Seagull Edge 540 46
06-08-2009, 12:47 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seagull Edge 540 46
The Seagull Edge 540 46 is much less popular than the Seagull Edge 540 60. My rational for the purchase is because I had an early model high compression Saito FA 80 needing an airplane. A "tweener" engine needing a home.
The 540 46 hasn't attracted much attention because people realized a .46 underpowers the airplane. According to a thread in the RCU 3D forum, a .46 isn't heavy enough to balance without adding weight to the nose. Even the Saito 80 doesn't move the scales to proper "factory" CG.
Here's some pictures. An easy ARF out of the box. Maiden this week.
The 540 46 hasn't attracted much attention because people realized a .46 underpowers the airplane. According to a thread in the RCU 3D forum, a .46 isn't heavy enough to balance without adding weight to the nose. Even the Saito 80 doesn't move the scales to proper "factory" CG.
Here's some pictures. An easy ARF out of the box. Maiden this week.
06-10-2009, 03:06 PM
#2
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Okeechobee,
FL
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Hey westcoastflyer; I have the 60 size and have a saito 125 for power. This baby rocks! You should find that by using the larger motor and going with a 6 volt system, you can play with the battery to achive the cg, I would think. Good luck on your madien flight. Nice looking plane for sure!
juicesqueezer
06-11-2009, 12:36 AM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Hi Joe, that's a great looking airplane you have, I'm sure it flies great. One of the reasons I got the 46 is because of so many good comments I read about the 60. I know it won't fly the same, but I basically got it as an everyday flier.
I was a little concerned about buying a Seagull, but I was pleasantly surprised with the quality. If the weather cooperates, maiden on Friday. And thereafter, first day with no rain, this baby flies.
I was a little concerned about buying a Seagull, but I was pleasantly surprised with the quality. If the weather cooperates, maiden on Friday. And thereafter, first day with no rain, this baby flies.
06-12-2009, 06:02 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
I maidened my Edge 46 this morning. Don't you love first flight reviews where they say, "...gave it half throttle, beautiful takeoff roll, climbed out perfect, just a click of down and this plane flies like a dream!" LOL, well, that didn't happen.
I've been working 16 hour days in my business, I never had the chance to run the FA 80 in the airplane. Last time it ran was in the final moments of the existence of my Thunderbug. Crashed due to not extending the antennae... And of course I forgot to load the toolbox in the car this morning. So I get to the field and the engine isn't running very well. No top end RPM, maybe half to 3/4. We fiddled with the engine, never did get much RPM, but I figured even at half it’s potential revs it should fly this airplane fine.
Bottom line, full throttle and the takeoff roll was twice as long as it should have been. This airplane is much twitchier than my CG Extra, it climbed out, engine not sounding great... I decided it'd be best just to land, so I turned back a little hot - very tight flying field - decided to go around because the landing may have overshot. I turned giving full throttle and the engine quit. Bent the landing gear a little. I may have time this afternoon to get the Saito running right and head back to the field so I can see how this airplane flies. All I know is it behaves nicely on landings.
Sorry for the boring report, but I like hearing about first flights of a model, and hopefully someone got some entertainment value from this post.
Edited to add: Here's some notes on CG because someone may find this thread in the future researching this model.
Factory says 9.5 cm. It’s too squirrely at this CG. Calculating 1/4 chord puts it at 8.625 cm. A guy on another thread says an online calculator gave him 7.5 cm.
Rounded in inches from centimeters, the factory says 3 3/4†which is tail heavy with the Saito FA 80.
Calculating 1/4 chord puts CG at 3 3/8â€, which I think should be the starting point for the Edge 540 46.
In addition to the 1 1/4 oz of lead in the left wing tip for lateral balance due to horizontal mounting of the engine, I now have 11 oz of lead in the firewall to acheive 1/4 chord 3 3/8" CG.
The airplane in this configuration weighs exactly 7.5 pounds. The Seagull assembly manual says approximate flying weight is 5.7 - 6.4 pounds. To acheive the factory approximate flying weight with the design of this model would result in my opinion with a dangerously tail heavy airplane.
