If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.
couple of questions for you guys who have this plane already.
is it me, or is the covering purple instead of red like quique's other planes??
has anyone decided to go with a gas motor?
how much ground clearance is there / how large of a prop could you run?
what is the servo setup for the elevators? 1 per side? how much torque is needed per side? where are the servo(s) mounted, back to back in the fuse, or offset??
I havn't gotten that far........I like the Saito...But thats just me love the four stroke sound, tourke....etc....I have the 180 on my gene soucy extra 300s and love it!!!!It seems the more I use it the better it gets 60 + Flights......
Nope its you....
Just teasin'... yea it's purple... it's the new scheme colors.
The manual should be able to answer most of your questions... on their site:
The elevator servos (2) are offset (one pushrod is longer than the other)
You can easily use a prop within the range of the suggest engine size. I'm going electric with a 20x10 prop and will have decent clearance...
As far as servo selection, manual states:
The servos used for the control surfaces of this Yak-54 S must have a minimum of 130 ounce-inch of servo torque. In the prototype Yak-54 S, we used JR8411SA on all control surfaces and on throttle we used one standard JR servo. Best results can be obtained by using digital servos. Please do not risk your plane by using low torque servos. This Yak-54 S has large control surfaces and fully capable of any maneuvers that a pilot is able to perform, therefore using weak servos will increase chance of flutter and can cause you crash.
BTW, it doesn't matter if the servos are equidistant from the hingeline or not. THe length of the pushrod can be 3" or 3 feet... as long as the distance from the servo shaft (same hole used on the servo arm) and the distance from the hingeline and the attachment point on the control horn is the same. The length of pushrods introduces no throw differential.
its purple, using a Saito 220, Looks like an 18" a 20 will be cutting it close but doable ( not sure how to spell that) ,
Servos: elevators one per side offset , pull pull rudder and one servo per aileron, I'm using Hi tec HS5945's on all...I think they are a little overkill but will be taking full advantage of them.. QQ suggest's 130 oz per sq inch at a minimum...
The hardware package is probably the best ( or at least one of the best) on the market within this class...This plane is well worth the money...Its been raining here in NY this weekend so I should flying it by next week....
Couple of questions on the new Yak 54S 73",
- are the wings detachable for transportation
- would a Saito 220 fit in it
Also who makes a better ARF, Hangar 9 or QQAircraft, I am trying to decide between a Hangar 9 Extra 260 or the Yak 54s 73"
1) The wings are two-piec with a carbon fiber wingtube.
2) Check through the thread and I think there is a pic of a guy trying to install the 2.20... because of the rear carb, the 2.20 requires a good deal of room between the firewall and engine. I believe with some work the 2.20 can be made to fit nicely. As mentioned before, the firewall could even be moved back 1" to accomodate the longer engine. Otherwise, you'll have a significant distance between the cowl and the prop hub.. (like 2") See page 6 of this thread for the discussion and some pics I did of how to move the firewall back if so inclined... (EMVIN, what did you end up doing?)
3) H9 and QQ both make very nice aircraft and you couldn't go wrong with either. If you into 3D I think you'll find the Yak a better airfram... but if you are into IMAC style of flying... either plane should do you well.
The power to weight ratio wil be higher on the Yak as it will come in a couple lbs lighter... it will probably even have a better wingloading as the 260 only about 86" more wingarea with that extra 2 lbs.
Maudib, I wound up using the provided mount and with that was able to get the clearance down to 6 1/4" could have went back another 1/8 but was satisfied with that. I spoke with QQ ( great customer service!!!) and he agreed that the 220 will work and likes the extra power. He is concerened with vibration atold me to keep an eye out.....The only soft mount i could find is with Merle Hyde it will need to be custom and will run about $200.....Not sure if I will be going that route.........
That seems good enough...
As far a softmounts... I really don't know what to think... I've seen the Hyde mount with a YS 1.10 on it... It allowed the engine to swing so much that the resulting vibration, while at a lower resonance, actually shake the plane MORE.
Which vibration is worse? I dunno... But I don't think I'm going ot have to worry about that wiht a HiMax on mine...
I do have a set of these mounts (I think they came with a Chip Hyde CAP-X... that have cushions in the bolt mounts... Again. don't know what to think of them, but the look like they'd do "something".
do gas motors require perry pumps or anything similiar or do they run better than glow in that respect?
It sounds like QQ likes the extra power of a Saito 2.20 for the yak 54s 73". Before I head that way, do you guys feel a Saito 1.80 would be enough to accelarate vertically?
Thanks, appreciate your input.
Actually if you look at the website, the recommended power plant for this aircraft is 1.2-1.8 two/four stroke. OR a 25-35cc gasser.
I'm not sure that Quique is going to say that a specific engine is better than another for this aircraft, because really that's not his place.
I think what he would tell you is:
Keep it simple, keep it light.
The 2.20 is nearly 1/2 lb heavier than the 1.80... It iwll also swallow down fuel a bit more (and both are considered thirsty) they also like higher Nitro for best power (30% heli fuel)
8 oz (plus a little heavier prop) is a good bit of weight. The power will be more, but the question you are asking is do you need more?
I'd guess you'll come out at 10.5 lbs or less with the 1.80... The 1.80 will indeed be a good 3D powerplant.
If a 4 stroke is your desire, the 1.80 will be a great choice... or a YS 160DZ (it's the same weight as the 1.40 I guess).
The O.S. 1.60 will be an excellent 2 stroke choice, putting out a little more power than the 1.80 I think at about the same weight and consuming less fuel (not to mention costling a good deal less)
I think Quique will be testing a G26 in the plane to determine if it's wnough power... he knows it will be great power for IMAC but only til he flies it with the engine will he know if it's good for 3D.
