Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

I am looking to get my First glow powered plain and am looking at the Seagull PC9 0.40 ARF with an irvine53 engine.

I have had this recommended by my club mates and a few have had them and they are a "known quantity".

However I would like something slightly different and was looking at the 40,60 Phoenix Tucanos which look similar but won't be the same plane everyone else has [8D]. I have heard it said that the PC9 lands like a trainer and flies like it's on rails. How do the Tucanos fly ? this will be my second low wing plane, I have a Ultrafly Super Chipmunk a the moment and can fly it reasonable well. Is there much difference in flight characteristics between the two Tucanos ?

Link to the Tucanos here [link=http://www.phoenixmodel.com.vn/index.php?cmd=products&id=46]40 Tucano[/link] and [link=http://www.phoenixmodel.com.vn/index.php?cmd=products&id=50]60 Tucano [/link] and here the seagull [link=http://www.seagullmodels.com/ProductDetail.asp?id=24]Pc9[/link]

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

i think there would be no difference between the two , as you can see they are very alike.i have to say my second plane was not scale, it was a kyosho calmato with evolution 46 (trainer power system). since then i have transformed it into a taildragger and flies just as good. 4 years later and im still flying it , along with super tigermoth rcv91cd ,1/4 sig clippedwing cub os 91fx and weston cougar with a gms 47 up front. happy shopping!.:D

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

I was looking at the wing loading and shape, the tucano has more of a tapered wing and was wondering if this would make slower speed handling harder? I was also wondering if the 60 size one would be better for the flaps and slowing it down to land ?

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

Mthemadhatter;

My second plane was the Seagull PC9 with the Irvine 53, and was an excellent plane. I would suggest that you let an experienced pilot get it trimmed for you and give you perhaps a couple of flights on a buddy box before you fly it by yourself. I would not recommend it for a 1st plane however. Fact of the matter is, I have one sitting in the box ready to be put together. The 1st was a victim of a glitch about three years ago.

The Seagull PC9 needs to be flown a little faster when in the landing pattern and on final, holding 1/4 throttle until on final and over the fence before cutting to idle. It does land fast and you will have to fly it on final, but is will land like it was on a string, and will almost land itself if landed in this manner. I will tell you that I balanced mine at the mid balance point and that was just about right.

I do not know anything about the Phoenix PC-9.

I have learned one thing in life and in flying models; "Experience is a hard teacher. She always gives the test first, and the lesson some time later!"

Phillip

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

Sounds like my Chipmunk which is not a floater and has to be flown down to 1in of the ground before cutting power ! Its a light model and can be tricky to land in anything resembling a strong breeze, hence why I am after the PC9/Tucano.

Experience is harsh ! I lost my Phase 3 EF-16 today, I was low and slowing down on the turn to land it and lost signal, it carried on its turn and disapeared into the valley at the bottom of our field. It was in 6 bits, but it will glue back together. Lesson even 2.4G is not infallible, and things will always go wrong at the worst time !

The thing the perked my interest with the pheonix one was the flaps, as this should slow down the landing a touch ??

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

Mthemadhatter, I have a seagull pc9 that I have for a while and was flying it today. It has and old OS 48 FS in it and it is slightly underpowered but run's perfect and has a lovely sound. The pc9 flies great and lands very gently. Altogether a nice gentle plane to fly with no bad habits.

RE: Seagull PC9 or Pheonix Tucano
 

Actually, what I said about the Seagull PC9 landing fast is not a negative. This was my 1st plane after a trainer, and if I could handle it, I think anyone could. They just need to be aware of what to expect. I never had the airplane make a bad landing, it never tried to tip stall, just rock solid with a little power until your ready to flare the plane. I don't think I could make a bad landing with it, something I can't say with some of the models I've had since. It's just a very nice handling model in the air and on the ground. It has excellent penetration in the wind, and does not float, yet it never showed a tendency to drop out of the sky, just keep the speed up a little with a little power until ready to flare. Just don't kill the power downwind or on base and slow up too much or it will bite you, but that was never a problem with me.

As for the flaps, I just wonder what they would do with the roll rate, seeing as the Seagull has full strip ailerons. Mine did aileron rolls quiet well, not to fast, but definately faster than my trainer, and did the most beautiful hammerhead turns and tailslides of any model I've had to date. I really liked the way it flew better than anything I've had, including a 72" yak, and my Ultra Stick 60, and both of them flew quiet well, although somewhat differently.

I doubt very seriously you would go very far wrong with either the Phoenix model or the Seagull model.

And I, like Dmurf think the Seagull PC9 is indeed a *****cat, very gentle, but not a trainer, but capable of taking one to the next step in RC flying; and like he says about the sound, mine had a somewhat different sound as well. In fact, I would go on record as saying that it made me look like a much better pilot than I was. Fact of the matter is, I just might go out there and put mine together just to see if it will give me the confidence I had when I was flying it, and if it will make me look as good now as it did then!! LOL

I'm sure prop selection would make an impact on the speed of the plane and it's slowing down when making the landing approach. Unfortunately, I do not remember what I had on mine. I do have a tendency to overprop a bit. I'm thinking I had perhaps a 12/6 or perhaps a 13/6 on it, and that did not make it all that much faster in the air than my trainer. It does pretty much go where you point it, or at least mine did with my set-up. You will like the Irvine 53 on it. It's not overpowered, but quiet adequate. Vertical, while not out of sight, but is quiet adequate. It will not prop hang with a 53 on it, but it will go vertical quiet a ways before it gives out.

Just keep an eye on Experience, because "She will always be a hard teacher, always giving the test first and the lesson sometime later!!"

Phillip