spyder0069

For what its worth I wrote to world models asking about the CG on their 60 size zero. Their response was:

Dear Dion,


Thank you for your enquiry. The ideal C.G. position is 100mm (3.94 in)
behind the leading edge measured at where the wing meets the fuselage. In
order to obtain the C.G. specified, add weight to the fuselage or move the
battery position.


Guess what? Thats about 1 inch behind the spar on my plane. The wings should be pretty close in comparison. I took the heavy hub off my engine and mine seems to balance about 1/4" behind the spar right now. I think I'll go ahead leave it that way until its first flight (unfortunately we just got more snow last night here in Illinois). I'll probably finnally invest in a cg machine. I built a cg checker but it basically has dowl rods the plane rests on which works great for all my 25 size and smaller but my 40 size planes are a bit too heavy for it to work without imprinting the wood. Also I did get a chance to weigh mine tonight. With my .91 and all I mention in the previous post I weigh in at 7lbs 4oz. NO LEAD WEIGHT ADDED! I think i'll have to set my throttle travel to about half because this .91 four stroke pulls so hard it scares me. ha ha ha I love my thunder tiger .46 pros but they got nothing on this four stroke. Although to be fair I would have add a $100 bill to the nose of my .46's to balance it compared to this engine!

milkman-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Hdkenny - Did your friend contact Horizon about the sheared clevis. They may work with him on a new ARF to replace the one that went in. Still waiting to do the maiden flight, had 6-8 inches of snow today, time to get the planes on skis out.

hdkeney

My Feedback: (4)

Milkman - We took pictures of the crashed plane, he has his sales receipt and he has contacted Horizon Hobbies. They told him to send them the receipt and some photos, but he hasn't done it yet. I jerked his chain the other day[:@] and told him to get on the stick or give me the receipt and I will deal with the matter and use what ever they agree to do as payment for all of my time and effort in building the ARF. It definitely was faulty factory supplied equipment that caused the crash. Thanks for the interest.

spyder0069

Ok guys. I gave her a maiden flight today.......


5 mph winds and 20 degrees out. It was a last minute decision to get her into the air and stop worrying about it. I knew it would either come home in pieces or it would be a great flyer. Luckily it was the second. I fired up the O.S. FS-91 fourstroke. The onboard glow I built worked awesome. Super low idle and this bird was just awesome spinning the 3 blade prop. I was flying off of a short back street behind factories next to my local lake. Very abandoned on cold weekends. Started to taxi. Engine sounded good and next thing I knew the tail came up I throttled up to about 3/4 by natural reaction. A split second later and zero was climbing away. It was a thing of beauty. I found the books reccomended throws a bit high for me. I had my low rates dialed down to 75% and it still felt like I had a lot of throw on the ailerons (with about 20% expo). Got my 3 mistakes high and felt the plane out. First impressions?? What a *****cat. It felt very familiar. No real differences than most of my low wing planes. In fact probably in the upper 50% as far as stability. My stalls seemed very straight forward. I didn't push the plane hard but did manage to get a loop in (I was still cautious being the first flight). The fourstroke sound with the warbirds looks was just awesome. And you know what, not once did I even notice the lack of retracts. I was too busy having fun. A couple of low speed passes with climbouts and after about 7 minutes I came in for a landing (fingers were numb). This was the tricky part since there is a 12 foot pile of snow at the end of the street where I had to make my approach. So I had to side slip it in and I came in a little hot. I had a super soft landing and I thought I was home free. But since it was a little hot I paniced and cut the throttle to kill the engine. Wind caught me and weathervaned me towards the curb. I had full opposite rudder and aileron in it and managed to just graze the curb with the wingtip. I had not expected any damage because the plane didn't even display a bump. Walked up to find it collapsed the top sheeting of the hollow wing tip. It was minor and my fault for killing the engine (and flying a warbird with minimal landing zone). I peeled back the covering, CA'd it, used a little balsalite filler. Tomorrow it will be good as new. I already have matching monokote because I had to recover one of the elevators when the original covering pulled away when I was trying to take the wrinkles out. As far as the speed of the plane. Most of the time I was at half throttle. Full throttle wasn't as scary as I thought but I didn't let it get to full speed plus I've been told a 3-blade isn't as effecient as a 2-blade prop. I liked the combo though and you can't beat the sound.

hdkeney

My Feedback: (4)

Congratulations spyder0069! I am glad to hear that you have another fine craft to add to your hangar. Keep us posted on her progress. I think she will become a common sight because of her looks and ease of handling. [sm=sunsmiley.gif]

AMB

Sorry about the demise of the plane due to clevis failure my brother in law lost his hobbico
60 trainer for same reason. Its hard to believe they still ship with those crappy clevises I just
replaced mine with the dubro 2 mm safety locks on my world models skyraider mach 2 but the
one with the kit though plastic had metal pins would be willing to pay a couple of dollars more
if they had decent hardware also for some reason the 2mm sullivans did not fit the control
rods but the dubro had a plastic body and self threaded on them
I have a rascal 40 ARF and hardware is metal sig gets my acalades on that one
What a shame we lose planes for this reason

Mac-

1 & 2) My Zero has its c of g set at 85mm measured back from the centre leading edge root rib. The model has around 7ozs of lead in the nose even with a .53 2-stroke engine fitted!

