Old_Robin Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Posted by Rich2 on 06/08/2015 06:44:19: Posted by Jon Harper on 23/01/2015 08:53:59: I am interested in this but can find zero information about these models. Perkins website has nothing, the sussex site has that one model listed but I cant find it by navigating the menus. Im also confused as its seems to be a challenger super sporter, which they do as an artf, and yet the quoted span is larger at 61 not 52? and yet the wing area is the same :\ Do they do any others in this range? Google is your friend! **LINK** Rich. There has been a long running misprint in the data on this, the Seagull Challenger Sport LW. It is and always has been the same as the Seagull Challenger ARTF at 1340 mm which is 52 inch , nearly 53. It even has the wrong numbers in the instruction manual for the build! It is being "muddled" with the Boomerang I think. Bad word processing! This is the other "ATF" that has been kitted for a build too. I am quite a way through the wings and enjoying it. Main design change I have done is to bury proper wing servos in the wing rather than having huge standard servos sticking out under the wing. All I have is a slot where the servo arm emerges. Pictures to follow... Got mine through Hurricane Models. Thoroughly recommend them. Ordered one day and arrived at 10am the next! Many people offered the model but were out-of-stock... Regards Robin Edited By Old_Robin on 06/08/2015 16:59:19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Posted by Tom Sharp 2 on 06/08/2015 07:32:21: I have strived for years to convert everyone I meet to ARTF, then Seagull does this on me. Tom, Do you not like the smell of balsa sanding in the morning......? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I also had some difficulty finding this model - and I even tried Facebook! It looks very similar to the sports low winger I've recently built and converted to electric power - a Skyshark Fantasy. Both are a similar wingspan and intended for 40/46 power though the Fantasy is 60" ws and has swept back L/E with built in washout. Both look slightly old-fashioned with the upright engine out in the fresh air. It's an interesting trend for an ARTF company to supply kits. It shouldn't be too hard to pack the parts they already cut into a box, print a set of plans and write some instructions so perhaps there will be more. We can only hope. What power are the current builders intending? Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Geoff, In the April RCM&E in the article about the build David Ashby fitted a Overlander 3548/05 900Kv on a 13" x 6.5" prop, battery being 4S 3200-4000 mAh. My pockets are a bit shallower for motors so i have gone Hobbyking Prodrive 3548 900. which was considerably less....still on a 4S 3200...which I have for other planes. Another few weeks and I will know how it flies.... Hope this helps with the decisions Robin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 15, 2015 Share Posted August 15, 2015 Final lap after 5 weeks.. with a big BUT. took several hours to get the root rib of each wing to match up to the recess in the side of the fuselage... rather unexpected problem. Profile cut in the side of the fuselage too small. Had to bevel the ends of the wings to match the recess. Be warned and check that W0, the root rib fits to the fuselage side before you get too far into the build. In my kit the "doublers" of the fuselage sides came ready glued together in the kit. Maiden flight tomorrow after adding 180 grams of ballast around the nose.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Well, survived the maiden, just. Instructions say 60mm from l.e. to c of g which is WRONG WRONG WRONG. Far too far forward. Should be much further back... another inaccuracy due to bad word processing by Seagull in the instructions... Will move the C of G back to the spar, about 75 mm for starters.. Robin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 The idea of a jigging tube I think goes a long way back. I think that "Ron Warring", in his book "Construction for Aeromodellers", described the technique using a stout cardboard tube. My copy is long gone. If not Ron, I would hazard a guess that Vic Smeed described the technique. None the less, whoever it was, the description of a present day Laser cut kit using the idea is great to follow. I wonder if more kits using the technique will follow? Edited By Erfolg on 17/08/2015 16:52:53 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangster Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Nice kit BUT ............. I am sure there will be a lot of people who buy it as a step from artf to self build and will be put off building for life, I guess a lot will not be finished. If Seagull intend to move in this direction they will have to improve their documentation. I have been building from plans for half a century but this baby had me scratching my head a few times A supposedly simply to build model has been turned into an "experienced " build by numerous ommissions in both plan and book. On first glance that thick book and large plan look the finest ever seen in any kit shame the plans dont show all the parts and the bloke who wrote the fusalage section on the book went awol,before he finished it and wasnt replaced. Shame because it lets down a great kit and the stuff that is in the book is in good english I really hope this does not put anyone off having a go though cos all is not lost The RCM&E review clarifies some of the shortcomings and there are also some fantastic step by step instructions on you tube. Have a go it looks a great model ( I am at the covering stage .) