Seagull PC-9 120 size...
04-04-2010, 02:39 PM
#27
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: kuwait city, KUWAIT
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
hi again
ok so try the o.s 200 and after few day u will be hope to take the satio better
the fuel is perfect i used byron fuel 10% nitro for four strok and its the perfect fuel for o.s and its still over heat in cold weather i think the o.s for pepole thay did not care in speed and i dont care in other comment forums about this engine i see in my eye live and i test it its a junk engine the saito is cheap in price than o.s and more power u get and u will be have much fun and you be remmber my comment in this think
ok so try the o.s 200 and after few day u will be hope to take the satio better
the fuel is perfect i used byron fuel 10% nitro for four strok and its the perfect fuel for o.s and its still over heat in cold weather i think the o.s for pepole thay did not care in speed and i dont care in other comment forums about this engine i see in my eye live and i test it its a junk engine the saito is cheap in price than o.s and more power u get and u will be have much fun and you be remmber my comment in this think
04-08-2010, 05:19 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toowoomba, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
I am looking at the box with one of these birds in it and it is rated 120 2 stroke and 110 / 125 four stroke, they are designed around these engines not 200 size. From all the magazines the only real negative point i have found is that the instructions for the C of G are incorrect. The person reviewing the aircraft balanced the plane at 80 mm back from the leading edge at the wing root and had to add 42 grams of lead into the tail to achieve this. This plane apparently flew very nicely with an OS 120 AX
I have experience with the small version of this aircraft and had a new one in the sky last weekend. They fly nicely when they are correctly powered. The manufacturers put engine ratings on the boxes expecting pilot to work with their recommendations not with a substantially larger engine. I have an OS 120 FS that will be going into mine.
I know that "Boys will be Boys" and seem to want to make everything shine brighter and go faster but manufacturers put engine sizes on the box for a reason. The plane is designed and tested to fly at a particular level not be grossly overpowered.
I have experience with the small version of this aircraft and had a new one in the sky last weekend. They fly nicely when they are correctly powered. The manufacturers put engine ratings on the boxes expecting pilot to work with their recommendations not with a substantially larger engine. I have an OS 120 FS that will be going into mine.
I know that "Boys will be Boys" and seem to want to make everything shine brighter and go faster but manufacturers put engine sizes on the box for a reason. The plane is designed and tested to fly at a particular level not be grossly overpowered.
04-08-2010, 05:45 AM
#30
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
ORIGINAL: Delta3
I am looking at the box with one of these birds in it and it is rated 120 2 stroke and 110 / 125 four stroke, they are designed around these engines not 200 size. From all the magazines the only real negative point i have found is that the instructions for the C of G are incorrect. The person reviewing the aircraft balanced the plane at 80 mm back from the leading edge at the wing root and had to add 42 grams of lead into the tail to achieve this. This plane apparently flew very nicely with an OS 120 AX
I have experience with the small version of this aircraft and had a new one in the sky last weekend. They fly nicely when they are correctly powered. The manufacturers put engine ratings on the boxes expecting pilot to work with their recommendations not with a substantially larger engine. I have an OS 120 FS that will be going into mine.
I know that ''Boys will be Boys'' and seem to want to make everything shine brighter and go faster but manufacturers put engine sizes on the box for a reason. The plane is designed and tested to fly at a particular level not be grossly overpowered.
I am looking at the box with one of these birds in it and it is rated 120 2 stroke and 110 / 125 four stroke, they are designed around these engines not 200 size. From all the magazines the only real negative point i have found is that the instructions for the C of G are incorrect. The person reviewing the aircraft balanced the plane at 80 mm back from the leading edge at the wing root and had to add 42 grams of lead into the tail to achieve this. This plane apparently flew very nicely with an OS 120 AX
I have experience with the small version of this aircraft and had a new one in the sky last weekend. They fly nicely when they are correctly powered. The manufacturers put engine ratings on the boxes expecting pilot to work with their recommendations not with a substantially larger engine. I have an OS 120 FS that will be going into mine.
I know that ''Boys will be Boys'' and seem to want to make everything shine brighter and go faster but manufacturers put engine sizes on the box for a reason. The plane is designed and tested to fly at a particular level not be grossly overpowered.
If you are so "stuck" to the manufacturers recommendations,
then tell me WHY my Seagull 40 size PC-9 needed 270gr on the nose to balance ?
