mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

I've been poking around doing a lot of reading on Decathlon's and Citabria's, looking for another project. I happen to come across these two versions of the Decathlon, that are larger than the current offering by Seagull. I have been looking for something bigger than the current 40 size Decathlon's on the market, that aren't all that scale looking. RC Guys have a Giant Scale ARf, but that a little larger than I like to haul around in my car.

Has anyone read or heard anything that indicates that these will be imported into this country? I like the sizes of these two models, as I have few 91's and 120 four-strokes looking for a new airframe.

I downloaded the manual of www.seagullmodels.com (very slow site) The manual shows some features of the arf, like a door.

If you want a copy of the manual, as it took a long time to download from Seagull. If you got time your hands click on the link below to download.

Link to Manual in PDF form (Long download time)
http://www.seagullmodels.com/Admin/c.../SACH%2083.pdf

If you want a copy of the manual, I can also email it to you.
[email protected]

120 Size Specs:
Wingspan - 78.7ins (200cm)
Wing area - 1032.8 sq.ins (66.8sq.dm)
Suits - 120 4 Stroke
Factory covered with Profilm
Length - 52.9ins (134cm)
Approx flying weight - 10.6lbs (4.8kg)
Servos - 6 x High powered

91 Size Specs:
Wingspan - 70.9ins (180cm)
Wing area - 837sq.ins (54sq.dm)
Suits - 75 2 Stroke (91 4 Stroke)
Factory covered with Profilm
Length - 47.6ins (121cm)
Approx flying weight - 7.5-8.8lb (3.4-4.0kg)

Jetdesign

My Feedback: (8)

Haha, the Decathlon! 78" wingspan and only 53" long...my .40's are longer than that!

I'm SO down for the 120, but I don't think my landlord will pay for an addition to fit any more planes[] I had a .40 size Decathlon (Phoenix, same manufacturer?) and although it wasn't what I was looking for in a plane at the time, it was so nice to look at. Sold it, and will definitely have a larger one some day. Nice find!

Oh THREad, I'll be WATCHING you!!!

NorfolkSouthern

I think I'll watch this thread as well. I've had some good experiences with one I put together just a few days ago, and this one looks like a much easier build. Nothing quite like a leisurely trip around the parameter in a red taildragger with a short tail movement .

NorfolkSouthern

Iflyglow

My Feedback: (79)

Bring them on, I will be buying the 1.20 size.

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

As a pilot, I've been around a lot of Decathlon's, Citabira's, Cub's, ect. Many times the ARF's or even kits are always way off when it comes to dimensions. Now sometimes, there's a reason for "taking liberties" with the scale dimensions. For example, lengthening the the fuselage or increasing the vertical stabilizer or rudder, takes some of the "touchy," "twitchy," characteristics of the "real" plane and make the model easier to handle. For example, a Pitts Special, which is a handful, because of it's short tail-moment, so sometimes it makes sense to make changes that would make the plane more enjoyable. I've had some scale models, that were a accident waiting to happen.

Now, guys correct my math. Here is a link to the current manufacture of the Decathlon/Super Decathlon specifications.
http://www.amerchampionaircraft.com/...th/sdspecs.htm

If we take the Length and divided by the wingspan you should get a number that tells the percentage of the wingspan to the length of fuselage. Then take the model's dimensions and do the same thing. If they Seagull used scale dimensions, then the percentage should be similar.

Real Plane
Super Decathlon Wingspan = 32ft
Super Decathlon Length = 22.9ft
Divide Length by Wingspan, I got just under 72%

The 120 Size Seagull Decathlon
Wingspan = 78.7"
Length = 52.9"
Dived Length by Wingspan, I got just over 67%

So, the model is a little short of scale, by 5% Nothing earth shattering!

Okay, I'll stop now! Just let me know if my math is wrong!

SunShyne

My Feedback: (68)

120 sized, about time

looks good

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

So, are you guys from Horizon Hobby watching?????

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

That makes it 4 inches shorter than scale. And a scale Decathlon is twitchy. That definately gives me pause.

Jim

Or maybe somebody just blew the Metric to English conversion.

mydartswinger

Carl Goldberg Decathlon (claimed to be a 60 size)
Wingspan: 80.75"
Length: 55"
Comes out to 68%

The reason I say this, is that it's not twitchy at all. A little sensitive, maybe, but twitchy, no. It requires very little rudder to keep straight on takeoff and landings, and doesn't have a tendency to "ground loop" on taxi. A little shorter than scale isn't a problem, just go with the biggest your wallet, storage, and transportation means can fit and you'll be fine. If you still feel nervous about a Decathlon's ground handling, give it a couple of passes down the runway before taking off the first time. If it's to twitchy for you, shelf it until you can work your way into it. If it feels fine, go for it and have a blast. Decathlons are an excellent flying airplane, but many people shy away from them because of all of the fuss on the twitchiness of it's ground handling. I too, was of that mindset before I bought the mine. I was about to buy a Cessna 182, when a friend stopped me and convinced me to get a Decathlon (I was wanting a Decathlon before, but was scared of the ground handling). I'm glad that he did. If I had bought the Cessna, I would have missed out on the best flying airplane I've ever flown (it'll even hover with an OS .91FX ).