3) Fitting pieces of fuel tube over the clevises will help keep everthing safe, even with the supplied clevises!

spyder0069

I see a few differences in your plane. My landing gear is regular straight 5/32 rod. Yours has the loop. Also mine has 2 plywood wing reinforcement pieces that glue over the holes for the nylon wing bolts. I didn't see those on yours. I didn't actually use the strip of monocote they include to cover the wing joint. I used the 2-ton epoxy that cures in a couple of hours so I got a good bond that looks good without the tape. With the FS-91 it balanced perfectly without any added weight. Receiver pack still is mounted to the side of the engine mounting block out front. The 3-blade and larger spinner probably also help.

Mac-

Although the instructions do not mention a wing bandage , imo, it is essential that one is fitted. Also I have read above that some are using a .40 size 2-stroke engine which, imo, is well underpowered.
The supplied coiled u/c legs were angled too far forward on mine at about 40 degrees which was excessive. So I removed the legs and bent them more rearwards.
Even with a .53 2-stroke fitted with a 12 x 6 prop I regard my Zero as just above adequately powered. She's a nice flyer however and lands smoothly.[8D]

J3 Cub

I just received my Zero in the mail today. Its a green one, I was expecting a Silver but Green is better. when i opened it i have identified minor damage to the Wing farings (L Side). Will contact Singapore hobbies tomorrow to see if they will send me some of the green covering as i dont mind fixing it myself if i had the covering for patching. Cant seem to find that colour anywhere. Does any body know the correct colour name for the Oracover Zero green??

spyder0069

Green?? Are you sure it is manufactured by Seagull Models ?? Green would have been neat too but I do really like the silver after flying it. The manual specifically says they used Ultracote on mine which was nice because my hobbyshop had it in stock. Which brings me to my next point. Got in the second flight today. I was out flying with my buddy who owns a Great Planes 40 size AT-6 Texan with a TT .46 pro in it. My zero spanked his texan in speed and climb. That O.S. FS-91 is a puller. I would let him get around the back stretch and give him about 1/4 field head start and then by 1/2 field (over our heads) I was passing with that 4stroke groan. This zero is such a awesome flyier. It tracked so straight at high speeds I felt really safe. My only problem is the HOT landings. I can cut to 1/4 throttle on the downwind, turn on to final with about 1/8th throttle and drop the flapperons. Switch to high rates on the elevator to be prepared to keep the tail down once landed. I had a 12-14mph head wind and it still took 100 feet or better to come to a complete stop once the wheels touched ground. Granted this was on gravel so it doesn't slow you down like grass does. I can't wait to get out to a grass field. I really think I am just a hair nose heavy. On one side I can pull a loop knowing that I can pull full back on the elevator (low rates) and it shows no snap out. On the other hand it felt like the amount of throw should have been a little more effective which tells me its a little nose heavy. I'll have to shift a little at a time and see how it feels. Two tanks of gas through her today without a hitch.

J3 Cub

Its the Seagull Zero and its green. (Bought it from Singapore Hobbies) They used ultra coat. I was originally hoping for a Silver one but when i opened the box wa la Green. I love the color it suits the Jap WW2 Fighter that was used in the jungle. I'm going to assemble it in the next couple of weeks. I'm putting in a ASP 53 ( Side mounted).

I cant wait to get it in the air it looks Fabulous..

spyder0069

Just an update. Had tons of great flights with this model now. It was a hair nose heavy. I put 1.5oz in the tail and now she lands easy. No more hot landings. The only problem I have had was the soft landing gear versus the rough soccer fields/parking lots I was flying from. I made a new set with a little more length out of 3/16 rod and made a small cross brace for each gear and welded it. The new gear only added an ounce and I have had no problems since. Plus I finally got my AMA and joined Kishwaukee R/C Flyers (a local club) and their field is very well maintained. No more avoiding gopher holes and soccer goals! All in all a sweet flying plane.

old bird

Spyder 0069, Did you have to make any modifications to the engine mounting box or firewall to install your OS .91? I am putting one of these Zeros togethor and have been doing some measuring for a Saito .72. It looks like the crankshaft will be sticking out of the cowl about 3/4" too far with the original set-up of the engine mount and mount box. Any information will be helpfull and will be appreciated.