I started with the Irvine 53 ABC MK2 engine at first but because i needed so much balast on the nose it was a DOG.
So i installed my OS 91FX and i couldn't be happier!
I see the manufacturers reccomendations as a *suggestion*, at the end i will judge what to install.
And because my 40 size came so tail heavy (...everything was installed as shown in the manual)
i believe that the larger version will be in the same boat.
So for me the OS 160FX is the better two stroke!
Kostas
04-08-2010, 07:09 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toowoomba, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
I have a lot of weight in the front of my small PC9 as well. When these planes first came out they had a metal engine mount, the new ones have a plastic engine mount, the instructions for both are the same. There is a reasonable difference in the weight of the plastic mount and the metal one. I know this because my son flies one of the earlier versions. They both fly very nicely with a Thunder Tiger 54 FS in the nose or a Magnum 52. The point I am trying to make is that the manufacturers place an engine recommendation on the box for a reason, they have built and tested the aircraft to meet a range of power plants and safety requirements. Having a 91 size 2 stroke engine in one of these planes turns it into a rocket and in most of the manufacturers instructions they "recommend" not over powering the aircraft on the basis that they are not designed to fly with an engine of that size and can become dangerous.
This all gets back to personal opinion and you are quite welcome to yours I just wouldn't like to be trying to explain to an insurance company why I had constructed an aircraft outside the manufacturers recommendations in the event of an insurance claim.
This all gets back to personal opinion and you are quite welcome to yours I just wouldn't like to be trying to explain to an insurance company why I had constructed an aircraft outside the manufacturers recommendations in the event of an insurance claim.
04-09-2010, 12:41 AM
#32
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
ORIGINAL: Delta3
I have a lot of weight in the front of my small PC9 as well. When these planes first came out they had a metal engine mount, the new ones have a plastic engine mount, the instructions for both are the same. There is a reasonable difference in the weight of the plastic mount and the metal one. I know this because my son flies one of the earlier versions. They both fly very nicely with a Thunder Tiger 54 FS in the nose or a Magnum 52. The point I am trying to make is that the manufacturers place an engine recommendation on the box for a reason, they have built and tested the aircraft to meet a range of power plants and safety requirements. Having a 91 size 2 stroke engine in one of these planes turns it into a rocket and in most of the manufacturers instructions they ''recommend'' not over powering the aircraft on the basis that they are not designed to fly with an engine of that size and can become dangerous.
This all gets back to personal opinion and you are quite welcome to yours I just wouldn't like to be trying to explain to an insurance company why I had constructed an aircraft outside the manufacturers recommendations in the event of an insurance claim.
I have a lot of weight in the front of my small PC9 as well. When these planes first came out they had a metal engine mount, the new ones have a plastic engine mount, the instructions for both are the same. There is a reasonable difference in the weight of the plastic mount and the metal one. I know this because my son flies one of the earlier versions. They both fly very nicely with a Thunder Tiger 54 FS in the nose or a Magnum 52. The point I am trying to make is that the manufacturers place an engine recommendation on the box for a reason, they have built and tested the aircraft to meet a range of power plants and safety requirements. Having a 91 size 2 stroke engine in one of these planes turns it into a rocket and in most of the manufacturers instructions they ''recommend'' not over powering the aircraft on the basis that they are not designed to fly with an engine of that size and can become dangerous.
This all gets back to personal opinion and you are quite welcome to yours I just wouldn't like to be trying to explain to an insurance company why I had constructed an aircraft outside the manufacturers recommendations in the event of an insurance claim.
Well,
your point of view is welcome!
Although, I'd rather have the extra weight needed for balancing from a more powerful engine than can manage her operation with the throttle stick,
rather than having ti ad the weight ,push the AUW way up and install the recommended engine that would fly it but too slow.
Anyway
i'd like to know from thw owners of the big PC-9 is it's nose/tail heavy right out of the box....
04-09-2010, 03:09 AM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toowoomba, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
A friend of mine built the 120 size PC9 recently and had difficulty with the CG. The manual says they should be balanced 80mm back from the wing tip. This is incorrect the balance point is 80mm back from the wing root ie near the body of the aircraft. The other issue he had was with the wing incidence. It was apparently out quite a way. He sought expert help from an instructor and managed to sort it out before he flew the plane.
