Jump to content

Seagull Seafire artf


SiBee
 Share

Recommended Posts

Friend of mine has one with an Enya 120R fitted and its a complete animal with that engine in it. A 100 will provide plenty of go but you must lower the fuel tank as the engine will not run reliably (or at all) if you do not. 

 

Fortunately this is quite easy in this model as there is a large area under the engine mount box which can accept a tank (see photo). It might be a bit short, so you might need two smaller tanks tied together to get enough capacity, but but without knowing the exact dimension i cant say for sure if this will be a problem. Even if it is short two tanks in parallel will solve it nicely. 

 

Anyway with the tank mounted down there all of the oily bits are in the cowl and this makes maintenance much easier. It also means any fuel leak will not contaminate the radio and other innards so its a win win. 

 

 

spitfire tank.png

 

 

The only other point i would make is that this model has a more scale outline than most and it behaves more like a true scale model than an artf Spitfire that is more cartoon scale. I consider this to be an advantage personally as the model overall performs very well and it looks better, but it will take no prisoners if you abuse it. I dont want to scare you off, its an excellent model and they fly very well, but respect its limits, go easy on the elevator rates and make sure you have plenty of rudder throw. 

Edited by Jon - Laser Engines
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for your reply. The laser was previously in a old BH Spit that I was given. When I last flew it, the engine cut out at the top of a loop and I had to dead stick it, so I guess the fuel tank position was the problem. 
It had just been repaired and the tank may have been repositioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ordered mine 2 months ago in France, super price, 255€ with postal charges,  ( now 400€ + ) it was sent Tuesday and I will be fitting it with my Enya 120 4C which I posted on the site somewhere where I was going to convert it to Petrol, I didn't but fiddled with different inlet pipes and carbs and flight tested in another plane, I have received all the other gear, servo less aluminium retracts and a ton of servos, only missing thing is the radio switch, on board glow driver, workshop space and time to build it, do you want pictures of it as I unbox it ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, SiBee said:

Thanks very much for your reply. The laser was previously in a old BH Spit that I was given. When I last flew it, the engine cut out at the top of a loop and I had to dead stick it, so I guess the fuel tank position was the problem. 
It had just been repaired and the tank may have been repositioned.

 

Yea it was probably the tank. If you mount it high gravity assists the fuel so you have to lean off the needles. The problem comes when you fly inverted as gravity is now against you and the needles are way too lean so it snuffs it. 

 

The issue comes from the fact that Laser engines have the carb at the top of the head. When the engine is inverted this means the carb is very low and does not line up well with the tank bay that is built into most aircraft so modifications are required. 

 

 

Paul, my friend used to use a 120-4c in his and claimed it was under powered. I cant see how as i have the same engine and it performs very similarly to a laser 100. Anyway he crashed that one due to a radio issue and then built another with the 120R. 

 

I have also been looking at this model as a potential home for an RCV120sp i want to test but as you rightly point out, they certainly arent cheap these days. 

 

 

Edited by Jon - Laser Engines
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

Yea it was probably the tank. If you mount it high gravity assists the fuel so you have to lean off the needles. The problem comes when you fly inverted as gravity is now against you and the needles are way too lean so it snuffs it. 

 

The issue comes from the fact that Laser engines have the carb at the top of the head. When the engine is inverted this means the carb is very low and does not line up well with the tank bay that is built into most aircraft so modifications are required. 

 

 

Paul, my friend used to use a 120-4c in his and claimed it was under powered. I cant see how as i have the same engine and it performs very similarly to a laser 100. Anyway he crashed that one due to a radio issue and then built another with the 120R. 

 

I have also been looking at this model as a potential home for an RCV120sp i want to test but as you rightly point out, they certainly arent cheap these days. 

 

 

That’s very interesting Jon, thanks.

I’m moving from electric to IC because of the ridiculous price of batteries and it seems far more satisfying flying IC than electric. My 1600 Flightline Spit is great to fly but the whine of the electric motor spoils the experience a little.