Edited 7/3/09 to add:
OK, final review for anyone researching and considering buying this airplane.
With the engine issues sorted out the airplane has had a chance to fly. This is now my everyday flier and I’m glad I bought the airplane.
It does have some issues. Due to the CG, and the added 11 oz of lead to the nose, it weighs too much for its size. I've kept the CG at 25% chord, 3 3/8 inches back from the leading edge. It flies slow if you want, the extra weight doesn't mean it has to be a speed burner to stay in the air and fly well.
Some lead could come out of the nose to move back the CG, but at current CG it slows down to land very well, and there’s no floating and taking up the entire runway, which tells me I have the CG right, and I think it proves the factory has it wrong on recommended factory CG.
The caveat to slow landings, the way it’s set up now, is there’s no flair left in the airplane. It’ll stay in the air at slow speeds, no bad habits, but it’s too heavy to flair.
It’s a keeper, I like it.
I've been working 16 hour days in my business, I never had the chance to run the FA 80 in the airplane. Last time it ran was in the final moments of the existence of my Thunderbug. Crashed due to not extending the antennae... And of course I forgot to load the toolbox in the car this morning. So I get to the field and the engine isn't running very well. No top end RPM, maybe half to 3/4. We fiddled with the engine, never did get much RPM, but I figured even at half it’s potential revs it should fly this airplane fine.
Bottom line, full throttle and the takeoff roll was twice as long as it should have been. This airplane is much twitchier than my CG Extra, it climbed out, engine not sounding great... I decided it'd be best just to land, so I turned back a little hot - very tight flying field - decided to go around because the landing may have overshot. I turned giving full throttle and the engine quit. Bent the landing gear a little. I may have time this afternoon to get the Saito running right and head back to the field so I can see how this airplane flies. All I know is it behaves nicely on landings.
Sorry for the boring report, but I like hearing about first flights of a model, and hopefully someone got some entertainment value from this post.
Edited to add: Here's some notes on CG because someone may find this thread in the future researching this model.
Factory says 9.5 cm. It’s too squirrely at this CG. Calculating 1/4 chord puts it at 8.625 cm. A guy on another thread says an online calculator gave him 7.5 cm.
Rounded in inches from centimeters, the factory says 3 3/4†which is tail heavy with the Saito FA 80.
Calculating 1/4 chord puts CG at 3 3/8â€, which I think should be the starting point for the Edge 540 46.
In addition to the 1 1/4 oz of lead in the left wing tip for lateral balance due to horizontal mounting of the engine, I now have 11 oz of lead in the firewall to acheive 1/4 chord 3 3/8" CG.
The airplane in this configuration weighs exactly 7.5 pounds. The Seagull assembly manual says approximate flying weight is 5.7 - 6.4 pounds. To acheive the factory approximate flying weight with the design of this model would result in my opinion with a dangerously tail heavy airplane.
Edited 7/3/09 to add:
OK, final review for anyone researching and considering buying this airplane.
With the engine issues sorted out the airplane has had a chance to fly. This is now my everyday flier and I’m glad I bought the airplane.
It does have some issues. Due to the CG, and the added 11 oz of lead to the nose, it weighs too much for its size. I've kept the CG at 25% chord, 3 3/8 inches back from the leading edge. It flies slow if you want, the extra weight doesn't mean it has to be a speed burner to stay in the air and fly well.
Some lead could come out of the nose to move back the CG, but at current CG it slows down to land very well, and there’s no floating and taking up the entire runway, which tells me I have the CG right, and I think it proves the factory has it wrong on recommended factory CG.
The caveat to slow landings, the way it’s set up now, is there’s no flair left in the airplane. It’ll stay in the air at slow speeds, no bad habits, but it’s too heavy to flair.
It’s a keeper, I like it.