As with all of these things every one of these models will differ when they come from a different batch or production run. I have also seen two of these flying at the same time, both powered with gas engines. One pilot landed his vey well however the other guy came in to hot and bent his front wheel. I believe the engines were 26cc, I don't know the brand.
Seeing 2 side by side is very impressive and they flew well. I have a couple of other projects to finish but will shortly commence building my PC9 120 size. I am looking forward to flying it.
As with all of these things every one of these models will differ when they come from a different batch or production run. I have also seen two of these flying at the same time, both powered with gas engines. One pilot landed his vey well however the other guy came in to hot and bent his front wheel. I believe the engines were 26cc, I don't know the brand.
Seeing 2 side by side is very impressive and they flew well. I have a couple of other projects to finish but will shortly commence building my PC9 120 size. I am looking forward to flying it.
04-10-2010, 02:26 PM
#34
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: kuwait city, KUWAIT
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
hi guys
u don`t like any advise belived me use the satio 180 most manufacturers says that just thay want to fly in plan thay dosn`t matter yours enjoy or not that how thay think and thay affraid some customer compline about what thay recommended in box
soo if the plane come fit for examble in os 120 III four strok this engie weight is about 950 grams the satio 180 four strok is about neerly 850 soo what you got is lees weight and more power so in that case you will have no proplem in c.g ... you pepole did not lisen to advise i want for you the best what is 120 two strok [
] and what is 120 III four strok and waht is 160 two strok you did not feel the power its all junk engine i try all those and i sell it i sheft to saito made in japan and more power than the o.s and you don`t be more advanced in hobby or just you want to fly ??? ......satio forever
u don`t like any advise belived me use the satio 180 most manufacturers says that just thay want to fly in plan thay dosn`t matter yours enjoy or not that how thay think and thay affraid some customer compline about what thay recommended in box
soo if the plane come fit for examble in os 120 III four strok this engie weight is about 950 grams the satio 180 four strok is about neerly 850 soo what you got is lees weight and more power so in that case you will have no proplem in c.g ... you pepole did not lisen to advise i want for you the best what is 120 two strok [
] and what is 120 III four strok and waht is 160 two strok you did not feel the power its all junk engine i try all those and i sell it i sheft to saito made in japan and more power than the o.s and you don`t be more advanced in hobby or just you want to fly ??? ......satio forever
04-10-2010, 05:45 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Leeds, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
Kostas i am very jealous!!...you have a perfect flying site there my friend!!... large asphalt runway soaring temperatures & fine scenery!!..heaven.
Hey, i have an OS 200 in my ESM stuka...quite a heavy warbird & is fully laden with the steel tank buster armoury etc...that engine pulls the hefty bird around perfectly!....sounds like the guy is running his too lean!?.
OS & saito don't make Junk engines...i should know, i own almost all of them!!
Hey, i have an OS 200 in my ESM stuka...quite a heavy warbird & is fully laden with the steel tank buster armoury etc...that engine pulls the hefty bird around perfectly!....sounds like the guy is running his too lean!?.
OS & saito don't make Junk engines...i should know, i own almost all of them!!
04-11-2010, 01:39 AM
#36
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
ORIGINAL: Neo gold
Kostas i am very jealous!!...you have a perfect flying site there my friend!!... large asphalt runway soaring temperatures & fine scenery!!..heaven.
Hey, i have an OS 200 in my ESM stuka...quite a heavy warbird & is fully laden with the steel tank buster armoury etc...that engine pulls the hefty bird around perfectly!....sounds like the guy is running his too lean!?.
OS & saito don't make Junk engines...i should know, i own almost all of them!! [img][/img]
Kostas i am very jealous!!...you have a perfect flying site there my friend!!... large asphalt runway soaring temperatures & fine scenery!!..heaven.
Hey, i have an OS 200 in my ESM stuka...quite a heavy warbird & is fully laden with the steel tank buster armoury etc...that engine pulls the hefty bird around perfectly!....sounds like the guy is running his too lean!?.
OS & saito don't make Junk engines...i should know, i own almost all of them!! [img][/img]
Neo Gold thank's so much for your kind words!
Indeed it's a very nice place to fly.
The only negative is the fact that it is built on a mountain near Athens ,with a bit of elevation ,arround 500m.
It's very windy during winter and also during summer ,
few are the really calm days.
Another runway could do the job....
