Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
01-16-2005, 08:56 AM
#627
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MississaugaON, CANADA
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
ORIGINAL: jrjohn
I have a question about the rudder setup. are you guys using the supplied hardware for the rudder pull pull, or are you buying the SWB setup?
John
I have a question about the rudder setup. are you guys using the supplied hardware for the rudder pull pull, or are you buying the SWB setup?
John
Thanx!
01-16-2005, 08:59 AM
#628
Senior Member
My Feedback: (51)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
And so are 3 line systems. I've use both. They both have their benefits...
A with a 2 line system you risk the fuel dot leaking air which can cause the engine to run lean or quit.
But it is lighter.
I use 3 line tanks with no 2nd clunk and cna get as much fuel out as you can with a 2... it's setup like this: (Editing Wayne's image)
The purple "ends" in the tank are short pieces of tygon fuel line witht he tip cut at a sharp angle... this prevents (especially the vent line) from sealing against the tank. But as you can see the fill line get's angled down to the tank floor. To get the very most fuel out, you can lift the tail of the plane slightly up to have the remaining bit of fuel run to the front.
With either method it's a good idea to transport the plane with the vent line plugged. Keeps gas odor down But remember to unplug it next time at the field, or you will get a really sore arm.
As for the looping of the vent line... there are a couple different ideas out there. I don't do it. When the engine is running it is pulling fuel.. even at idle. as fuel is drawn from the tank air must come in.
You've taken a soda straw, dipped it in liquid and put your finger across the top sealing the top? And you can lift the straw out of the liquid but the liquid stays in the straw? That's because the water cannot leave without air taking it's place. When you remove your finger from the top, air rushes in and gravity draws the fuel out.
When an engine is running it not only is plugging the straw, but also sucking through it.
My buddy asked how then does the engine get air into the tank wehen inverted and the vent line submerged? It's the water bong principal. Air MUST come in to replace the space the fuel took up... and will draw air bubbles in thru the vent line... just like a water bong.
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
So which tank plumbing method is better?
Neither... they are just two ways to skin a cat. I do like the fact that a leaking fuel dot won't cause my engine to quit, and that's why I have leaned toward the 3 line tank... but I've used the 2 line without incident.
A with a 2 line system you risk the fuel dot leaking air which can cause the engine to run lean or quit.
But it is lighter.
I use 3 line tanks with no 2nd clunk and cna get as much fuel out as you can with a 2... it's setup like this: (Editing Wayne's image)
The purple "ends" in the tank are short pieces of tygon fuel line witht he tip cut at a sharp angle... this prevents (especially the vent line) from sealing against the tank. But as you can see the fill line get's angled down to the tank floor. To get the very most fuel out, you can lift the tail of the plane slightly up to have the remaining bit of fuel run to the front.
With either method it's a good idea to transport the plane with the vent line plugged. Keeps gas odor down But remember to unplug it next time at the field, or you will get a really sore arm.
As for the looping of the vent line... there are a couple different ideas out there. I don't do it. When the engine is running it is pulling fuel.. even at idle. as fuel is drawn from the tank air must come in.
You've taken a soda straw, dipped it in liquid and put your finger across the top sealing the top? And you can lift the straw out of the liquid but the liquid stays in the straw? That's because the water cannot leave without air taking it's place. When you remove your finger from the top, air rushes in and gravity draws the fuel out.
When an engine is running it not only is plugging the straw, but also sucking through it.
My buddy asked how then does the engine get air into the tank wehen inverted and the vent line submerged? It's the water bong principal. Air MUST come in to replace the space the fuel took up... and will draw air bubbles in thru the vent line... just like a water bong.
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
So which tank plumbing method is better?
Neither... they are just two ways to skin a cat. I do like the fact that a leaking fuel dot won't cause my engine to quit, and that's why I have leaned toward the 3 line tank... but I've used the 2 line without incident.
ORIGINAL: Mokken
You are correct... 2 Line systems are very very very very common.
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
ORIGINAL: Bosshossv8
if a gasser with a walbro carb has the two line system , no fuel will get past the "float valve" during fueling...it needs suction from the motor to allow fuel to pass. Right?
if a gasser with a walbro carb has the two line system , no fuel will get past the "float valve" during fueling...it needs suction from the motor to allow fuel to pass. Right?
You are correct... 2 Line systems are very very very very common.
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
01-16-2005, 09:23 AM
#631
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Independence,
KY
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
ORIGINAL: Mokken
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
01-16-2005, 10:11 AM
#632
Senior Member
My Feedback: (51)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
I think that's what Mokken was saying BBriBro... that he prefered the 2 line system because he could defuel.
I do find that with a 2 line system and a felt clunk that you can get almost every drop out as the felt soaks the remaining gas up.