He said he had GOBS of power with the 1.40 and was comparing the prop sizes and RPMs... which leads him to believe that the power will still be plenty. And with the additional wingarea will be able to handle the extra weight of a gas engine (or the Saito 2.20 for that matter)
Gas engine carbs have a diaphram pump which pulls fuel needed. As opposed to glow engines that use a pressurized tank to push fuel. Even add on pumps/regs pressurize the tank and push fuel.
Because they are ignited by a seperate battery (assuming we are talking modern, electronic ignition controlled designs) you don't have the same issues with glow plugs going cold at idle, etc.
A good quality gas engine requires only initial carb tuning and are less susceptable to atmospheric changes and therefore run more reliably. Seems you always have to set your needle on a glow engine at the field.
A good gas engine requires a simple handflipping process to start (about 6-10 flips cold, one or 2 warm) and they don't coat your plane with uber-goober snot.
At even $3 a gallon (plus a buck or two for oil) they are cost effective to operate... and in a years time with a frequently flown plane, will pay for themselves over a glow engine. (In the case of big 4 strokes, it's actually cheaper to go gas up front)
Lastly you carry a LOT less fuel... I'd recommend 20 oz for the Saito 2.20... and 10 oz for a 26-28cc engine. The 2.20 will get about 10 minutes... the gas maybe 15 minutes. Even though the gas engine requires a battery and ignition weight (about 8 oz) you take off with 10 oz less fuel...
The only problem is that gas usually doesn't put out the same power per CC as glow... i.e. a 1.6ci OS glow engine is considerably more powerful than a 1.6 (25cc) gas engine.
Not untilk you get to about 40-50cc does gas begin to make more power than equivilent (there really isn't an equivilent)glow engine.
Gas rocks I don't care what anyone says. But this is the very SMALLEST plane I would consider a gasser for do to overall weight. But if I were to decide between the 2.20 and a G26 or 3W28... I'd lean gas. There wouldn't be any real weight difference, but he gas would be somewhat less power.
They are about the same price, so that's not an issue... so it's whether you wanna spend $25-$30 a gallon on glow fuel and get 6 flights out of it then wipe the accompanying ubergoo off the bottom of your plane for the insane power...
Or burn $3.50 a gallon mixed gas that gets you 12 flights, adequate power and a clean bottom plane....
The O.S. 1.60/Saito 1.80 however are decently priced (especially the 1.60) and provide lots of power (especially the 1.60) and are particulary light.
I would LOVE to try the new 1.20AX on her, but afetr seeing that stock battery install (on a plate jutting out over the engine) I don't think balance could be acheived...
do gas motors require perry pumps or anything similiar or do they run better than glow in that respect?
To all, for starters QQ DID NOT RECOMMEND the Saito 220 , but thinks that it will work as far as balance and definitly power. As per QQ " he cannot guarantee the life of the airframe due to vibration with a 220" he also said "this plane with the 220 will be a Ferrari". I will probably be placing the battery in the raido compartment somewere, opposed to on the engine box due to the extra weight. I have a 180 on a slightly larger and heavier plane with an 18X6 pro zinger and it performs well, hover's, waterfalls, etc. However, there is not much left over power if any... It will definitly perform better in the QQ73" as it is better suited for this plane. I just happened to have a 220 sitting around and thought the QQ 73" would be a good home for it.. Yes the fuel is expensive. I use Morgan Cool Power 30% Heli ( it helps to buy it by the case) and my Saito's react very well to it plus who needs a smoke pump as this fuel create's quite am impressive smoke trail on its own. I have never owned a Gasser so I dont have any opinion on them other than they appear ausome. Another project another time I would love to try a DA50... One more thing about the big Saito's they sound great!!!! It just adds to the whole experience...
Maudib/anybody - I'm in the final stages of putting my "73" together and you have given a wealth of info. Whats your opinion;
1. Can I put the throttle servo forward of the gas tank? any major weight balance problems with a YS 140 ?
2. What prop with the YS 140?
3. Has anybody used the Slimline inverted muffler? Does it fit? I've spotted the muffler QQ recomends but unsure of the equipment that goes with it - what is it and where can I get it?
Thanks for any help.
Is everyone installing the servo arms that came with the kit? The 5945 servo arm holes are about 1.5mm longer and shorter than the kit arms. Decisions,decisions decisions!!!
Highstrut, I went with the 5945 arm......I like to get as much as I can.....There's always low rate's....or expo..........I was not crazy about attaching the arm to the round servo surface............
thanks for the information i am thinking of the 26gt would love to know the results of quique's test with the evo motor i am going to be flying more imac than 3d but would like to have the capabilities for both...i think the balance will be better with the 26gt as well...anyone have any good muffler recomendations for the 26gt? or problems with them running inverted?has anyone tried balancing the wings yet? mine were spot on....am i lucky?
Just wanted to put a few pix of the mounted Saito 220 out there.........
What a big honkin momo! Forget prop clearance... you sure you got muffler clearance? LOL
Wow, that is big..... it looks thirsty!!
Hear that big sucking sound? That's the sound of tanker fulls of 30% Heli fuel being sucked into the state of NY...
Just teasin.. that oughtta snap roll vertical outta site... (and rain snot all the way up)
Once it gets leaned out its not to bad.....hoping for 7- 8min maybe a little better.....24 oz tank.....$20 a day .... I can live with that....
I'm concerned about using the kit servo arms myself, if I use them I'll fasten them with bolts & nuts ,rather than screws. Anyone else have concerns.