, but this time round I'm going to use the self tapper screws that came with the kit.   When you say David it took a long take off run with your 46, how long approx would you be talking?    Yes your right David,  our health and family come first.   Wishing you all the best.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aidan, it's a fairly heavy model with a trainer-sized engine, so it will take longer to overcome inertia and gradually accelerate than a more lightly-loaded model with a more powerful engine, and the landing roll-out is similarly longer.  For me that - and also its less acute climb-out angle - actually makes it seem more realistic.

 

I've never measured the length of take-off run but I'd guess (assuming you open the throttle smoothly) you should allow a good 30-40m...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jonathan M said:

Aidan, it's a fairly heavy model with a trainer-sized engine, so it will take longer to overcome inertia and gradually accelerate than a more lightly-loaded model with a more powerful engine, and the landing roll-out is similarly longer.  For me that - and also its less acute climb-out angle - actually makes it seem more realistic.

 

I've never measured the length of take-off run but I'd guess (assuming you open the throttle smoothly) you should allow a good 30-40m...?

Many thanks David.   I like a plane with a shallow climb out also as it looks very realistic.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Jonathan M said:

Aidan, it's a fairly heavy model with a trainer-sized engine, so it will take longer to overcome inertia and gradually accelerate than a more lightly-loaded model with a more powerful engine, and the landing roll-out is similarly longer.  For me that - and also its less acute climb-out angle - actually makes it seem more realistic.

 

I've never measured the length of take-off run but I'd guess (assuming you open the throttle smoothly) you should allow a good 30-40m...?

Many thanks Jonathan, I'm looking forward to getting it completed.  I like a plane that looks realistic on take off with a shallow climb out.  I have the holes drilled for the 46fx, did you use the supplied self tapping screws or hex screws and lock nuts?    Happy new year to you Jonathan.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/12/2021 at 18:14, Jonathan M said:

11x6 works best.  Tried an 11x5 to help slow it for landings, but found it was then too slow for normal smooth flying...

 

I have an electrified Arising Star, fitted for its initial trials with a prop 11x5.5 - I have in reserve, or if found to be necessary, additional props 11x7 and 11x8. This is an interesting thread! Wish I'd come across it earlier, as one of those older (70+) newbie flyers who's made very slow progress so far in getting into the air... (In addition to what might be poor aptitude & age, I move between England and France so no continuity, have unfortunately lost a couple of experienced guys who started to train me, and English winter weather is just so atrocious there's rarely any point in visiting the field. Most of my training has taken place in France, during the sunny months - thanks David!) But I bought an Arising Star in good nick (except for the seized-up OS46!) which had been in someone's attic for a dozen years, and have electrified it. The CoG seems spot on, and I look forward to getting it into the air, with an experienced chum and buddy lead. Its significant weightiness gives me confidence - earlier in this thread someone mentioned beginners having difficulties with light foamy so-called "trainers" and that has been exactly my experience. I hate planes that get blown around by every tiny gust, very nerve racking and irritating. In fact I hate windy weather in general...

Much of the aerodynamic argument here passes me by, but I like the look and feel of my Arising Star, hope it works for me.

rgds Tony

(pic shows Arising Star as it was, unaltered - will post another pic here in a while showing the modified plane, redesigned nose for electric, bigger wheels...)

Arising Star 1.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...