Anyway,
i think he also runs his 200FS lean or he has a leakage.
These ARE NOT BAD ENGINES
04-20-2010, 04:54 PM
#37
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: redditchworcs, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
hi all i think the PC9 120 is a great plane so large and well built, i used EVOLUTION 26 petrol and it ballanced from the box, flew very well, sadly due to not checking the bolts were tight the carb came off the evo when flying slow and it stopped flying and went in, my fault for not checking all the bolts !!, Im going to get a new one its ace and large and good looking in the sky and on the ground a real head turner.
Robert K
Robert K
04-20-2010, 04:58 PM
#38
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: redditchworcs, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
oh yes and just ballance the large PC9 so its slightly nose down when held under the main spar (lowest part of cord) measuring from wing edge etc does not take account of you final configuration, the above method works for any model save for deltas thats more tricky
Robert K
Robert K
07-29-2010, 10:57 AM
#40
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: redditchworcs, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
mmm i have been flying for years and not had so much trouble as the large PC9 the small one flies fantastic but the large one drops like a brick when the engine stops so not much chance to do a dead stick landing, keep the speed up and ur OK, two large PC9 now gone to grave, im trying the Black horse RYAN STA 61 first as its wing loading is good and it flies like a dream, cant stall it and floats in on flaps fantastic, may try the large petrol 26 version next,
robert happier bunny now
wit Ryan STA
SEE http://www.ripmax.com/item.asp?itemi...ry=010-030-030
robert
happier bunny nowSEE http://www.ripmax.com/item.asp?itemi...ry=010-030-030
07-29-2010, 11:42 AM
#41
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
ORIGINAL: robertp1h
mmm i have been flying for years and not had so much trouble as the large PC9 the small one flies fantastic but the large one drops like a brick when the engine stops so not much chance to do a dead stick landing, keep the speed up and ur OK, two large PC9 now gone to grave, im trying the Black horse RYAN STA 61 first as its wing loading is good and it flies like a dream, cant stall it and floats in on flaps fantastic, may try the large petrol 26 version next,
robert happier bunny now wit Ryan STA
SEE http://www.ripmax.com/item.asp?itemi...ry=010-030-030
mmm i have been flying for years and not had so much trouble as the large PC9 the small one flies fantastic but the large one drops like a brick when the engine stops so not much chance to do a dead stick landing, keep the speed up and ur OK, two large PC9 now gone to grave, im trying the Black horse RYAN STA 61 first as its wing loading is good and it flies like a dream, cant stall it and floats in on flaps fantastic, may try the large petrol 26 version next,
robert
happier bunny nowSEE http://www.ripmax.com/item.asp?itemi...ry=010-030-030
Robert
recently i built the BH P-36A Hawk and all i can say is AWSOME
You can see it on my gallery !
Have you bought ,yet, the Ryan or you plan to do it soon ?
Will you post some pics
or better
start a build thread ?
07-29-2010, 04:18 PM
#42
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: redditchworcs, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
thanks Kostas i see u have built a few models nice.
Yes i would like to do build thread of 26cc RYAN ST if theres not one here already ill take a look
Thanks
Robert
Yes i would like to do build thread of 26cc RYAN ST if theres not one here already ill take a look
Thanks
Robert
07-30-2010, 11:10 AM
#43
Member
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
drops like a brick when the engine stops so not much chance to do a dead stick landing
My motor/gear combinationturns a 17x14 propeller and weights just 300 grams. It has the same power output like a 1.20-1.50 two stroke but it's priceis significantly higher
This will save me any lead (i hope) in the aircrafttailand lower the wing loading.
The only thing i dislike with the PC-9 120 is the landing gear. I plan to install a robart 510 series with struts.
Do you think this one will fit in without major modifications?
Regards
Andi
09-12-2010, 09:12 PM
#44
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canberra , Australian Capital Territory, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
Hey Guys,
I've been flying mine for several months now using a MLD 28CC gasser. I've just put on a 15.5 x 12 4 blade APC prop and she flies very scale like. If I want blistering performance I put on a 18 x 8 or 17 x 6 2 blade and she goes like a cut cat. She weighs just over 5.5kg with Spring Air retracts (I too ditched the kit mechanicals after two retract servo failures!) I've just finished making an air brake paddle similar to the full-size to slow her down on approach and will test it tomorrow (weather permitting). Having flown the full sized Roulette PC9-A, this is a dream R/C model and very much like the full size in appearance except for a few things like spinner, no flaps and no air-brake (pilots could be better but they are not too bad really). I love this thing and looks fantastic in the air.
