RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche    Gallery
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
    Search This Thread  
 
Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft >> RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Tower Hobbies Get Coupon Codes Brands  
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 8/29/2012 12:43 PM   
c_nut


 

Posts: 56
Score: 100
Joined: 8/26/2009
Last Login: 4/20/2013
From: RobinaQld, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Hey Joe, 

I just checked the dimensions of the OS FSa72 and they will fit no problem although you will need to cut the cowlings to allow the rocker covers to protrude (maybe the heads too) you'll have 70mm from the engine mount to the cowling, your engines are 90mm from the bearer surface to the top of the rocker cover so you'll have 20mm  of engine through the cowlings. I went for the fully enclosed look but your four strokes will certainly sound nice.

Hi had a Dual Ace before the Comanche and the flight characteristics are very similar. My Comanche build was heavy with all the extras but she certainly flys nicely. I'm sure you will enjoy flying it every bit as much as the Dual Ace but be warned........ the Dual Ace is going to look like an ugly duckling next to the Comanche. It's a lovely looking plane on the ground and in the air 

Enjoy 
Craig


_____________________________

How far will it fly with the aileron''s reversed????
All the way to the crash site.........

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Acetronics)
       Post #: 76

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 8/29/2012 6:42 PM   
JoeMamma



Posts: 646
Score: 115
Joined: 11/15/2002
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Lenox Township, MI, USA
Status: online 		Alain and Craig,

Thanks for the info.

Yeah, those .72 4-strokers most likely will stick outside the cowls on the Comanche.

The picture is of my TopFlite Cessna 310. It was a tough decision to hack up the cowls to make the 4-strokers fit.

The nice part is having that great 4-stroke sound.

Joe M.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize



_____________________________

Joe Mamma


Hide Signatures

(in reply to c_nut)
       Post #: 77

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 9/7/2012 7:18 AM   
m1morrow


 

Posts: 69
Score: 100
Joined: 8/19/2010
Last Login: 10/16/2012
From: , MI, USA
Status: offline 		Guys,

Thinking about this for my next model.  Would like to not have to chop up the cowls.  It looks like the 46ax's fit nicely inside.

I would like to go with 4 strokes but the FA-70 are too big to fit inside.  I was wondering if the FA-56's would fit.  They turn the same size prop as the 46ax and they are a bit lighter and would save on gas......and I'm guessing the .46ax's are probably overkill for scale/spirited flying.  I'm not looking for this thing to be an aerobat.  .

Thoughts?

There is a completed Twin Comanche at my local hoby shop with retracts on it so i'm thinking I might be a buyer.  It caught my eye.  :-)




Hide Signatures

(in reply to JoeMamma)
       Post #: 78

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 9/7/2012 12:04 PM   
Acetronics



Posts: 55
Score: 100
Joined: 7/12/2006
Last Login: 3/27/2013
From: NESLE nse, FRANCE, METROPOLITAN
Status: offline 		Hi,

quote:

Would like to not have to chop up the cowls


What about a couple of RCV 60 ??? http://www.hallamhobbies.com.au/index.php?ID=4&DID=7040

or electric !

Alain

Hide Signatures

(in reply to m1morrow)
       Post #: 79

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 11/14/2012 10:43 AM   
eclipse3g



Posts: 84
Score: 100
Joined: 2/20/2008
Last Login: 5/14/2013
From: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		Hi Craig,

How your Piper is doing?
I am on the way to install wing retract units and having a dilemma: using your way or Nick’s. I like your way - cutting the wing structural bridge and insert a retract dipper into the wing. Appearance of your main landing gear is awesome; however, Nick’s design is simpler, easy to make and does not require cutting down the plywood bridge in the wing.
Have you had any problem with your landing gear/wings which were modified (the bridge was cut)?

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Acetronics)
       Post #: 80

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 11/14/2012 9:35 PM   
c_nut


 

Posts: 56
Score: 100
Joined: 8/26/2009
Last Login: 4/20/2013
From: RobinaQld, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eclipse3g

Hi Craig,

How your Piper is doing?
I am on the way to install wing retract units and having a dilemma: using your way or Nick’s. I like your way - cutting the wing structural bridge and insert a retract dipper into the wing. Appearance of your main landing gear is awesome; however, Nick’s design is simpler, easy to make and does not require cutting down the plywood bridge in the wing.
Have you had any problem with your landing gear/wings which were modified (the bridge was cut)?


Yes, it was a little extra work but well worth the effort. I'm a slow (translate - fussy) builder, but the extra modification and stuffing around with the wheel wells only took a few hours and as you say, the appearance is great. I still get a lot of compliments on the model whenever I take it to the club. 

I understand your concern regarding the cutting of the ply rib but I am happy to say that I have seen no problems with strength as a result of the modification. what I did was simply sand it out with a dremel tool which meant that there was still a small "bridge" left to provide a little strength. The top part of the wing is sheeted in that area so that provides the necessary structural strength and the retract screws to the bottom which efectively "bridges" the rib on the underside.