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Gangster, I couldn't agree more. The fus instructions only take you through the first half of the build and leave out the fitting of the turtle-deck sheeting, fus through-tube, and numerous other bits. No instruction at all about fitting and retaining the canopy hatch and the plastic bolts and small tabs for the underside of the hatch are not even in the parts list! Anyone "stuck" with their build, I would be happy to advise how I coped. I broke the fus with a tip-stall while turning crosswind leg to land and have just completed the repair. CofG at 75mm was not far enough back so I have set it at 85mm and will fly when the weather improves. I have checked for wing-warp carefully and I have none, so I wonder if they build in wash-out in the RTF version in the wings to reduce the tip-stall tendancy... anyway, keep flying reasonably fast on the way down and minimise the bank in turns near the ground. Also it does need opposite rudder to come out of a spin or it just keeps on going. It comes out with just a prod of it, so be mentally ready to apply rudder. It does look a treat in the air, but mine has been sledging along on its tail with lots of up elevator trimmed in to get it flying which is why I am moving the CofG. I also put in more down-thrust than specified on the motor if this helps. Robin.... Edited By Old_Robin on 31/08/2015 16:52:39 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Picture of the under-wing without the "drop-tank" servos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangster Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Thanks for the heads up on the tip stall Robin. I wouldn't have been expecting that. I don't know if you have seen the Mojo vids on you tube gotta take my hat off to the guy whoafe then. I think I would have had to have built three of them to be ready to make that vid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangster Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Thanks for the heads up on the tip stall Robin. I wouldn't have been expecting that. I don't know if you have seen the Mojo vids on you tube gotta take my hat off to the guy whoafe then. I think I would have had to have built three of them to be ready to make that vid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Now got the Challenger flying as I want! C of G should be on the wing joiner tube. Some forums posts say front of the wing joiner for "gentle" and mid-joiner tube for "fun". Now the 45 degree dive test and the change of elevator on level inverted flight tests both show I am getting there. I braved the final touch and spun it. Quite sudden kick into spin, and fast rotation, but came out as I centred everything... don't think I needed opposite rudder. From being a poo of a model I think this may become a keeper! Amazing what a bit of concentrated trimming does to your impression of a model! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 9 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 a similar idea can also be used for building wings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Robin Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 While quite a good idea, the fun of fitting leading and trailing edges to this wing makes me wince. I think a thick and strong base layer to your bench with a soft pin-surface is still the best bet, with spacer blocks for the LE and TE and even the ends of the spars if you want washout. I am not a believer in plate glass and I think significant minor warpage can easily be created during covering, so why be in anguish about the last 2 thou (that's 2 mils to you guys over there) during the gluing up of very flexible assemblies.... I keep hearing a song "....castles in the air...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetenor Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Personally never had any probs using a flat board pins and weights. for wings and fuselages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Why a square tube, though? A round tube can be gently twisted to aid extraction. A sq. tube requires a straight pull and my luck would see a former or two getting cracked! The move towards CNC kits is welcome though - I'd much prefer to put those lovely jigsaws together myself. Just think of all the KK Flying Scale models that would actually have flown, had they been CNC cut from balsa (not teak). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 The requirement for drilled or punched holes is seen by myself as a potential issue. To avoid twists and good LE/TE alignment requires that these mandrel holes being reasonably accurately made. This requirement may be slightly more difficult to achieve if the holes are not on the CL of the rib. This wood come into play where the top surface or lower surface of the wing is normally built flat, to the building board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.