07-22-2009, 08:43 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: montreal, QC, CANADA
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
It is a very very nice plane..... I had one with OS 46AX and pitts muffler. I had to put weight at the front (lots) and a alum spinner and I got the GC..... I ran out of battery (I know) and I lost my plane, well, the fuselage, I am ordering another fuselage and it should be fine to fly again...... I do not want to use the same engine because it was underpowered, it did not have good climbing....
I want to move to 4-stroke of ASP engines, I have read good reviews and they are at a good price. However, at the place where I want to order it, they just have 61 and 91 (four strokes)..... I was thinking the 61 might be a bit limited, the 91 too much power but I still wonder if I can put it on...... the 91 (4 stroke) is 8oz heavier than the OS 55AX.... do you guys think I should be fine?????? I could put the battery at the back with an extension...... what do you guys think????
has anyone measured the extra weight at the front??? I did not....
I want to move to 4-stroke of ASP engines, I have read good reviews and they are at a good price. However, at the place where I want to order it, they just have 61 and 91 (four strokes)..... I was thinking the 61 might be a bit limited, the 91 too much power but I still wonder if I can put it on...... the 91 (4 stroke) is 8oz heavier than the OS 55AX.... do you guys think I should be fine?????? I could put the battery at the back with an extension...... what do you guys think????
has anyone measured the extra weight at the front??? I did not....
07-22-2009, 06:45 PM
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
From my knowledge of the airplane, definitely no to the .61
A .91 4 stroke sounds about right :-) It's a fairly small model, but I think the design should handle it and you'll benefit from the weight up front. Beefing it up a little at the firewall sounds like a good idea however
If you go with the .91 I'd be interested to see where you end up with the CG you like. I'm at 3 3/8 inches and I'll bet even with the .91 you'll be adding weight up front.
A .91 4 stroke sounds about right :-) It's a fairly small model, but I think the design should handle it and you'll benefit from the weight up front. Beefing it up a little at the firewall sounds like a good idea however
If you go with the .91 I'd be interested to see where you end up with the CG you like. I'm at 3 3/8 inches and I'll bet even with the .91 you'll be adding weight up front.
07-22-2009, 08:24 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: montreal, QC, CANADA
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Hello, thanks for answering...... I would say I would be really close with the .91-4stroke and even if I need to add weight, it will be compensated with power at least..... I also want to hear opinions about people who have built this plane to make sure that I am gonna be ok and not end up with a too heavy nose plane.....
If I get a couple of people telling me I should be fine with that engine, I'll order it
but I am definetely not putting back the .46AX that I had before and seeing that the 55AX needs more weight, well, why not the .91 4-stroke........ come on guys... any other opinions?????
If I get a couple of people telling me I should be fine with that engine, I'll order it
but I am definetely not putting back the .46AX that I had before and seeing that the 55AX needs more weight, well, why not the .91 4-stroke........ come on guys... any other opinions?????
08-30-2009, 03:43 PM
#8
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
I have the 46 Edge with a Saito .72 and have not had to add weight to balance the CG at 9.5 cm per the manual. This is with a 5-cell battery at the receiver mount. But I also believe this is tail heavy since I trimmed the plane for level flight and then have to give UP elevator during inverted flight. It also does some squirrelly stuff doing a tight loop.
I initially used the plastic motor mount and the plane flew good but it had too much downthrust. Instead of shimming the mount I went with the aluminum Saito mount. More nose weight but a staighter mount. Reset the cg and now it flies a LOT different. I'm going to try moving the cg forward and see what happens.
It does fly nice with a 13x6 prop. It can hover about 3/4 throttle and will slowly pull out. But I mostly just fly aerobatics with this plane.
Are you measuring CG at the fuse or wingtips. I'll try getting a straight edge on the leading edge to see if it makes a difference where it's measured.
I initially used the plastic motor mount and the plane flew good but it had too much downthrust. Instead of shimming the mount I went with the aluminum Saito mount. More nose weight but a staighter mount. Reset the cg and now it flies a LOT different. I'm going to try moving the cg forward and see what happens.
It does fly nice with a 13x6 prop. It can hover about 3/4 throttle and will slowly pull out. But I mostly just fly aerobatics with this plane.