When I was setting up and practicing my full flap landings, I had a few solid landings. She's quite a heavy model for its size so if you close the throttle and try to glide her home, she does'nt "float" for long and as a result, I've had her drop onto the strip a few times after flairing with no power on. I also push her through loops and rolls and have absolutely no issues with the strength.

Got my landings sorted out now but I can definately confirm that you will have no strenght issues with the modifications I made to mine. She's still flying and looks great.

Whatever decision you make, you're going to love flying this plane :-)

Craig 



_____________________________

How far will it fly with the aileron''s reversed????
All the way to the crash site.........

Hide Signatures

(in reply to eclipse3g)
       Post #: 81

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 11/14/2012 10:01 PM   
eclipse3g



Posts: 84
Score: 100
Joined: 2/20/2008
Last Login: 5/14/2013
From: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		Thx Craig for the reply!

My built is on http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1547957&page=6
The topic was started by Nick

Regards

Vlad

Hide Signatures

(in reply to c_nut)
       Post #: 82

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 12/30/2012 6:07 PM   
donddsms


 

Posts: 50
Score: 100
Joined: 5/2/2005
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Status: offline 		Hi Craig,
I've read your build thread through, You have a very nicely documented thread thank you! This is a tremendous asset to modelers and i appreciate all the work you guys do for us! I have the model and starting to collect components for the build. Also I have checked the several other build threads you refer to.
Question I am trying to clarify: for retracts, did you use 60 - 120 Tricycle Electric Retracts by E-flite (EFLG430) which are all 90 degree? Some threads recommend buying 90 degree mains and using 105 degree nose units. That sounds way more expensive, just trying to find out if it is worth the added expense. I think you used all 90 degrees and it seems to have worked out well.
Thanks

Don

Hide Signatures

(in reply to eclipse3g)
       Post #: 83

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 12/31/2012 1:14 AM   
c_nut


 

Posts: 56
Score: 100
Joined: 8/26/2009
Last Login: 4/20/2013
From: RobinaQld, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Hey Don,

thanks for your kind words, honestly it is easier to just build the project and not go to all the extra work of taking photos and writing the build log so when someone actually takes the time to say thanks, it really does mean a lot.

Yes, I used the tricycle set which is all 90 degree operation. It works perfectly and look ok. the pros and cons are as follows

90 degree pros
cheaper ti buy the tricycle set

90 degree cons
not as scale looking (ie would look better if the strut was raked forward more in the down position)
requires smaller front wheel to get full retraction inside gear doors and also packing the front edge when mounting.

95 degree pros
will look better in the down position

95 degree cons
more expensive
will still need packing to fully retract but with more packing, may be able to use the supplied wheel diameter

My Opinion
yes, the extra angle would be nice but the extra money was not worth it for me. Either way, you will need to make some adjustments to the mounting. There is an example in another thread that involved a lot of modification to accomodate the supplied wheel diameter however, after doing a bit of research on the real aircraft, I discovered that the full size Comanche was a challenging plane to land even for experienced pilots. One common modification to the full size plane was to fit a smaller diameter nose wheel to reduce the frequency of nose gear first touchdowns.

With this in mind, I simply went ahead and did the same thing, sand down the supplied wheel or buy a smaller one, this way, you do not require as much packing under the leading edge of the mount to achieve full retraction below the gear doors.

From memory, I just put a couple of washers between the hardwood rails and the front mounting hole and no spacer on the rear mounting holes. This created sufficient angle to fully retract the smaller wheel and required no modification to the airframe itself.

bottom line is that the 95 degree will look better on the ground simply because it will angle the strut forward 5 degrees which is nice if you can justify the extra money. Smaller wheel diameter and my packing trick will still work with the 95, it will just "open" 5 degrees more. Gear up position will be the same with both units.

I look forward to hearing about your progress,
Craig


_____________________________

How far will it fly with the aileron''s reversed????
All the way to the crash site.........

Hide Signatures

(in reply to donddsms)
       Post #: 84

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 1/1/2013 8:59 PM   
donddsms


 

Posts: 50
Score: 100
Joined: 5/2/2005
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks for your help Craig! Still collecting components but I will keep you posted! Happy New Year! It's cold up here in Ohio!
Don

Hide Signatures

(in reply to c_nut)
       Post #: 85

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 1/3/2013 6:17 PM   
donddsms


 

Posts: 50
Score: 100
Joined: 5/2/2005
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Status: offline 		Hello Comanche pilots. I have made some decisions regarding engines. This plane is going to be training wheels for two other twins I have. One is a VQ P-61 I built pre-divorce about 7 years ago and have yet to fly, which has RCV 120's on it. The other is new in box, the ESM F7F Tigercat. The Tigercat is going to be a long, long project, so I thought I would do some learning before tempting the RC gods (who already laugh at me). I have decided to go with EVO 10 cc gas for the Piper. They fit the same mount as a .46 glow, and power is in the mid .50 range, although heavier. These engines need to be broken in by flying, not on the bench. Therefore I will be putting them in a Seagull Edge 540 and do a lot of Cuban 8's. This might take awhile before I have anything to report. I am also thinking about using mechanical retracts I have lying around, and altering the struts the way C-nut did with his electric retracts. Be back later.
Don

