3D Flying! Our 3D flying forum is the ultimate resource for 3D flyers. Also discuss the latest in "4D" flying!

Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Reply
Old 04-07-2006, 03:23 PM
  #76
adrenalnjunky
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: West Monroe, LA
Posts: 539
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Quote:
ORIGINAL: akschu

Here is a nice picture I took two summers ago when I got hooked on airplanes. Enjoy:

R.I.P. Eric Beard www.russianthunder.com

Since there were only a couple of handfuls of flying Yak 54's left - I wonder if another aerobatic performer is going to continue flying his plane? This has been my desktop wallpaper for a long time now:
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Xv64176.jpg
Views:	6
Size:	28.9 KB
ID:	440552  
adrenalnjunky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 03:43 PM
  #77
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

More pictures of the airshow which had a Eric Beard and another guy flying an Edge 540 are [link=http://www.schu.net/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=5094]here[/link].
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 07:28 PM
  #78
STG
 
STG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Richmond, WI
Posts: 3,518
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Will this be available in all White?
STG is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 09:00 PM
  #79
xurifle06
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dayville, CT
Posts: 164
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Got my QQ 73" at toledo today! its a great looking plane. more details to come. too tired from a long day of walking and shopping!
xurifle06 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 11:55 PM
  #80
TedG
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 26
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Ok, Molly called and asked for my credit card number - so I should have it by next wednesday. I've been waiting for months for this bird. I have followed the thread, but still in a quandry about about whether to go glow or gas. I'm a begining-intermediate presently trying to master a "Showtime 4D" with a YS 110. Never had a gasser but am entrigued with them. Would a YS 140 or YS 160 be another avenue? Would appreciate any input from the more experienced.
TedG is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 12:27 AM
  #81
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

I'm not experienced, but after having lots of discussion and doing lots of research it has become very clear that gas is not currently an option if you want 3d performance. Later when the BME55 and ZDZ40 ship this might change, but right now if you want good 3d you have to go with glow.

I'm going to wait for a while before I fly mine (get more experience and take my time building) so if one of those gas engines comes out and looks to be a good solution then I'll be going gas on mine, otherwise I'll probably just go with an OS 1.60 since they are cheaper to operate and several have reported that they work great on the 72" version.
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 06:48 AM
  #82
randy racer
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: mayfield, KY
Posts: 1,429
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

the OS160 is a great engine and works great on the 72" i have now. mine has aBisson pitts style muffler and a perry pump and has performed verry well with no dead stick for over 3 gallons of fuel. it has unlimited vertical. like you i'm taking my time with this one waiting to see if there is a gass engine that will work as good, but if not i will use the 160 again and love it.

randy
randy racer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 08:25 AM
  #83
ChrisK7
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Stanfield, OR
Posts: 97
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

How will the YS 140 FZ work on this plane? I was thinking that this plane was made for it.
ChrisK7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 09:18 AM
  #84
xurifle06
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dayville, CT
Posts: 164
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Chris. The YS-140 was the engine that quique had in his plane at the Toledo show. I was told it give it great performance.

Im still undecided between gas and glow. Id love to go gas but i really want to do 3d with it too. Can anyone recommend decent servos for this plane. It will be my first of this size.
xurifle06 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 09:50 AM
  #85
xurifle06
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dayville, CT
Posts: 164
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

While doing a search here on RCU for smaller gas engines i found both [link]http://www.scottellingson.com/brillelli_010.htm[/link] (the EI version) and this [link]http://www.bcmaengines.clearwire.net/BCMASPE.htm[/link] . From what i have read they a great performing motors (especially the brillelli) and are fairly light weight. Im sure swinging a carbon prop would even increase their performance. let me know what you guys think

Rich
xurifle06 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 09:58 AM
  #86
Bob Pastorello
 
Bob Pastorello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: El Reno, OK
Posts: 6,707
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

WAY too heavy for really optimal balance and wing-loading.... won't make the QQ a garbage-scow, but it would become rather porcine in it's flight characteristics when slowed.

Optimum for these is an all-up-engine weight somewhere around 40-42 oz total. The OS 1.60 is great on these.

For a DIFFERENT gas approach, the MVVS 1.6 (same as Horizon's Evolution 26GT) is a pretty light motor..... engine is 34 oz, then the ignition is 6.... so add a battery/switch, and it's bumping 44 before a muffler....