Are you measuring CG at the fuse or wingtips. I'll try getting a straight edge on the leading edge to see if it makes a difference where it's measured.
08-30-2009, 04:31 PM
#9
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
OK, it looks like the leading edge at the root / fuse is 2mm (1/16") forward of the wingtip.
With a Saito .72 and aluminum mount up front and an Ohio tailwheel at the back, I can balance it at 8.5cm at the wingtip with the 5 cell battery pack just forward of the former at the wingtube. Gives a lot of adjustment for the cg. I imagine a .91 will move the battery back a bit. The battery can be placed aft of the servos under the pushrods if need be. I already had the .72 before the .82 came out[&o]
Hope this helps.
With a Saito .72 and aluminum mount up front and an Ohio tailwheel at the back, I can balance it at 8.5cm at the wingtip with the 5 cell battery pack just forward of the former at the wingtube. Gives a lot of adjustment for the cg. I imagine a .91 will move the battery back a bit. The battery can be placed aft of the servos under the pushrods if need be. I already had the .72 before the .82 came out[&o]
Hope this helps.
08-31-2009, 03:12 AM
#10
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
ORIGINAL: reeseman9
I have the 46 Edge with a Saito .72 and have not had to add weight to balance the CG at 9.5 cm per the manual. This is with a 5-cell battery at the receiver mount. But I also believe this is tail heavy since I trimmed the plane for level flight and then have to give UP elevator during inverted flight. It also does some squirrelly stuff doing a tight loop.
I initially used the plastic motor mount and the plane flew good but it had too much downthrust. Instead of shimming the mount I went with the aluminum Saito mount. More nose weight but a staighter mount. Reset the cg and now it flies a LOT different. I'm going to try moving the cg forward and see what happens.
It does fly nice with a 13x6 prop. It can hover about 3/4 throttle and will slowly pull out. But I mostly just fly aerobatics with this plane.
Are you measuring CG at the fuse or wingtips. I'll try getting a straight edge on the leading edge to see if it makes a difference where it's measured.
I have the 46 Edge with a Saito .72 and have not had to add weight to balance the CG at 9.5 cm per the manual. This is with a 5-cell battery at the receiver mount. But I also believe this is tail heavy since I trimmed the plane for level flight and then have to give UP elevator during inverted flight. It also does some squirrelly stuff doing a tight loop.
I initially used the plastic motor mount and the plane flew good but it had too much downthrust. Instead of shimming the mount I went with the aluminum Saito mount. More nose weight but a staighter mount. Reset the cg and now it flies a LOT different. I'm going to try moving the cg forward and see what happens.
It does fly nice with a 13x6 prop. It can hover about 3/4 throttle and will slowly pull out. But I mostly just fly aerobatics with this plane.
Are you measuring CG at the fuse or wingtips. I'll try getting a straight edge on the leading edge to see if it makes a difference where it's measured.
True about the stock plastic white motor mount, it's designed for smaller engines. The flex and movement with an .80 is alarming. I'm replacing with a Dave Brown.
It's interesting you aren't adding weight up front. This indicates three possibilities - your 8.5 cm may not be at the fuse, and either your aluminum motor mount or your exhaust setup is helping to add weight up front.
The next things I'm doing is mounting the battery directly behind the firewall and changing the thrust. With one washer on top and bottom left for right thrust, cutting throttle balloons it up. I'll be adding upthrust.
08-31-2009, 09:21 PM
#11
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Thanks for the reply Westcoastflyer. The ballooning is what made me check the thrust line. This was my second arf build. I found I had some downthrust (using a bubble level
) The thing about it was I installed the aluminum mount and did not rebalance the plane then flew it and it required just a click up on the elevator and flew OK. I am using an aluminum spinner also. It also ballooned on the throttle cut. I checked the thrust again last night and it had a slight up thrust on the engine. This was still at the 9.5cm CG at the wing tip. The odd thing to me was that after trimming for level flight upright it would climb when inverted. On a downline it would pull to the canopy. On KE it would tuck to the landing gear severely. If I gave it rudder during level flight it would dive in the direction of the rudder input but no rolling.