Point is:
Don't be too concerned with the "twitchiness" of it. Both of the Seagull Decathlons should be OK, but I'd go with the 120.

Happy flying.

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Mydartswinger!

I agree with what you said. many rc pilots don't use enough rudder or even use it all. I find it interesting that all of the manufacturers don't seem to get dimension right when they make these models. All of the Decathlon ARF's are shorter than if they were scaled down from the full size dimensions. I guess I have to keep in mind that these are not scale models by any means. I'm curious to how they actually come up with their plans for the models, as we've all seen some pretty goofy looking models that are suppose to look like the actual plane. Do these manufactures just use a 3-view and come up with an outline and draw up the plans?

NorfolkSouthern

I emphatically have to agree with dartswinger. My Lanier Citabria is a little sensitive, and needs some rudder in flight. However, it is a lot easier for me to get off the ground than my Hangar-9 Tango. It is slow compared to my Rapture 40. Overall, it's a very easy plane to fly and I never need to worry about tip stalls or death spirals should the engine go out. For landing, just cut the throttle on final and stear it in. Like any Hobbico Superstar trainer, you do flare it a little but no biggie. Why is that hard? I have no idea why people fear these planes so much.

NorfolkSouthern

mydartswinger

Probably from hearing horror stories from pilots that don't use their rudder much, if at all, then having a hard time getting it up by nailing the throttle and hoping she gets up in the air in time. I know a pilot that has been flying for 3 years, and bought a 40 size Decathlon (I think it was either Seagull or Phoenix) as his second plane after learning to fly on a Nexstar. After a few flights, he wound up crashing it. Only recently has he talked about getting another Decathlon after flying mine for a bit. Don't get me wrong, he is a good guy and a good pilot. But it is people that get themselves into similar situations as him, then talking trash about the plane (not saying that he did that, just using his experience as an example) and scaring potential pilots of said airplane.

I've only been flying about 6 months, and have had no issues with it's flight or ground handling characteristics in the 2 months I've owned it. And on top of that, I let my buddy, who has only been flying for 3 months, take off, and fly it. He had no issues with it either. Since it was my plane, he didn't want to take a chance at dinging it up a bit on landing, so he handed the TX back to me (it would've been a longer flight, but it deadsticked on him). Which brings me to another point, Decathlons deadstick very gracefully. I have had my best landings deadsticking in my Decathlon. They glide very well. This should be a testament to how well these planes really do fly. If you can fly a Cub (which, unfortunately, is another plane that has been feared for it's ground handling), you should be able to fly a Decathlon with no issues. I don't say that from personal experience, as I have never flown a Cub, but I have, however, talked to a Cub pilot that has seen me fly. He told me that they are really no problem on the ground, and you just have to continue "flying" until the plane stops.

Maybe there should be more "twitchy" taildraggers used as trainers. If you can't take off, you can't solo. Maybe that's a bit harsh for some and I don't mean to be a butt about it. Yes, it is good to have the easy to fly trainers to keep people interested in flying through their training. However, a taildragger would assist in teaching the use of the rudder. I tend to use rudder on planes that don't even need rudder to fly (IE, my "yank and bank" TWM Nemesis 52, which is, BTW, a fast and VERY twitchy airplane on the ground and with it's ailerons in the air. I would say about 2-3 complete rolls per second on high rates. It scared the snot out of my buddy when he took the TX for a couple of patterns.). I'm even now working my way into using the rudder to assist in my crosswind landings. As with full size airplanes, "stick and rudder" skills are important to learn when flying an RC. It really opens up your world to some EXCELLENT flying airplanes such as the Decathlon. Sorry, a little rant. I apologize if I offended anyone, as I was not intending to.

Now, if you're interested in one, don't be scared. Go out and get one, build it, and if you are nervous about the ground handling, get a friend that is experienced with taildraggers to take it off and trim it, then hand you the TX. Fly it around for a few minutes and see just how great it flies. You'll be itching to do full flights with it.

The Seagull Decathlons are gorgeous airplanes and look like they should be a real winner. If interested, get one. I've had a Seagull product (Yak 54 .60). It was a good flying, well built ARF. I only sold it because it wasn't my flying style, plus, I can do everything that it could do and more with my Decathlon. I just enjoy the Decathlon much more.

Do what you do and enjoy what you do.

Happy flying.

Edit:
See pic. That was after only flying for 4 1/2 months, and only 2 weeks with the Decathlon.