I'm undecided, too, but definitlely leaning toward the MVVS or similar. Glow fuel creates too big a mess anymore, and your takeoff weight is higher. Where I use a 16 oz on an OS 1.60, I use a 6-8 oz on gas.
Bob Pastorello is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 11:13 AM
  #87
xurifle06
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dayville, CT
Posts: 164
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

i dont know how you say they are way to heavy. By my math your MVVS would weigh 40 minus the muffler. the BCMA above weighs 38 with igniton and muffler and the brillelli weighs 42 with muffler and igniton. all that would be left is battery and switch.
xurifle06 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 11:22 AM
  #88
Bob Pastorello
 
Bob Pastorello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: El Reno, OK
Posts: 6,707
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Guess maybe I better buy both so I can know what I'm talking about..... Kinda makes me think of that line from "Independence Day"..... * I gotta GET me one of THESE *
Bob Pastorello is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 11:54 AM
  #89
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

The BCMA-26 is light enough (for a gas) in that it is 38oz with muffler so add 3-4oz for the battery and it's around 41-42oz. But the problem with it is that it performs a bit less than the OS 1.60. As Muadib pointed out several posts ago, CC to CC the glow is going to pull a bit more, and since the BCMA-26 is a 1.60ci engine one would expect it's performance to be a good notch below the OS. This is confirmed by the numbers posted on the site: "18x8 @ 7200 rpm (12lbs Thrust)." Xtraflyr pointed out that his OS 1.60 will pull an 18x8 prop at 9500 rpm. Now they are probably not testing with the same prop, but just the same that is a HUGE difference in performance. Combine that with the fact that the BCMA weighs at least 4oz more and I think it will be lacking in vertical performance.

The Evolution 26GT has the same problem, it won't turn the numbers that the OS will so in the end you still end up with a bit less performance and more weight. Someone in the 72" thread mentioned that they had a 72" yak with the 26GT and said power was average, but glow would be much better.

So in the end you pretty much only have 3 choices:

1. Wait for newer lighter gas motors to come out and hope they can get something that will out pull an OS 1.60 in a 3lb ready to fly package.
2. Get a gas, and don't expect great 3d performance.
3. Put a slimer on it.

I should note that I'm not experienced with gas engines, so I don't want to come off as an authority on this subject, but I have spent a lot of time researching this because I too want a gas engine, and everywhere I look gas costs me 1/2lb more weight and 1000 less rpm.
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 12:11 PM
  #90
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Bob, what does your brison 2.4 weigh all setup ready to fly? (Ign, battery, engine, muffler)?

Because I really want at least 1.5:1 thrust to weight a 26cc engine just wouldn't cut it. A 30cc might, but according to my research a 40cc is where it starts outperforming the OS 1.60 enough to make up the weight.

So lets say the BCMA-40 weighs 55oz ready to go. That would be almost a good pound more than the OS.160 and according to their specs it belts out 20lbs of thrust on a 20X8 @ 6900. So if the plane weighs 12lbs with the OS and 13 lbs with the BCMA-40 then the theoretical thrust to weight ratio would be right at 1.53:1.

Now you would get some of the weight back by running a smaller fuel tank, but in the end the gas just doesn't have the same thrust to weight ratio of the slimer.

If the BME55 can get under 3lbs ready to go, that will be different, but for now I don't see any gas engine that will really do good 3d in this plane.
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 12:34 PM
  #91
xtraflyr
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 2,295
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Yeah my 160 was doin 9500 on both an APC 18x6W and a Bolly 18x6..I'm not sure about the weight of it,but what about a Moki 1.8? Fuel is cheap,put out tons of power and doesnt drink alot of fuel..

Something to think about..

Later,
Frank
xtraflyr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 12:52 PM
  #92
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Xtraflyr,

According to [link=http://www.justengines.unseen.org/moki180b.htm]this[/link] review the Moki only turned the 18x8 at 8650rpm. If that is true then your OS 1.60 is a way stronger engine.