Note: a buddy of mine has the .60 edge and it ballons/floats on him, but he likes a rearward CG.
I am new to all this but I did look at some of the online cg calculators and when you put in the numbers and look for a 25-30% MAC the CG goes from roughly 7cm to 9.26cm. Do I know what I'm talking about or should I hit the books again? I've tried reading as much as I could. This plane seems to be a bit tricky. But it gets a lot of compliments for looks and construction.
I started early last year with an Avistar. Then moved to an GP EasySport .40 followed by The Seagull .90 Ultimate with a Saito 1.25. Flew it once then back tracked to the .46 Edge. I can fly the Ultimate now and it's wonderfull. I like flying the edge, quicker to setup and fly, but it is a little squirrelly. Just trying to find that sweet spot. My other planes flew great from the start. From what I've read going too far forward with the CG makes it mushy but going too far back... Not A Good Thing?
I was asking you since you started the thread but I guess we're all looking for help where we can get it.
I think Matador will be OK with a .91 just from I've seen with mine. I did epoxy all around the engine box and where it attaches inside the fuse.
) The thing about it was I installed the aluminum mount and did not rebalance the plane then flew it and it required just a click up on the elevator and flew OK. I am using an aluminum spinner also. It also ballooned on the throttle cut. I checked the thrust again last night and it had a slight up thrust on the engine. This was still at the 9.5cm CG at the wing tip. The odd thing to me was that after trimming for level flight upright it would climb when inverted. On a downline it would pull to the canopy. On KE it would tuck to the landing gear severely. If I gave it rudder during level flight it would dive in the direction of the rudder input but no rolling.Note: a buddy of mine has the .60 edge and it ballons/floats on him, but he likes a rearward CG.
I am new to all this but I did look at some of the online cg calculators and when you put in the numbers and look for a 25-30% MAC the CG goes from roughly 7cm to 9.26cm. Do I know what I'm talking about or should I hit the books again? I've tried reading as much as I could. This plane seems to be a bit tricky. But it gets a lot of compliments for looks and construction.
I started early last year with an Avistar. Then moved to an GP EasySport .40 followed by The Seagull .90 Ultimate with a Saito 1.25. Flew it once then back tracked to the .46 Edge. I can fly the Ultimate now and it's wonderfull. I like flying the edge, quicker to setup and fly, but it is a little squirrelly. Just trying to find that sweet spot. My other planes flew great from the start. From what I've read going too far forward with the CG makes it mushy but going too far back... Not A Good Thing?
I was asking you since you started the thread but I guess we're all looking for help where we can get it.
I think Matador will be OK with a .91 just from I've seen with mine. I did epoxy all around the engine box and where it attaches inside the fuse.
08-31-2009, 11:26 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Hi Reesman9,
I crashed my Edge the other day with the wings vertical and a tight radical downwind turn, (watch out for that, it'll drop out of the sky straight down quicker than a heartbeat) but I've got a fuse coming this week and I'll have it back in the air, so we can continue comparing notes for our benefit, and the benefit of others interested in this model.
My elevators were set dead even with the stab and checking my radio after reading your post I have 6 clicks up for level flight at approximately 1/2 throttle. I hadn't been flying the Seagull 46 Edge long enough to get into solving the balloon issue.
I'm not an aeronautics expert, nor an expert flier. It's safe to say however, just by looking at this airplane with small wings, short fuse and too much weight, that it'll take patience to get the most out of it.
In the meantime, I liked the way mine flew, it's a hot dogger and I flew most circuits at full throttle. It didn't track on rails, but I wouldn't expect a short fused airplane to track all that great. My son liked how it flew, and that's what counted the most making the decision to either continue with it by ordering a fuse, or getting something else.
If we're persistent, we'll solve how to make this airplane the best it can be. Did you check your CG measuring from the LE at the fuse?