< Message edited by donddsms -- 1/15/2013 2:15 PM >

Hide Signatures

(in reply to donddsms)
       Post #: 86

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 1/15/2013 2:33 PM   
donddsms


 

Posts: 50
Score: 100
Joined: 5/2/2005
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Status: offline 		delete post

Hide Signatures

(in reply to donddsms)
       Post #: 87

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 1/17/2013 7:20 AM   
robertwilkerson


 

Posts: 98
Score: 105
Joined: 9/23/2007
Last Login: 2/24/2013
From: Laveen, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		I happen to be a twin nut I have the duel ace, twin star, great plane p38 profile ,a10 broco and am looking forward to the comance I will be using the OS fx 46 as I find then great engines,

_____________________________

"I know everything?" (yeah right!)
Robert

Hide Signatures

(in reply to donddsms)
       Post #: 88

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 3/25/2013 11:35 PM   
JoeMamma



Posts: 646
Score: 115
Joined: 11/15/2002
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Lenox Township, MI, USA
Status: online 		Just jumped back into finishing up my Twin Comanche.

Got a couple of questions for you fellahs that have already finished yours. Couldn’t find an answer in the assembly manual.

Seagull Models supplied two different sets of wooden engine mounting boxes. One set is for glow engines and the other is for electric power.

I’m mounting a set of O.S. .72 4-strokers, so I’m using the set of wood boxes designed for glow engines. Was wondering if anybody found out if there is a difference between the left and right wooden box ?

I have found there are a few very small differences between the two glow engine boxes, but either box seems to fit either wing. How about you electric guys. Did you find a difference between the left and right wooden box for electric power ? There was no left/right identification on any of the wooden boxes.

I have the same problem with the fiberglass cowls. They also were not marked left or right. Either cowl seems to fit either wing OK, but there are a few small differences between the two cowls.

I sure wish they would have ID’ed them in the assembly manual as either left, or right, or the same ??

Thanks,
Joe M.


_____________________________

Joe Mamma


Hide Signatures

(in reply to robertwilkerson)
       Post #: 89

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 4/12/2013 3:22 PM   
eclipse3g



Posts: 84
Score: 100
Joined: 2/20/2008
Last Login: 5/14/2013
From: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		My fiberglass cowls are completely different, motor/engine boxes are the same

Hide Signatures

(in reply to JoeMamma)
       Post #: 90

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 4/12/2013 10:55 PM   
Quigleywins


 

Posts: 611
Score: 110
Joined: 10/17/2008
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Kyneton victoria, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Joe Mine had the letters L on one and R on the other on the inside in black lead on the top. A bit hard to read and see. yours Paul T

_____________________________

''''''''''''''''bugger''''''''''''''''- That went in quick... I fly that well now i''m DANGEROUS.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to eclipse3g)
       Post #: 91

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 4/15/2013 1:21 AM   
JoeMamma



Posts: 646
Score: 115
Joined: 11/15/2002
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Lenox Township, MI, USA
Status: online 		I had two left cowls.

Go here and read posts (reports) 97 through 104. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1547957&highlight=piper+twin+comanch&page=7

Joe M.


_____________________________

Joe Mamma


Hide Signatures

(in reply to Quigleywins)
       Post #: 92

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 5/17/2013 8:11 PM   
JoeMamma



Posts: 646
Score: 115
Joined: 11/15/2002
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Lenox Township, MI, USA
Status: online 		Was a little nervous, but got in the maiden today plus one additional flight.

A real nice, stable flyer ! Next I think I’ll move the CG a little more tail heavy to suit my tastes.

Has anybody experimented with CG, or are you all using the recommended 110 mm (4 3/8”) ?

Joe M.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize



_____________________________

Joe Mamma


Hide Signatures

(in reply to JoeMamma)
       Post #: 93

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 5/19/2013 8:43 AM   
Quigleywins


 

Posts: 611
Score: 110
Joined: 10/17/2008
Last Login: 5/25/2013
From: Kyneton victoria, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		Great News Joe, with many more to come. Yours Paul T

_____________________________

''''''''''''''''bugger''''''''''''''''- That went in quick... I fly that well now i''m DANGEROUS.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to JoeMamma)
       Post #: 94

RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche - 5/19/2013 8:40 PM   
JoeMamma



Posts: 646
Score: 115
Joined: 11/15/2002
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Lenox Township, MI, USA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Quigleywins

Great News Joe, with many more to come. Yours Paul T



Thanks Paul !

Joe M.


_____________________________

Joe Mamma


Hide Signatures

(in reply to Quigleywins)
       Post #: 95

Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft >> RE: Seagull Piper Twin Comanche
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]





Jump to:


 
Google 



Search | Marketplace | Event Calendar | Local Clubs | Magazine | Product Ratings | New Products | Discussion Forums

Photo Gallery | Instructor Search | Field|Track|Marina Search

Advertisers | Hobby Vendor Resources | Rate Manufacturers | Sign In/Sign Up

SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

RC Universe is a service of Internet Brands, Inc. Copyright © 2001-2013.

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America


0.719RCU1