Your info on positioning the fuel tank is much appreciated, I knew it should be level with the carb but didn’t know why.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SiBee If you are changing to IC, I would recommend Petrol if you can stand the noise,,,

 

 Jon, I can't find the picture but my Enya is pulling this 1m72,  4.8 kilo lump around the sky, all changed into a Spitfire,,,tail and paint job at the moment hanging in the garage,,,

 

 I did post it somewhere here but can't find it,,, here with it's Rcgf 15cc petrol engine

Golly-2048.jpg

Edited by Paul De Tourtoulon
Rcgf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instructions for my one on the French site,, which is as you can see a British review published in the UK,

 

https://www.miniplanes.fr/images/pdf/33045/notice_jp_4495120.pdf

 

 And here the Instructions also from the same shop on the 'new' one,,

 

https://www.miniplanes.fr/images/pdf/522654/notice_sea116n.pdf

 

 What are your instructions like Richard ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Paul De Tourtoulon said:

Instructions for my one on the French site,, which is as you can see a British review published in the UK,

 

https://www.miniplanes.fr/images/pdf/33045/notice_jp_4495120.pdf

 

 And here the Instructions also from the same shop on the 'new' one,,

 

https://www.miniplanes.fr/images/pdf/522654/notice_sea116n.pdf

 

 What are your instructions like Richard ?.

Other than mine was the version with mech retracts, exactly as those, mine was the earlier escale version.  can't see any difference other than the retracts.  IIRC I ended up at 130mm on the cg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It arrived this morning, 🥳 I looked at both of the instructions and they are the same plane, Ref N° SEA 116, the only difference is on Page 24

the electric setup and esc from 60a to 80a, and Page 38 C of G from90mm to 110mm, although I saw one on a forum that balanced his at 130mm.

 

 The usual rubbish SG retracts that will wear in around 5 flights, I have Alu servoless from china to replace them and I will keep the aluminium legs which will have my Robart wheels dangling on the end of them.

20221021_085654.jpg

20221021_085905.jpg

20221021_090256.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a review on this model when it came out and the oleos broke on the first landing as they were so flimsy. 

 

When it comes to c/g i find most models are too nose heavy and have very large elevator rates to compensate. I always aim to get the c/g right a reduce the elevator rates as needed to make the model nice to fly. My sea fury for example has barely 5mm of travel on the elevator and i only need half of that to loop it. I dont use any expo as its not needed when the rates are set right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

I read a review on this model when it came out and the oleos broke on the first landing as they were so flimsy. 

 

When it comes to c/g i find most models are too nose heavy and have very large elevator rates to compensate. I always aim to get the c/g right a reduce the elevator rates as needed to make the model nice to fly. My sea fury for example has barely 5mm of travel on the elevator and i only need half of that to loop it. I dont use any expo as its not needed when the rates are set right. 

Sea Fury is another one I’m looking at, which model did you get ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SiBee said:

Sea Fury is another one I’m looking at, which model did you get ?

 

Mine is the now discontinued ESM/YT model. 80 inches, 23lbs and a 360v for power. Its a complete animal, just like a sea fury should be 🙂 

 

DSC04761.thumb.JPG.43293b1754c49e7d9e51b479bdf2f7e4.JPG

 

I dont think there are any ARTF Furys available these days as black horse discontinued theirs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

Mine is the now discontinued ESM/YT model. 80 inches, 23lbs and a 360v for power. Its a complete animal, just like a sea fury should be 🙂 

 

DSC04761.thumb.JPG.43293b1754c49e7d9e51b479bdf2f7e4.JPG

 

I dont think there are any ARTF Furys available these days as black horse discontinued theirs.

 

 

I picked up an new/old stock Seagull Seafury recently and repainted it to a Dutch scheme. Also fitted electic retracts from HK and bigger wheels. Fitted with Saito 115

Dutch Sea fury side.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, SiBee said:

Contemplating getting this model as I’ve got a spare Laser 100 looking for a home.

Anybody got one of these and if so what do you reckon ?

 

Its just dawned on me, the 63 inch Seagull P47 is another perfect match for a 100 if you are looking at other options as well. They fly very well and i have been recommending them to customers as entry level warbirds as P47's are a little more forgiving than most. All of the reports i have had back suggest everyone is very happy with the model/engine combo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

Its just dawned on me, the 63 inch Seagull P47 is another perfect match for a 100 if you are looking at other options as well. They fly very well and i have been recommending them to customers as entry level warbirds as P47's are a little more forgiving than most. All of the reports i have had back suggest everyone is very happy with the model/engine combo. 

Ok thanks I’ll check it out 👍

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...