Edited to add for Reesman9
Reading your previous post again, yours is currently tail heavy. Try bolting on two 3 oz fishing weights on the engine firewall, with one of them opposite the horizontal mounting of your engine (if you mounted horizontally).
Check out 3 3/38" from LE at the fuse back. It flies fine there. Then I'm bringing CG back and adding upthrust.
I crashed my Edge the other day with the wings vertical and a tight radical downwind turn, (watch out for that, it'll drop out of the sky straight down quicker than a heartbeat) but I've got a fuse coming this week and I'll have it back in the air, so we can continue comparing notes for our benefit, and the benefit of others interested in this model.
My elevators were set dead even with the stab and checking my radio after reading your post I have 6 clicks up for level flight at approximately 1/2 throttle. I hadn't been flying the Seagull 46 Edge long enough to get into solving the balloon issue.
I'm not an aeronautics expert, nor an expert flier. It's safe to say however, just by looking at this airplane with small wings, short fuse and too much weight, that it'll take patience to get the most out of it.
In the meantime, I liked the way mine flew, it's a hot dogger and I flew most circuits at full throttle. It didn't track on rails, but I wouldn't expect a short fused airplane to track all that great. My son liked how it flew, and that's what counted the most making the decision to either continue with it by ordering a fuse, or getting something else.
If we're persistent, we'll solve how to make this airplane the best it can be. Did you check your CG measuring from the LE at the fuse?
Edited to add for Reesman9
Reading your previous post again, yours is currently tail heavy. Try bolting on two 3 oz fishing weights on the engine firewall, with one of them opposite the horizontal mounting of your engine (if you mounted horizontally).
Check out 3 3/38" from LE at the fuse back. It flies fine there. Then I'm bringing CG back and adding upthrust.
09-01-2009, 10:32 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Geraldton, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Glad to hear this airframe should be able to take a .91. Been looking for an Edge or Yak for an ASP .91 FSAR engine for a while.
09-01-2009, 11:17 AM
#14
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
ORIGINAL: VeeAte
Glad to hear this airframe should be able to take a .91. Been looking for an Edge or Yak for an ASP .91 FSAR engine for a while.
Glad to hear this airframe should be able to take a .91. Been looking for an Edge or Yak for an ASP .91 FSAR engine for a while.
You might want to hold off on the Seagull, I like mine but until I personally get it sorted out, and the few other guys on the forum get theirs where they want it, it's not an airplane I'd recommend.
Instead, take a look at the AeroWorks Edge. http://aero-works.net/store/detail.aspx?ID=75
At $189 US it's priced great. More wingspan and a little longer fuse. If I had it to do over again I'd get the AeroWorks.
But, who knows, we may get these Seagulls flying great... Jump in and join the party if you'd like, but the water is a little cold at this point. The AeroWorks on the other hand may be the way to go.
09-01-2009, 11:39 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Geraldton, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Thanks for the info.
I will see if I can find a shop selling the Aeroworks models here in Australia.
I had a cheap Red Bull Edge 540T I got off ebay 6 months or so ago. That thing was awesome to fly. Until one of the metal wing bolts vibrated out and it lost a wing 40ft up. Unfortunately I wasnt good enough to pull off a one wing landing hehe. Can't buy them anymore and the plane was destroyed.
Thanks again.
I will see if I can find a shop selling the Aeroworks models here in Australia.
I had a cheap Red Bull Edge 540T I got off ebay 6 months or so ago. That thing was awesome to fly. Until one of the metal wing bolts vibrated out and it lost a wing 40ft up. Unfortunately I wasnt good enough to pull off a one wing landing hehe. Can't buy them anymore and the plane was destroyed.
Thanks again.
09-01-2009, 11:30 PM
#16
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Westcoastflyer, sorry to hear about the plane. I know I had to work to get the elevators to move together. If the servo arms are not 90 to the pushrods one of the elevators will move more up and less down.
I can get it to balance at 3-3/8" by moving the battery to where the manual says, just ahead of the wing tube. I guess the mount and spinner make up the weight in the nose. I'll try to fly it this weekend and see what happens with the forward CG.