My point is that if the tank is setup with 3 lines as my illustration shows, you do not have to have 2 clunks to get all the fuel out.
There will be little difference in how much fuel is left between to the two methods.
I still prefer the 3 line system, and with a felt clunk, eliminating the need for another filter before the carb as the felt clunk IS the filter.
A 2 line system with felt clunk still requires a filter before the carb as you might push dirrt in front of the clunk.
I do find that with a 2 line system and a felt clunk that you can get almost every drop out as the felt soaks the remaining gas up.
My point is that if the tank is setup with 3 lines as my illustration shows, you do not have to have 2 clunks to get all the fuel out.
There will be little difference in how much fuel is left between to the two methods.
I still prefer the 3 line system, and with a felt clunk, eliminating the need for another filter before the carb as the felt clunk IS the filter.
A 2 line system with felt clunk still requires a filter before the carb as you might push dirrt in front of the clunk.
01-16-2005, 10:31 AM
#633
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 6,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
Sorry guys,
I should have angled the pic so noone could see my fuel line that went behind the tank..
We have snow and ice on the ground now so no flying it today. Going to fly Foamies though!!!
I should have angled the pic so noone could see my fuel line that went behind the tank..
We have snow and ice on the ground now so no flying it today. Going to fly Foamies though!!!
01-16-2005, 10:37 AM
#634
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 6,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
ORIGINAL: Maudib
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
01-16-2005, 11:19 AM
#635
My Feedback: (63)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bethlehem, GA
Posts: 1,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
ORIGINAL: Maudib
And so are 3 line systems. I've use both. They both have their benefits...
A with a 2 line system you risk the fuel dot leaking air which can cause the engine to run lean or quit.
But it is lighter.
I use 3 line tanks with no 2nd clunk and cna get as much fuel out as you can with a 2... it's setup like this: (Editing Wayne's image)
The purple "ends" in the tank are short pieces of tygon fuel line witht he tip cut at a sharp angle... this prevents (especially the vent line) from sealing against the tank. But as you can see the fill line get's angled down to the tank floor. To get the very most fuel out, you can lift the tail of the plane slightly up to have the remaining bit of fuel run to the front.
With either method it's a good idea to transport the plane with the vent line plugged. Keeps gas odor down But remember to unplug it next time at the field, or you will get a really sore arm.
As for the looping of the vent line... there are a couple different ideas out there. I don't do it. When the engine is running it is pulling fuel.. even at idle. as fuel is drawn from the tank air must come in.
You've taken a soda straw, dipped it in liquid and put your finger across the top sealing the top? And you can lift the straw out of the liquid but the liquid stays in the straw? That's because the water cannot leave without air taking it's place. When you remove your finger from the top, air rushes in and gravity draws the fuel out.
When an engine is running it not only is plugging the straw, but also sucking through it.
My buddy asked how then does the engine get air into the tank wehen inverted and the vent line submerged? It's the water bong principal. Air MUST come in to replace the space the fuel took up... and will draw air bubbles in thru the vent line... just like a water bong.
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
So which tank plumbing method is better?
Neither... they are just two ways to skin a cat. I do like the fact that a leaking fuel dot won't cause my engine to quit, and that's why I have leaned toward the 3 line tank... but I've used the 2 line without incident.
And so are 3 line systems. I've use both. They both have their benefits...
A with a 2 line system you risk the fuel dot leaking air which can cause the engine to run lean or quit.
But it is lighter.
I use 3 line tanks with no 2nd clunk and cna get as much fuel out as you can with a 2... it's setup like this: (Editing Wayne's image)
The purple "ends" in the tank are short pieces of tygon fuel line witht he tip cut at a sharp angle... this prevents (especially the vent line) from sealing against the tank. But as you can see the fill line get's angled down to the tank floor. To get the very most fuel out, you can lift the tail of the plane slightly up to have the remaining bit of fuel run to the front.
With either method it's a good idea to transport the plane with the vent line plugged. Keeps gas odor down But remember to unplug it next time at the field, or you will get a really sore arm.
As for the looping of the vent line... there are a couple different ideas out there. I don't do it. When the engine is running it is pulling fuel.. even at idle. as fuel is drawn from the tank air must come in.
You've taken a soda straw, dipped it in liquid and put your finger across the top sealing the top? And you can lift the straw out of the liquid but the liquid stays in the straw? That's because the water cannot leave without air taking it's place. When you remove your finger from the top, air rushes in and gravity draws the fuel out.
When an engine is running it not only is plugging the straw, but also sucking through it.
My buddy asked how then does the engine get air into the tank wehen inverted and the vent line submerged? It's the water bong principal. Air MUST come in to replace the space the fuel took up... and will draw air bubbles in thru the vent line... just like a water bong.