Balsawings

It's been my experience that if a tail dragger wants to ground loop, you better straighten out the landing gear. What usually happens is that after a couple of less than perfect landings the gear starts to spread. When this happens the toe-in on the wheels becomes toe-out. Thus the hard to keep her straight syndrome. Next time it happens, stand back and take a good look at your gear.

First of all make sure you bend your gear back into shape so that they don't look like a duck on ice. Then, if you have wire gear, just remove the wheels, put a crescent wrench on the axle and torque the wire until the end of the axle is about one degree forward of plumb. If you have an aluminum gear it's easier to put the wrench on the gear just above the axle and pull the gear leg in to get your one degree of toe-in. Ever try driving a car with the toe-in off on the front steering? Believe me, it drives just as bad as that airplane that wants to ground loop.

With this simple fix you will once again have a plane that is oh so easy to takeoff.

Bob Cox
SPA 374
Miami, FL

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Regarding this airplane, I was hoping that some of the people from Horizon would happen to see this thread and chime in as to when or if it is going to be available here in the States. I see that it's available in Europe, as it showed up on hobby shop web-sties. Anyone heard anything? My guess, is that it will probably be shown at Toledo or one of the major hobby shows next year.

netdudeuk

They look good but when I went to that web site last week to look for the same manuals Windows Live OneCare warned that the site had sent some malware (javascript, iirc) to my PC.

It wouldn't be right to say for sure that they have been hacked but I do urge caution when visiting the site for now.

playntraffic

I can't wait to get one. Will only have to decide which one. The new Yak and Edge 120 size look pretty good too.
I need a Decathalon.

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

I didn't get that message! Oh, that's right, I'm using a Apple!

If any of you guys, want a copy of the PDF, I downloaded it and can email it to you!


Hey, Horizon or whomever, where's this plane at! Tell me it's on the boat!

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Just wanted to keep this thread alive a little longer.

I was surfing the internet doing "Google" searches for the this new airplane. Looks like it's available in the U.K.! Any of you over there got one yet? This "Yankee" needs a new decathlon in the 91/120 size. Not real crazy about anything that is available here and I need something bigger than a 40 size!

NorfolkSouthern

I would have to agree, there should be more choices than the Phoenix and Goldberg offerings. I have a hunch that Great Planes could discontinue the Goldberg Super Decathlon without notice or fire-sale pricing.

NorfolkSouthern

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Goldberg Decathlon is going the way of the Dodo Bird! Goldberg a.k.a. (Tower) a.k.a Hobbico has it listed as discontinued on their web site.!

NorfolkSouthern

I see a limited quantity available, so there must have been a return or two since you last looked. I guess using the rudder must be a lost art.

NorfolkSouthern

mimoore67

My Feedback: (51)

Norfolk,

These is a link to Goldberg, who is now owned by Hobbico, which bought them from Lannier, who bought out Goldberg!

http://www.carlgoldbergproducts.com/...ued/index.html

I think we'll see that they'll be replacing their arf's with their own, under the Goldberg Badge!

mydartswinger

Goldberg has discontinued the Decathlon . If you look on the Carl Goldberg website, it's listed as a discontinued ARF. As of my last check (5:31 PM EST, 15 Dec), Tower is, in fact, showing them as limited quantities. It's a shame that they're doing that, it's such a great airplane. Tower and Horizon are currently being very notorious about discontinuing great models. Sometimes they're smart and replace them with an updated offering (IE, Horizon's Hangar 9 PTS Mustang RTF). Tower (Great Planes) has supposedly discontinued the Giant U Can Do 3D (however, Tower is still showing limited quantities). I talked to a club member yesterday that owns one, and was going to buy a new one to make quick work of his damage repair (engine cut out going vertical and crashed it. he had it repaired and back at the field yesterday, though.). He said he tried to order one, and was told they were discontinued, and no longer available.

I would have to agree with NorfolkSouthern. It does seem that the rudder is becoming a lost art (excepting during 3D maneuvers). My field, however, does seem to be an exception. 99% of our members fly taildraggers. Though some do "gun it and go" for their take offs, and hope for the best on landings (they are quite successful at it though).

Happy flying.

G.Barber

My Feedback: (1)

Does anyone else think that these models might be a little over-powered? I had a Lanier Citabria ARF with a 64" wingspan and 44.5" inches long. This model flew great on a tower .46. I installed a magnum .81 4-stroke and it flew great on floats- just needed some tail weight. The one they call th .75-.91 is not much bigger that the one I had. Just my humble opinion, though...

mydartswinger

They may be, my Goldberg is an 80.75" span. It was recommended by the manual as a .61-75 2S or a .70-.91 4S. Mine has a .91 2S and flies just right. Not overpowered, but has plenty to do scale aerobatics, knife edges, and hovers. Climb is not ballistic, nor unlimited, but more than adequate.