My maiden was a little the same. The engine was from the easysport that crashed. Had to replace the needle and could not get it to run right. Replaced the carb and back to 100%. Took off and started a low turn, lost the plane visually in the trees, when I saw it again it was inverted but climbing. The guys thought I was showing off! I take off steeper now!
VeeAte: I just like the looks of the 540 compared to the 540T.
I can get it to balance at 3-3/8" by moving the battery to where the manual says, just ahead of the wing tube. I guess the mount and spinner make up the weight in the nose. I'll try to fly it this weekend and see what happens with the forward CG.
My maiden was a little the same. The engine was from the easysport that crashed. Had to replace the needle and could not get it to run right. Replaced the carb and back to 100%. Took off and started a low turn, lost the plane visually in the trees, when I saw it again it was inverted but climbing. The guys thought I was showing off! I take off steeper now!
VeeAte: I just like the looks of the 540 compared to the 540T.
09-02-2009, 04:16 AM
#17
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
ORIGINAL: reeseman9
...Took off and started a low turn, lost the plane visually in the trees, when I saw it again it was inverted but climbing. The guys thought I was showing off!
...Took off and started a low turn, lost the plane visually in the trees, when I saw it again it was inverted but climbing. The guys thought I was showing off!
That's too funny! You're killing me over here, I'm still chuckling and it's been five minutes since I read your post.I absolutely guarantee you'll like 3 3/8". It'll be so stable and nicer to fly that you won't recognize it as the same airplane.
One of the nicer things about this Seagull Edge 46 is the scale like takeoff roll. The short wings mean you have to build some speed, and I like how it takes off - I like how it lands too, it's all business, no floating.
My fuse comes in tomorrow, it'll be a quick assembly. I hope to get out and fly it Thursday because my son leaves Friday on a two week vacation taking his car - I only have a motorcycle at the moment and so I'll be out of the flying biz for two weeks.
Which means you are currently the test pilot! [8D]
09-02-2009, 09:03 PM
#18
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Man I'm good!
We'll see about the test pilot thing. The plane flies great and I don't really have any problems. I was really wondering if I messed up with the CG or flying wrong or what. I can get it to an inverted flat spin with a slooow rate of descent. I was really wondering about the flying inverted and it climbs. Haven't seen that in the trimming instructions and so I don't know what it means as far as CG or trimming goes. But I do know at 9.5cm it seems tail heavy. I even tried spoilerons to straighten the downline but it still climbs inverted.
OK, quit laughing now.
We'll see about the test pilot thing. The plane flies great and I don't really have any problems. I was really wondering if I messed up with the CG or flying wrong or what. I can get it to an inverted flat spin with a slooow rate of descent. I was really wondering about the flying inverted and it climbs. Haven't seen that in the trimming instructions and so I don't know what it means as far as CG or trimming goes. But I do know at 9.5cm it seems tail heavy. I even tried spoilerons to straighten the downline but it still climbs inverted.
OK, quit laughing now.
09-03-2009, 05:21 PM
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
New fuse came in yesterday. As previously mentioned, I'm replacing the original mounts, too wimpy for an .80.
Easy setup for a Dave Brown mount with 90 degree reference marks all around. Picture attached if someone else comes along and wants to change out the original mounts.
According to the original white plastic mounts, the center thrust is half the distance of the width of the firewall and half the distance of the original mounting holes measured each side vertically. Scribe the lines, match the (4) 90 degree Dave Brown reference marks to each line and you're done.
Easy setup for a Dave Brown mount with 90 degree reference marks all around. Picture attached if someone else comes along and wants to change out the original mounts.
According to the original white plastic mounts, the center thrust is half the distance of the width of the firewall and half the distance of the original mounting holes measured each side vertically. Scribe the lines, match the (4) 90 degree Dave Brown reference marks to each line and you're done.