I only had limited experience with this concept as a teen... but I can vouch for it's scientific validity...
So which tank plumbing method is better?
Neither... they are just two ways to skin a cat. I do like the fact that a leaking fuel dot won't cause my engine to quit, and that's why I have leaned toward the 3 line tank... but I've used the 2 line without incident.
ORIGINAL: Mokken
You are correct... 2 Line systems are very very very very common.
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
ORIGINAL: Bosshossv8
if a gasser with a walbro carb has the two line system , no fuel will get past the "float valve" during fueling...it needs suction from the motor to allow fuel to pass. Right?
if a gasser with a walbro carb has the two line system , no fuel will get past the "float valve" during fueling...it needs suction from the motor to allow fuel to pass. Right?
You are correct... 2 Line systems are very very very very common.
I like to defuel before transporting and for storage and I've found that unless you run a second clunk (whis is not nessesary in the first place) then you never empty all the fuel out of the tank.
But treat it that way if you must, to each his own..
01-16-2005, 11:33 AM
#639
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
It still amazes me that a plane this size weighs that little. I cant wait to get mine!!!
-mike
-mike
ORIGINAL: wgeffon
I just weighed mine on two seperate scales to be sure.
15lbs 3oz
and
15lbs 9oz
Call it 15lbs 6oz
I just weighed mine on two seperate scales to be sure.
15lbs 3oz
and
15lbs 9oz
Call it 15lbs 6oz
01-16-2005, 12:29 PM
#641
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MississaugaON, CANADA
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
ORIGINAL: coche
Wayne,, change the spinner backplate and it will get you at 15 Lbs!
Wayne,, change the spinner backplate and it will get you at 15 Lbs!
Common these pupies put out 25+ lbs of thrust. You can't honestly tell me 6 oz is gonna amke a noticable difference!
[sm=lol.gif][sm=lol.gif]
01-16-2005, 12:35 PM
#642
Senior Member
My Feedback: (51)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
Way too cool Wayne... Simply awesome....
ORIGINAL: wgeffon
I just weighed mine on two seperate scales to be sure.
15lbs 3oz
and
15lbs 9oz
Call it 15lbs 6oz
I just weighed mine on two seperate scales to be sure.
15lbs 3oz
and
15lbs 9oz
Call it 15lbs 6oz
01-16-2005, 12:42 PM
#643
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NavojoaSonora, MEXICO
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
For me Lighter its better!
4-6 oz will not make the diference, I just think that if you can build the plane lighter with lighter equipment it will fly better on some manuvers, like harriers, elevators, etc...
I think Wayne has the lightest set up, and the spinner back plate its the only thing heavy he has....
my goal its to fly my Yak at 15 lbs, and for what I can see, mine will be at 15 lbs [8D]
Jose
4-6 oz will not make the diference, I just think that if you can build the plane lighter with lighter equipment it will fly better on some manuvers, like harriers, elevators, etc...
I think Wayne has the lightest set up, and the spinner back plate its the only thing heavy he has....
my goal its to fly my Yak at 15 lbs, and for what I can see, mine will be at 15 lbs [8D]
Jose
01-16-2005, 01:33 PM
#644
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 6,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
Jose,
Keep in mind that mine is balance right on the tube with this set up. A lightened backplate or a CF spinner will change things slightly aft. For me, I dont like flying tail heavy planes.
Under 15.5 is awesome for a plane this size is awesome.
These weights are exactly what Chris said they'd be. Hmm.....where are all the skeptics now?
Keep in mind that mine is balance right on the tube with this set up. A lightened backplate or a CF spinner will change things slightly aft. For me, I dont like flying tail heavy planes.
Under 15.5 is awesome for a plane this size is awesome.
These weights are exactly what Chris said they'd be. Hmm.....where are all the skeptics now?
01-16-2005, 01:42 PM
#645
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
right here -
do any of you guys have one flying yet?
(I am always skeptical till I see results -so-- no offence intended. I am skeptical of my own stuff too)
do any of you guys have one flying yet?
(I am always skeptical till I see results -so-- no offence intended. I am skeptical of my own stuff too)
01-16-2005, 01:48 PM
#646
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 6,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
Dick,
I was referring to the people that said the weights wouldnt be as advertised.
If your skepitcal about the flying, hang tight. As soon as the snow is off the grass mine will be flying. We will video it for everyone.
I was referring to the people that said the weights wouldnt be as advertised.
If your skepitcal about the flying, hang tight. As soon as the snow is off the grass mine will be flying. We will video it for everyone.
01-16-2005, 01:54 PM
#647
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Boyertown ,
PA
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
when is there gonna be some more stuff on the yak build site? i check everyday anxiously waiting for some new stuff.