Seagull Harrier 3D .46 Weight?
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Athens, GREECE
Hi,
I have a Saito 82 sitting on my Flip 3D, but I'm thinking of putting the engine on a Harrier 3D .46. Harrier seems a high quality ARF for its price and is nice looking IMO. I wonder how well it flies compared to the Flip. What is the model expected weight? It has two alloy tubes and one more servo for the elevators, so in that sense it will be heavier than Flip.
Any experiences to share?
Regards,
Nick
I have a Saito 82 sitting on my Flip 3D, but I'm thinking of putting the engine on a Harrier 3D .46. Harrier seems a high quality ARF for its price and is nice looking IMO. I wonder how well it flies compared to the Flip. What is the model expected weight? It has two alloy tubes and one more servo for the elevators, so in that sense it will be heavier than Flip.
Any experiences to share?
Regards,
Nick
#2
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: PerthWA, AUSTRALIA
I have a Saito 72 in my Harrier and it works well. The 82 will be even better for vertical though even though the 72 will pull vertically from prop hang it would certainly be more polished with the 82
I also had a flip but IMO the Harrier is easier to fly (maybe because of the fuselage length/wing span ratio).
The standard covering for the Harrier makes it a bit difficult to read when flying up high so I remedied this with some stick on shapes under the wings.
Like most Seagull ARF's, I found that using the recommended settings for CofG and control throws worked very well as a starting point, I have moved the CofG towards the rear of the recommended setting and it will now prop hang all day. I also use the two elevator servos to my advantage - I set up the "Ailevator" function (Optic 6 Tx) and have now got amazing roll characteristics - especially on high rates
I also had a flip but IMO the Harrier is easier to fly (maybe because of the fuselage length/wing span ratio).
The standard covering for the Harrier makes it a bit difficult to read when flying up high so I remedied this with some stick on shapes under the wings.
Like most Seagull ARF's, I found that using the recommended settings for CofG and control throws worked very well as a starting point, I have moved the CofG towards the rear of the recommended setting and it will now prop hang all day. I also use the two elevator servos to my advantage - I set up the "Ailevator" function (Optic 6 Tx) and have now got amazing roll characteristics - especially on high rates
#3
Senior Member
mine weighs in at 2.5 kilos ready to fly minus fuel. I have a 52 twostroke on mine, I think its about 500 grams ,almost the same as saito 82.I feared it would be heavy because of all the servos and those alu pipes and the fuselage is built really strong too, but its quite light anyhow.
#5
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Athens, GREECE
Thanks guys,
So you're saying that is worth putting the Flip on the shelf and use the engine and electronics on the Harrier. Right?
Another question, what are the knife edge characteristics of the plane? Any coupling issues?
Nick
So you're saying that is worth putting the Flip on the shelf and use the engine and electronics on the Harrier. Right?
Another question, what are the knife edge characteristics of the plane? Any coupling issues?
Nick
#6
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Murchison, TX
If you like to knife edge, DO NOT BUY THE HARRIER! it couples bad I tried to mix it out with no luck. I think its the shape of the fuse. The only thing I didnt try was a faster prop, like a 13x8 or a 14x6. I run a 15x4w on my 82's.



