seamaster ,with or with out flaps
03-12-2009, 09:24 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Niangua,
MO
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
seamaster ,with or with out flaps
Just got a 40 size seamaster at a swap meet built just not covered they cut the alerons to make flaps i have never used flaps on anything so should i go with flaps or just full lenght alerons , also the plane feels pretty heavy should i go bigger than 46 power plant thanks bryon
03-13-2009, 03:37 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
I have one of the original ACE seamasters, mine is glassed and not particularly light, I dont think flaps are required on this bird at all - mine flys well on an OS46FX 11x7 APC. They fly like an advanced trainer anyway. Why carry any extra weight? Also you would have to cut in to the wings to make servo mounts etc, its another place for water splashs to get in and at the expected position of the flap servos is where the majority of the water is sprayed from the take off's landings and ice skating. Your choice of course.
Siddus74
Siddus74
03-13-2009, 05:10 AM
#4
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
The flaps are cool. If you have a programmable radio you'll need to put in a small amount of down elevator to compensate for the added lift , when you add flaps.On landing they'll work like a air brake.I have added them to several of my planes.Any good running 46 will power it fine. Ifly one with a Sati 50.An another with a St. 45...An yes they are heavy. An they fly good.
Falcon
Falcon
03-13-2009, 08:09 AM
#5
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: northern,
VT
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
Have a kit built Seamaster myself, flaps are not necessary, but could be fun. Try it, you might like it. I run a OS.46FX with MAS 11x6, plenty of power, remember less drag with no wheels.
03-13-2009, 08:57 AM
#6
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
A good running 46 will be plenty of power heavy or not. As for the flaps. they are totally unnecessary. Flaps produce some lift up to 15 degrees and drag over 15 degrees. You don't need either on the Seamaster but the reduced aileron will be noticable. Cutting the Ailerons to make flaps will hinder roll performance and the increased fun factor with the flaps won't be worth it. Don't do it.
03-19-2009, 03:27 PM
#9
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grant,
FL
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
bryon,
The extra weight of an additional servo should not even be a consideration.
Why not have the best of both worlds; go with full-length ailerons controlled by individual servos? Then you can mix them as flaperons.
The extra weight of an additional servo should not even be a consideration.
Why not have the best of both worlds; go with full-length ailerons controlled by individual servos? Then you can mix them as flaperons.
03-19-2009, 06:32 PM
#12
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
Gladly
If you were flying a straight line, flapperons work ok. Not as good as regular flaps, but ok
But the problem with them is that you increase the chances of having a tip stall. Some wings are designed with washout where the trailing edge bends up at the wingtip. This is to prevent the tip from stalling first.
With standard flaps, the root of the wing will stall first. But with flapperons, the tip usually stalls first - this usually happens when you're turning on to final approach because you're going slow and the inside wing is moving slower than the outside wing.
So the inside wing (The one that is already low) tip-stalls and the plane just falls out of the sky at a low altitude with no chance of recovery.
I lost two planes to flapperons before I found out what was causing it - Never again!
If you were flying a straight line, flapperons work ok. Not as good as regular flaps, but ok
But the problem with them is that you increase the chances of having a tip stall. Some wings are designed with washout where the trailing edge bends up at the wingtip. This is to prevent the tip from stalling first.
With standard flaps, the root of the wing will stall first. But with flapperons, the tip usually stalls first - this usually happens when you're turning on to final approach because you're going slow and the inside wing is moving slower than the outside wing.
So the inside wing (The one that is already low) tip-stalls and the plane just falls out of the sky at a low altitude with no chance of recovery.
I lost two planes to flapperons before I found out what was causing it - Never again!
03-19-2009, 09:44 PM
#13
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grant,
FL
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
Makes sense...
So if he keeps the control surfaces separate, he can get the benefit of flaps with minimum loss of roll . Rational the being that the flaps shorten the ailerons where they are least effective and the flaps are (almost) as effective at the root of the wing as anywhere. And I was just about to add flaperons to my next plane...
So if he keeps the control surfaces separate, he can get the benefit of flaps with minimum loss of roll . Rational the being that the flaps shorten the ailerons where they are least effective and the flaps are (almost) as effective at the root of the wing as anywhere. And I was just about to add flaperons to my next plane...
03-20-2009, 08:43 PM
#15
RE: seamaster ,with or with out flaps
I have s a seacruiser with flap/spoiler things that don't seem to have an aeronautical name. But they are flaps that protrude up over the top surface of the wing, and while they add lift, they add drag, and mine don't cause any pitch change.
They slow it down like dragging a sack of rocks, tho'!
They slow it down like dragging a sack of rocks, tho'!