Dave
OK, so the last pic is a full size...just had to put it in!
I've been flying mine for several months now using a MLD 28CC gasser. I've just put on a 15.5 x 12 4 blade APC prop and she flies very scale like. If I want blistering performance I put on a 18 x 8 or 17 x 6 2 blade and she goes like a cut cat. She weighs just over 5.5kg with Spring Air retracts (I too ditched the kit mechanicals after two retract servo failures!) I've just finished making an air brake paddle similar to the full-size to slow her down on approach and will test it tomorrow (weather permitting). Having flown the full sized Roulette PC9-A, this is a dream R/C model and very much like the full size in appearance except for a few things like spinner, no flaps and no air-brake (pilots could be better but they are not too bad really). I love this thing and looks fantastic in the air.
Dave
OK, so the last pic is a full size...just had to put it in!
09-13-2010, 01:17 AM
#45
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
ORIGINAL: robertp1h
thanks Kostas i see u have built a few models nice.
Yes i would like to do build thread of 26cc RYAN ST if theres not one here already ill take a look
Thanks
Robert
thanks Kostas i see u have built a few models nice.
Yes i would like to do build thread of 26cc RYAN ST if theres not one here already ill take a look
Thanks
Robert
My last and all time favourite is the BlackHorse P-36A Hawk..
You can see it on my gallery !
09-13-2010, 01:22 AM
#46
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
Dave ,
your PC-9 looks awesome...
Is it stable during landings..?
Can i see a pic from the internal structure of the fuselage ?
your PC-9 looks awesome...
Is it stable during landings..?
Can i see a pic from the internal structure of the fuselage ?
09-13-2010, 02:47 AM
#47
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canberra , Australian Capital Territory, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
Hi Kostas,
Thanks for your very kind words. She is extremely stable on approach although she does come in hot due to the ratio of wing to fuze - she is after all, a jet trainer. I use Flaperons although I don't think they do too much in the way of providing more lift - if the engine isn't burning she doesn't float too well, lol. The pics I have included are a bit green because of the flash so don't worry about the colour. Happy to answer any more questions. By way of balance, I have put the receiver pack and the ignition pack in the tail along with some lead to fine tune the balance. I have glassed the front of the fuze and replaced the balsa in the wheel wells with ply because the balsa is VERY soft...maybe Seagull will improive the quality of the wood they use in future kits.
Dave
Thanks for your very kind words. She is extremely stable on approach although she does come in hot due to the ratio of wing to fuze - she is after all, a jet trainer. I use Flaperons although I don't think they do too much in the way of providing more lift - if the engine isn't burning she doesn't float too well, lol. The pics I have included are a bit green because of the flash so don't worry about the colour. Happy to answer any more questions. By way of balance, I have put the receiver pack and the ignition pack in the tail along with some lead to fine tune the balance. I have glassed the front of the fuze and replaced the balsa in the wheel wells with ply because the balsa is VERY soft...maybe Seagull will improive the quality of the wood they use in future kits.
Dave
09-13-2010, 09:49 PM
#49
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canberra , Australian Capital Territory, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull PC-9 120 size...
Hey thanks Kostas.
I flew her today and tested the airbrake and boy it made a huge difference to her approach. I firsat tested it at about 300 feet with wheels and flaps down and she porpoised when i deployed the airbrake - good sign! On approach she was very stable and did not yaw at all...had to appy a bit more throttle because she was coming in too slow. First landing as bit crappy, so went again and this time came in with the right amount of power and she landed really well. The runout was significantly less than without the airbrake so I'm pretty pleased with it. By the way, I've changed the pics so they show the colours better.
Dave
I flew her today and tested the airbrake and boy it made a huge difference to her approach. I firsat tested it at about 300 feet with wheels and flaps down and she porpoised when i deployed the airbrake - good sign! On approach she was very stable and did not yaw at all...had to appy a bit more throttle because she was coming in too slow. First landing as bit crappy, so went again and this time came in with the right amount of power and she landed really well. The runout was significantly less than without the airbrake so I'm pretty pleased with it. By the way, I've changed the pics so they show the colours better.
Dave
