c_nut

Hey Joe, 

JoeMamma

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.[&o]

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

Joe M.

m1morrow

My Feedback: (3)

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.  :-)

Acetronics

Hi,

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

or electric !

Alain

eclipse3g

My Feedback: (5)

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)?

c_nut

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

eclipse3g

My Feedback: (5)

Thx Craig for the reply!

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

Regards

Vlad

donddsms

My Feedback: (1)

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

c_nut

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

donddsms

My Feedback: (1)

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

donddsms

My Feedback: (1)

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

donddsms

My Feedback: (1)

delete post

robertwilkerson

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,

JoeMamma

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.

eclipse3g

My Feedback: (5)

My fiberglass cowls are completely different, motor/engine boxes are the same

Quigleywins

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

JoeMamma

I had two left cowls.[X(][:'(]

Go here and read posts (reports) 97 through 104. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...comanch&page=7

Joe M.

JoeMamma

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.

Quigleywins

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

JoeMamma

Thanks Paul !

Joe M.

donddsms

My Feedback: (1)

Question for anyone who has completed the arf: How high does the prop shaft sit off the ground? I am wondering what the max size prop could be. Thanks.
Don

JoeMamma

I flew mine again today........great flyer !

Mine has 12 inch 2-bladers. For grass, I would say 12 inch is about the max.

Joe M.

SJN

I just bought one of these little planes.
Ordered a pair of ASP 46 2 strokes for mine.

You guys still flying yours?

Quigleywins

SJN As for mine its sill a long way off. I will get inspired again one day and restart the building program. Working on a pair of Cessna 337 at the moment
This will look great when I get them joined togher.
Yours Paul T .................................................. ...........................

SJN

Hi Paul.

Cool cessna`s you have got there.
I also thought of getting one of those.......but worried about cooling the rear engine. It is far from ideal inside the aft cowl :-)