By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Something that will bounce

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Gary Manuel11/07/2018 18:00:31
avatar
1738 forum posts
1507 photos

Have a look at the Seagull Yak 54 Sam

Sam Longley11/07/2018 18:29:03
62 forum posts
Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 11/07/2018 17:57:16:

Of course you can work on two aspects at once - well not usually "at once" but certainly in parallel.

I guess you are looking for a 4-5Kg-ish arobat yes? Well in my experience a model that looks great and always seems to fly well is the Sbach 342. PilotRC do some excellent versions, but perhaps a little large for 20cc. But there are loads of others

BEB

Pilot are nicely built planes but, as far as I can see, the specs all show them as being for electrics. I sometimes wonder if an airframe built for electric can take the vibration of a petrol engine along with the strain of starting pressure etc

We have had some Seagull models in the club but they seem so badly built; falling apart (one in mid air) kind of puts me off them

trebor11/07/2018 18:33:34
avatar
1731 forum posts
213 photos

Some are good and some are down right bad frown

I have a second hand one of these that I,m fixing up and these are well made https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Seagull-Edge-540-180-Blue-ARTF-Deluxe-Series-Sea-26A-5500020-/263353864953

Edited By trebor on 11/07/2018 18:35:51

Percy Verance11/07/2018 18:38:05
avatar
6833 forum posts
138 photos

There are several artf quality categories trebor.

1. Good

2. Not too clever

3. Pretty awful

4. Downright lousy

5. VMar

Edited By Percy Verance on 11/07/2018 18:38:42

ASH.11/07/2018 19:51:07
avatar
221 forum posts

I have to disagree Sam, Seagull models are some of the best. They have good wood, excellent construction and are superb value for money. Cannot be beaten. As with all ARTF's you have to strengthen in places, it's the norm. Perhaps the ones you've seen fall apart were poorly built, (cheap glues etc).

Also, 3D models need high power to weight so are built for lightness and so are inherently more fragile.

trebor11/07/2018 19:55:02
avatar
1731 forum posts
213 photos

I picked up one of these but the quality is no where near as good as the Edge **LINK**

Sam Longley11/07/2018 22:30:14
62 forum posts
Posted by trebor on 11/07/2018 19:55:02:

I picked up one of these but the quality is no where near as good as the Edge **LINK**

With due respect. You are contradicting yourself.

On one hand you are telling me about how good a particular seagull model is then on the other you are telling me that the quality of another model is no where near as good.

That demonstrates inconsistencies in construction does it not

Furthermore, ASH suggests that perhaps the models I have seen might just have had poor glues. Well yes they did! & that was the problem- They fell apart

So if a particular manufacturer has inconsistencies across its range (within not dissimilar price ranges) then that makes it very difficult for someone like me to just go & buy a model from them with confidence - Does it not?

I know that other manufacturers have the same problems but one can buy (for instance)a Chris Foss designed plane from Ripmax,& be reasonably certain that it will stay together.(but not all other planes in the Ripmax range)

What model does one look for in the Seagull range (or any other for that matter) to give one confidence in one's purchase?

Plus, who are the good CONSISTENT manufacturers at the sub £300-00 price range in IC planes?

The fact that Pilot are happy to supply replacement wood parts FOC (plus postage) following minor prangs must give one some confidence. I do know club members with good experience of them. So that might be one. Are they priced sub £300-00?

 

Edited By Sam Longley on 11/07/2018 22:32:16

trebor11/07/2018 22:36:53
avatar
1731 forum posts
213 photos

Wow, I was just trying to give you an idea that two models can be different as I said before some are good and some bad.

Ron Gray11/07/2018 22:48:08
974 forum posts
256 photos

@Sam - the post from Ash and Trevor is spot on, most, if not all ARTFs need a careful going over with the sticky stuff (CA, epoxy etc) as the quality of the same model from the same supplier can vary so much and I don’t just mean Seagull, Pilot, Great Planes, Hangar 9 all suffer in the same way. Likewise strengthening of firewalls / bulkheads and U/C mountings becomes the norm on most of these too.

The advice being given here is to go into an ARTF build with your eyes open to the fact that re-glueing and strengthening will be required! Those that fall apart are usually ones that haven’t been given ‘the treatment’.

ASH.11/07/2018 23:05:59
avatar
221 forum posts

Sam, when I said 'Perhaps the ones you've seen fall apart were poorly built, (cheap glues etc).' I meant poorly put together by the modeller not the factory. Using pound shop glue instead of quality 2 ton epoxy for tail feathers etc. My mistake for not making it clear.

Sam, we're only trying to help you here because we want you to succeed, and whatever is suggested comes from a good place and with experience. We modellers are a very helpful lot and we want others to have the fun and pleasure we do without too much of the disappointment.

Thanks Ron for explaining it clearly.

ASH.11/07/2018 23:32:58
avatar
221 forum posts

The Seagull Yak 54 Gary suggested above is perfect for your flying needs. For flying IMAC. It looks good too being a scale version of the full size. Nice colour scheme and size with quality covering. What's not to like?

You will have to strenghten it very very well, your petrol engine is going to want to shake it to bits!!

Tom Sharp 211/07/2018 23:48:57
avatar
3089 forum posts
17 photos

It strikes me IMAC is a young mans game. I will stick to my Tiger Moth.