Thank you, old bird.

raymondcz1

My Feedback: (2)

Hey guys,
Im puttin together my Zero right now, and I tell you what, I needed some tinkering. Well I have a Tower Hobbies .46 engine, if you dont know how big their mufflers are go check it out. First of all I did not like the engine being upside down, just for convenience i put it sideways so the muffler is down. Then I am having to cut a section outta the muffler to fit behind the firewall since it extends so far back. Do they sell muffler spacers where it attaches onto the exhaust port? I am really scared bout all this weight I will be adding up front. My setup includeds the battery pack ontop of the fuel tank. I have the elevator servo on the rear tray mount (i could only get 2 screws in there), never even crossed my mind to put all three in the 1 slot..lol So that might change the CG a bit. Is there any easy way to balance the plane with a close first estimate. I havent really found on this forum a sure balancing point yet, 8mm 4 cm? Do i just set a scale on the tail and whatever that weighs I put on the nose? Whats a good prop, and has anyone had any problems with the gear on hard landings? How would i go about reinforcing without mauling the cote?

Thanks
Ray

spyder0069

old bird:
No mods to the box were necessary for my .91 four stroke. I cut the center out of the mount so that the engine could slide farther back. The carb is about the thickness of a nickel away from the wood on the box. Everything lined up nicely.

raymondcz1:
With the .46 2 stroke up front you are gonna need a boatload of extra weight. I have my .91 fourstroke, 5 cell 2300mah AA receiver pack attached on one side of the engine box and on the other I have another AA 2300ma battery for my on board glow. It flies like a dream and lands like a trainer. The CG on the instructions was actually pretty close. You have to balance the plane upside down without fuel. You can use your fingertips on the marks you create according to the manual and get close enough. I would dump the stock muffler and invest in a aftermarket pitts muffler (preferrably one by Bisson). Good prop for the .46 is a 11x5 or 11x6. If its a new engine I would run the 11x5. It will be easy on it for the break in and will give you extra thrust. The gear blocks in the wing are strong. The gear itself is soft. I bought some 3/16 stainless steel rod from the hardware store and bent a new set and added about 1/2" of extra length for more prop clearance. They have worked perfectly. I may be wrong but it sounds like you are new to the hobby. Which is great. If so my best advice is to have some patience ( I know I hate that word too) and put this plane aside until you have a few other planes under your belt. Although this is (in my opinion) a nice flying warbird it is still a warbird and I would recommend this be a 3rd plane after you master flying with a low wing trainer. And if your gonna fly it anyway......good luck and post some pics! I never was good at telling people not to fly. Hee he he

old bird

Spyder 0069, thanks for the reply. I took some more measurements and it looks like I might have to make more radical modifications to the engine mount box, for the Saito .72. Is there a chance that you could measure your OS .91 from the back of the carburator to the front of the driving washer? It looks like your modification to the engine mount would move the engine back about 1/2" or a bit less. I do love my two Saito engines, but I am not against trying another brand if it fits this application better. Right now it looks like I will have to shorten the engine mount box by 5/8 to 3/4", to make the Saito .72 fit right. I have not bought the engine yet for the Zero, and have not ruled out a two stroke either, but I really like the sound of the 4 strokes.

I am really glad to hear good reports of the Zero flying. My son and I have been flying now for 2.5 years, and the last year nothing but tail draggers. Slowpoke and a Starduster by Midwest. I think we are ready for our first warbird, we also have the Hangar9 Corsair on the bench almost ready to fly. I am hoping to get both of these birds in the air at the same time, before the end of the year. I just know that when we get both of these planes in the air at the same time, it is going to turn into a furball within the first 5 minutes.

Best regards from old bird.

spyder0069

Another great flight on the zero today!

I didn't want to take the cowl off to measure but was able to stick a ruler in and from the front of the stock box to the front of the drive washer was about 4 1/4". With the cowl in place there is a hair less than 1" between the back of the spinner and the front of the cowl. Originally when building I though that was too much but in reality it looks perfect and allows some air to get around the spinner and cool the totally enclosed engine (just the rockers and top of the head pop out of the cowl). I tossed the red spinner and went with a Dubro 2 1/2 black spinner. Much prettier. I'll post some pics. I had to make my gear. Original was too soft I bent some 3/16 and welded in a support brace. They have worked flawlessly.

old bird

Spyder 0069, thanks much for the information. Your measurement of 4 1/4" compares to mine with the Saito of 4 3/4", so the Saito is about 1/2" longer. Your plane looks really good the way you have it set up, so I'm going to move my firewall back 1/2" to achieve the same look with the Saito. Excellent quality pictures by the way. Have you had any problems with your engine mounted inverted? I have never tried a 4-stroke inverted and have heard some horror stories of flooding problems and running too rich.