09-07-2009, 09:00 PM
#20
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
Well, flew the plane with the CG at 8.5cm and it flew great. With a full tank it is slighltly nose heavy and at the end of the run it's slightly tail heavy. This is using the 45 degree upline inverted. Long take off and no balooning on landings or throttle cut. It appears that there should be 0 degree vertical thrust. I had a problem with it balooning at throttle cut, found I had some down thrust. Reset the engine the engine to zero down thrust and no more balooning.
From flying this plane quite a bit, it'll do basic aerobatics all day long. 3d The CG should be at 9.5cm from the LE at the wing tip. Normal flying 8.5cm. At 9.5 it is flyable just a little twitchy and floats on landings. At 8.5cm it's stable but lands fast. Could do slow descent flat spins at 9.5cm but much faster at 8.5cm. I think I'm going to end up somewhere in between.
Anyways, still enjoy flying it. Almost a gallon this weekend.
From flying this plane quite a bit, it'll do basic aerobatics all day long. 3d The CG should be at 9.5cm from the LE at the wing tip. Normal flying 8.5cm. At 9.5 it is flyable just a little twitchy and floats on landings. At 8.5cm it's stable but lands fast. Could do slow descent flat spins at 9.5cm but much faster at 8.5cm. I think I'm going to end up somewhere in between.
Anyways, still enjoy flying it. Almost a gallon this weekend.
10-05-2009, 07:39 PM
#23
Junior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newton,
AL
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
ecflyers
I mixed the elevators and ailerons. Ail and aux1, elev and aux2 on a JR 9303 and 7 channel receiver. The problem with the y-harness on the elevators is trying to get the throws the same, I set the servo arms 90 degrees to the pushrods, otherwise the throws go out of whack. See the post above. Using the sticks attached to the elevators helps to line them up.
I don't have any experience with Magnums, I run a 13X6 on a Saito 72, but from looking at your engine specs a 13X8 should work good. A 14" might have ground clearance issues when taking off and landing.
Hope this helps.
Oh, I put the CG at 9cm at the wing tips and it flies really nice.
I mixed the elevators and ailerons. Ail and aux1, elev and aux2 on a JR 9303 and 7 channel receiver. The problem with the y-harness on the elevators is trying to get the throws the same, I set the servo arms 90 degrees to the pushrods, otherwise the throws go out of whack. See the post above. Using the sticks attached to the elevators helps to line them up.
I don't have any experience with Magnums, I run a 13X6 on a Saito 72, but from looking at your engine specs a 13X8 should work good. A 14" might have ground clearance issues when taking off and landing.
Hope this helps.
Oh, I put the CG at 9cm at the wing tips and it flies really nice.
10-06-2009, 11:50 PM
#24
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No City,
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Edge 540 46
ecflyers,
reeseman9 gave you good solid advice. Start at 8.6 cm measured from the LE under the wing at the fuse and it'll be very stable, it'll land as resseman describes at this CG. It does float on landings at factory CG - but for regular flying start at 8.6 cm. It's a short coupled airplane and the CG range is relatively small.
Regarding props, I've used 13x6, 13x8 and 14x6 with my 80, 14x6 the most on this model, but mine has fairly tall carbon fiber gear so not sure about clearance with the stock aluminum. As always, match the prop to the model to get that comfort feeling.
Yes regarding mixing the two elevator servos. What type of radio do you have? If it's a 9C I'll post the simple Futaba instructions to make that happen.
reeseman9 gave you good solid advice. Start at 8.6 cm measured from the LE under the wing at the fuse and it'll be very stable, it'll land as resseman describes at this CG. It does float on landings at factory CG - but for regular flying start at 8.6 cm. It's a short coupled airplane and the CG range is relatively small.
Regarding props, I've used 13x6, 13x8 and 14x6 with my 80, 14x6 the most on this model, but mine has fairly tall carbon fiber gear so not sure about clearance with the stock aluminum. As always, match the prop to the model to get that comfort feeling.
Yes regarding mixing the two elevator servos. What type of radio do you have? If it's a 9C I'll post the simple Futaba instructions to make that happen.