ASH.12/07/2018 00:00:11
avatar
221 forum posts

You're never too old in R/C flying for anything.. Seen the OAP's flying drones ! surprise

Peter Miller12/07/2018 08:37:04
avatar
9287 forum posts
1086 photos
10 articles

I wil also comment that the way ARTFs are designed is poor and that applies to just about every one.

The problem is that the fuselage sides are fretted out of liteply wood. They feature diagonals and upright members.

The grain runs along the length of the side but look at all the diagonals and vertical members, the grain runs across the narrow dimension. No strength in that at all.

I have seen ARTFs intended for quite large petrol engines that I wouldn't trust to support a .40 four stroke. AND THEY PROVED ME RIGHT!!!!

But of course it is quicker and easier to manufacture the thing that way and if it converts to toothpicks in a crash...Hey! we will sell another model to the guy!!!

Nigel R12/07/2018 08:51:12
avatar
1549 forum posts
336 photos

Yes that sort of design does seem to rather sub optimal. I wonder how much extra production time and material cost it would take, to laser cut and glue together a warren truss. Even if done with liteply the grain could at least be mostly be aligned along the length of each constructional member.

The small foamies seem to do better - at least cutting an entire 3' model from lumps of EPO results in something strong enough to work.

Edited By Nigel R on 12/07/2018 08:53:42

The Wright Stuff12/07/2018 09:04:36
avatar
1306 forum posts
225 photos

It really does come down to the laws of economics, though. Supply and demand. As long as we keep buying them like that, they will keep selling them to us like that.

I lost a wing in flight on my beloved Black Horse Speed Air. The fuse speared into the ground and the wing gently fluttered its way down for seemingly a long time afterwards. Upon investigation, the wing was still firmly bolted to the wing bolt plate - which had come away from the fuselage.

This sort of specific fix is fairly easy to rectify once you know to look out for it. +1 to Ron's excellent advice, above.

Engine Doctor12/07/2018 11:23:09
avatar
2019 forum posts
20 photos
Posted by Ron Gray on 11/07/2018 22:48:08:

@Sam - the post from Ash and Trevor is spot on, most, if not all ARTFs need a careful going over with the sticky stuff (CA, epoxy etc) as the quality of the same model from the same supplier can vary so much and I don’t just mean Seagull, Pilot, Great Planes, Hangar 9 all suffer in the same way. Likewise strengthening of firewalls / bulkheads and U/C mountings becomes the norm on most of these too.

The advice being given here is to go into an ARTF build with your eyes open to the fact that re-glueing and strengthening will be required! Those that fall apart are usually ones that haven’t been given ‘the treatment’.

yes+ 1 .I find going over artf to strengthen etc is very time consuming and sometimes very tricky as the area you are trying to get to has other bits in the way angry. I am surprised by some modellers ,who after being told of these shortcomings then complain when the firewall falls out or the u/c collapses after a perfect landing !

Nigel R12/07/2018 11:43:53
avatar
1549 forum posts
336 photos

How long are you guys finding you spend, going over an ARTF getting it shipshape?

Sam Longley27/07/2018 19:42:35
62 forum posts

So Update

I bought the Wargo from Hobby King along with 2 Turnigy nano tech batteries.

I found one was dud so went through the hassle of getting an exchange sent. Unfortunately I was sailing when the replacement was delivered . The item was supposed to be delivered the following day but inspite of my wife being sat in the room at the front of the house at the alleged delivery time neither the battery or the note through the letter box arrived.

After 15 mins on the phone I had to waste another half day waiting & it arrived & guess what-- Yup a faulty cell.

Hobby king really can sell some carp when they try

The plane took loads of lead in the nose so perhaps I could use my normal 2200 batteries instead of the 1500 ones I intended to use. I really cannot be bothered with the hassle of wasting days waiting for deliveries so £ 13-00 wasted

However, first flight today with the single battery & i am really surprised at how well that went. I was hovering against the gentle breeze within 3 minutes & low rolls at 10 feet. Something I have never dared with my Jive

So once I get some decent batteries all should be well.

Denis Watkins27/07/2018 20:13:24
2982 forum posts
141 photos
Posted by Nigel R on 12/07/2018 11:43:53:

How long are you guys finding you spend, going over an ARTF getting it shipshape?

Takes a week, maybe more Nigel, in general, the undercarriage needs beefing up or replacing

The servo trays are too thin, so glue short beams of softwood below to accept screws

16th ply reinforce under most horns, so as not to crush the balsa control surface

8th ply along and under the tailwheel mount

Softwood, inside, along the inner line of cowl screw mounts

Whichever power source for the motor, the motor mount needs accessment for replacement

Most of the small hardware is substituted for own reliable stock

Pushrods retained with 90° bend and swing keepers where necessary

And we have not sorted the covering seal yet !

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Motion RC
Airtek Hobbies
Wings & Wheels 2018
Expo Tools 14 July
Overlander
Slec
electricwingman 2017
CML
Gliders Distribution
Sarik
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Which part of building a new traditional balsa aeroplane do you enjoy the most?
Q: Which part of building a new traditional balsa aeroplane do you enjoy the most?

 Research & choosing the model
 Building the fuselage
 Installing the engine and radio systems
 Building the flying surfaces
 Covering/painting/finishing
 All of it!
 None of it. I'd rather someone else did it!
 Other

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us