Best regards from old bird.

spyder0069

I built a onboard glow system that is in mine that was installed from day one. This was my first 4-stroke (now have 3) and I just did it to avoid any problems. I talk to all kinds of people that have them inverted without onboard glow that have no problems. I know I get a good low idle out of mine. I would say try it without and run a OS F glow plug and if you can tune it right you probably won't have any problems. I am also running Wildcat 15% (18% oil) all synthetic 2 or 4 cycle fuel. Being all synthetic is burns a little hotter and the four strokes love it. Run it in all my two strokes too. They say not to use it in any ringed 2 stroked though. I guess they wear a little quicker without the castor.

locolobot

I am building one of the zero fighters from seagull and I have some questions for those of you who have built and flown it. Did you split the rudder and tail wheel like the instructions call for? How did that work out.? Did you try using another servo for the tail wheel? Also did you use the supplied hardware? Appreciate any and all help you can give me. Thanks

old bird

Our Seagull Zero finally took to the air yesterday. With one of the best pilots in our club on the sticks and the Magnum .91 4-stroke turning a MA 13-6 3 blade at just over 9000, she started down the runway and was airborne in less then 100 feet as the throttle was being pushed through the 1/2 position. A few clicks of trim and a couple of passes later the transmitter was handed over to my son.
The s--- eating grin on his face a few minutes later was a great reward for old dad. The first landing was a little rough but no damage, and later in the day we both soloed our first WW2 fighter plane. As others have already stated on these threads, this is a good flying airplane, it tracks through the turns very well, and slows right down and flys well at landing pattern and final approach speeds. Thanks to all who posted the good information here concerning CG and other issues, it all helped us to have a great day.

Best regards from old bird.

spyder0069

Old Bird thats great news! Good to hear you had a successful maiden. Even after the demise of my zero I still see them in the hobby store and have to wrestle my wallet back into my pocket. I had a blast with mine. I wish seagull would give a retract option and WHEN I get another zero I want it to be the green scheme and will be looking for a 60 size. Congrats!

old bird

Spyder0069, thanks for the good thoughts. Your input was instrumental to our sucess. We now have 8-9 flights on the Zero an it gets better as we get used to the speed, great fun. This is our first WW2 fighter plane, and my son and I are really jazzed about flying this thing. The Magnum .91 4-stroke really hauls this thing around, faster than I am used to. My son of course instantly adapted to the speed and loves the new plane. I have to fly twice as much to keep up with him.

I'm sorry to hear about the demise of your Zero, do you wish to post the details? If not, that's OK too.

Best regards from old bird.

spyder0069

Doh, I had thought I posted back about its demise. Must have been a different thread. Well after lots of great fun with my zero I was at the field with a buddy of mine. He had his P51 in the air and I had my zero in the air. We were dogfighting around and having a blast. I was up about 7 minutes of hard banks, loops, ect. I came for a slow strafe across the field. My buddy flew his p51 into a dive and came over the top of me. We were laughing, ect. and then he jokingly made gun sounds like he was shooting me down. I was 3/4 the length of the field when I started to pull back slowly to gain some altitude. Plane just kept sinking... sinking... impact. I was only about 20 feet up but once it nosed in it flipped and was splinters. No body at the field could believe it. There were about 10 witnesses and as bad as everyone felt about the plane we laughed our butts off. It was the most scale shoot down ever. What are the odds. My buddy landed and we went out to the wreck. Receiver was fine and battery was still attached and working. Then I found the problem. When building I saw the tips of others about the lack of quality of the hardware. I inspected mine and noticed the plastic clevises were of a harder plastic than most. I found a couple I didn't trust and replaced them. Well one of the originals made it to my elevator and had been broken. All the dubro plastic clevises I used were fine. This was the only broken clevis. If I remember right I cheated on this plane and linked the two elevator halves together with a rod at the tail and only ran one control rod to the rear of one of the elevators. If I remember right the plans had called for a control rod on each side or a solder Y control rod with clevises on both elevator halves. If I had used either of these methods I probably could have brought it back home with one elevator half functioning (I did it before with a 1/2A texan). So, I chalk it up to my fault and if you haven't gone over your hardware I suggest replacing ALL original plastic clevises with dubro. The hard plastic of the originals just snap instead of flexing.