This doesn't make sense as I would have guessed that the Moki would have been stronger. I'm guessing the difference is the nitro in the fuel. What % nitro do you run though your 1.60 to get the numbers you posted?
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 12:54 PM
  #93
EMVIN
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Staten Island , NY
Posts: 290
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Purchased mine on Thursday and should have it on Monday.. Been following that UPS tracking #.....
I have a Saito 220 ready to go. It weighs 1100G / 38oz.......I think this will do the trick....
EMVIN is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 01:00 PM
  #94
xtraflyr
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 2,295
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"


Quote:
ORIGINAL: akschu

Xtraflyr,

According to [link=http://www.justengines.unseen.org/moki180b.htm]this[/link] review the Moki only turned the 18x8 at 8650rpm. If that is true then your OS 1.60 is a way stronger engine.

This doesn't make sense as I would have guessed that the Moki would have been stronger. I'm guessing the difference is the nitro in the fuel. What % nitro do you run though your 1.60 to get the numbers you posted?
akschu,

On my 106 I'm using 15/18 oil content. The Moki supposed to put out like 4 hp.and the OS 160 I believe is like 3.3hp. I haven't tried a 18x8 prop but that will drop the RPMs some.And I guess it would depend on how high or below sea level the test have been done..
xtraflyr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2006, 01:05 PM
  #95
Bob Pastorello
 
Bob Pastorello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: El Reno, OK
Posts: 6,707
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

akschu - here's my data from the Brison on my Goldberg Yak (since replaced with RCS 1.80)

Brison 2.4

Engine w/ plug 45.6
Ignition 4.2
Bisson Inverted 5.6
Battery/Switch 4.9

TOTAL "Firewall Fwd" 60.3
Total - (in lbs) 3.77

Reality is that the OS 1.60 probably has the weight/performance ratio to set the standard by....I've run several, great motors, and there ain't a gasser near it until the Brison 2.4, then it's WEIGHT against performance, as a complete comparable OS 1.60 setup is just about 48 oz (incl. 4 oz for mount, not needed on Brison).

So - the deal really is gas costs 1000 rpm, and about 12oz, typically..... until you get above 45 cc.....

Always a tough choice....
Bob Pastorello is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2006, 01:15 AM
  #96
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

I'm looking at the glow options and the Moki looks interesting. Do you guys think the Moki 1.80 is going to work better in the plane since it is a stronger engine, but also 8oz heavier? I like the idea of no/low nitro fuel.
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2006, 07:35 AM
  #97
walleyevision
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: GAHANNA, OH
Posts: 112
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

I have a ys 140 and am trying to decide on a plane. I was going with f90 but think I might opt for more quality. The wild Hare 73" edge had my attention then this plane was brought up. At $320 with no hardware, (wild hare), maybe this plane is a better value with its high quality hw and wing bag. Any idea how shipping comes out? I am in NJ. Thanks
walleyevision is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2006, 12:24 PM
  #98
akschu
 
akschu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , AK
Posts: 417
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

I should have noted that I was comparing the moki to the OS, but forgot.
akschu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2006, 01:09 PM
  #99
Maudib
 
Maudib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 5,833
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Well, I'm back! And I brought a purdy new airplane home!

Everything looks great... excellent covering (pristine actually) and the colors really pop in person... looks even nicer than the pic on the website. The paint is perfect.
A very nice, complete ARF with hardware, tank and yes a double wing bag is included. Sweet!

I weighed everything that goes in the air and I came up with 110.25 oz or just under 6.9 lbs. So I'm guessing around 10.5-11 lbs dry with an O.S. 1.60 & Bisson Inv. Pitts

The cowl diameter is 8" and the distance from the firewall to front of cowl is 5" (you'd want to add as much as 1" beyond that for proper scale appearance of spinner position.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Fd91379.jpg
Views:	6
Size:	49.7 KB
ID:	441904   Click image for larger version

Name:	Bw73625.jpg
Views:	6
Size:	45.6 KB
ID:	441905   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ns45707.jpg
Views:	6
Size:	46.5 KB
ID:	441906  
Maudib is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2006, 01:41 PM
  #100
Russmall
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 331
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Quique Somenzini YAK-54S 73"

Maudib, Are the tail surfaces air-foiled or flat? It appears in the picture that the rudder is flat but I can't tell for sure. That was my only complaint on the 72" version, and I was hoping that they changed it on this one........RS
Russmall is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:27 PM.