spyder79

Just thought I owed it to everyone to offer my personal experience with the Nitroplanes Seawind. First, understand that I'm no expert, but have built and flown various seaplanes successfully over more than 3 years. I hope to just offer some facts for those who might consider buying one of these things.

I ordered mine Seawind and it was shipped promptly and packaged adequately, but the canopy had a large crack in it. Shot some photos of the crack and emailed Nitroplanes the same day. No response after several days, so I spent a dime and phoned them, referenced the email, and they said they would check the photos. Got a fairly prompt email reply promising a 2-week delivery time for the new canopy because it had to be ordered from China. Sent more inquiries after 3 weeks and finally got a reply that the canopy was en route, and they supplied a FedEx tracking number. The tracking number was bogus. I made more inquiries and finally got another promise of 2-week delivery. It has been over 11 weeks since my first message and still no canopy.

As for the plane, well it seemed to be fairly well constructed. There is a weakness in mine in the wooden support structure in the tail. Didn't take long for the glue joint to break and then the tail section becomes soft and won't support the engine rigidly. To the point, after having read numerous posts and trying every technique that I could think of, the plane has yet to be airborne. Yes, the CG has been checked carefully and I've adjusted it fore and aft just a bit. Even though it planes nicely and moves easily in the water, it won't track straight enough for a good take-off run, tending to turn unexpectedly left or right indiscriminately. On the few times that I've been lucky enough to get it off the water (barely), it has immediately buried itself in the water.

I have flown some very touchy planes and managed to work through some interesting tracking issues, floatation, etc., but I have decided to put no further effort into this beast. I will scrap it out and maybe cannibalize the wings to repair another bird. I'm not saying it is impossible to fly, but next-to-impossible is close enough for me and the plane I bought isn't worth any more of my time.

I suppose there are others out there who have had more positive experiences. Maybe there are quality control issues involved. Maybe there is a special incantation required for flight. The best I can say is that it makes a nice boat if you don't try to go fast, and it looks nice hanging from the ceiling. If you buy one, be prepared for virtually ZERO customer support, and make sure you always have a boat handy.

Finally, I just want to say that I'm writing this as an informational post, not really expecting a reply. I'm not really intending to start another discussion or debate. Just sharing my experience... for what it's worth.

Larry S

My Feedback: (6)

Spyder,
it's good to know when someone has a problem either with a dealer or model or both. I have bought one Nitroplane plane in the past and had good luck with them, but then again, I didn't have anything broke. As for your Seawind, from what I heard, I didn't think the Nitroplane Seawind was to bad of a plane. I can tell you a buddy of mine has the Great Planes version and he hates it, always something breaking on it.
Larry

spyder79

Larry,

Wish I had some more positive commentary. This plane LOOKS like it should fly beautifully, which is usually a good quality. Put it on the water and it moves very easily with plenty of floatation. I'm running a .75 engine on mine which has tons of thrust for the size/weight of the plane. I have taken this bird out on the water a couple of dozen times now and I'm fed up with repairing it. At one point I decided to make it "fly or die", trying every variation of balance, trim, flaps, and technique that I could muster. In the end, it flipped over and started filling with water. I was lucky to retrieve it just barely before sinking. The few times that I've had it off the water, it has either just hopped into the air enexpectedly and then nosed-in, or instantly rotated inverted for a nice crash. And no, I'm not trying to horse it into the air, but the hull design seems to porpoise badly, even on smooth water with neutral, or even down-elevator applied. That is probably why it hops out of the water- when it noses up. Anyway, I'm sick of messing with it and just hoped to maybe save someone else from wasting a few hundred bucks.
Spyder

MMallory

My Feedback: (1)

Spyder,

Read the Great planes thread for info on how to fly these birds. You may be suffering from too much engine or too much up elevator. I have the GP version with retracts and haven't gotten to a lake big enough yet, but I have been reading all of the comments so when I get there I hope to be prepared.

Mark

spyder79

Here's the final chapter to my story: I really wanted to fly this bird and spent a lot of time trying to analyze the problem and try to find a solution. I never did get it to fly, but came up with a few observations. First, the engine being perched very high above the CG gives the plane a very delicate sense of balance. Only a slight change in pitch attitude makes the engine weight move either forward or aft of the center of lift, which makes the plane respond in an erratic manner, thus the porpoising in the water and touchy elevator control. Second, this is a fairly heavy plane for its wing area. It simply doesn't generate enough lift with the thin, symmetrical airfoil. Even though it officially spans 72", much of that wingspan is occupied by the wide fuselage and tip floats, neither of which provide lift. These attributes mean that a long take-off run over calm water is essential, something that is difficult to acheive with a very short-coupled hull that likes to turn arcs. I have read comments that suggest staying off the rudder and being quick on the ailerons during take-off, and that makes good sense but my model wouldn't track straight enough for that under any conditions.

I'm not an expert pilot, although I have a lot of seaplane time, and I recognize that there may be a few people out there who have been successful with their NP Seawind. I suspect that one may have more success flying off land, but that's not why I bought it. I also suspect that the quality control is lacking and I may have purchased a particularly lame bird. I should also mention that it was a bit over 3 months before the replacement canopy finally arrived in the mail (after several calls and emails). It came in a cardboard box without any hint of internal packaging and had a huge tear in it, worse than the first canopy. Didn't matter much by then since I had already removed engine and components from the model, salvaged any useful hardware, and sent it to the landfill. I did save the wings however and hope to use them to repair a Seamaster (excellent plane!) that lost its ballast last summer and came in hard.

Spyder

[email protected]

Just a quick comment.

My NP Seawind had the CG set @ 3.54" behind the wing LE. It went totally out of control. Since the plane fairly screams "TAIL-HEAVY," I set the CG to 1" behind the wing LE (following the Great Planes instructions instead). The Seawind took off (without a water rudder) , flew beautifully and landed very smoothly. It required 3lbs of dead weight in the nose to balance it. It now weighs 11lbs with 3 lbs of useless weight. I am thinking of installing an electric motor and battery in the nose with a l-o-n-g shaft to a steerable water propeller in the tail. Might as well make the weight useful.

{The GMS .76 works great. Head straight into the wind with half-flaps, gently build up speed and gently give more and more up elevator.
If you advance the throttle too quickly, the engine will pull the nose straight into the water without warning. }

It is unfortunate that, as useless as the NP Seawind manual is, one of the few solid pieces of information (the CG point) is disasterously AND INEXCUSABLY WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Maybe they meant 3.54 centimeters.

Even more unfortunate is their DISMAL support for this airplane.

Having said that, the plane is beautiful and built like a rock. The first flight went straight into the water and literally only shattered the canopy. Unbelievable. Any other plane I have owned would have resolved itself into its original components.

Unfortunately, NP has no Seawind canopies available after -what- 2 years? I had to fabricate a new canopy myself (ARF ARF) . I wonder if the Great Planes Seawind canopy will fit?

Pay less, get more or less less.

Satel

Hello people, I am Andres from Estonia and in this forum first time.I was been a flyer two years.With my Seawind was happend accident and now any help needed.Please, maybe You know, does Great Planes canopy fits with Nitro Planes Seawind or from where I can get new Nitro Planes canopy? I set my Seawind CG according to manual (90 cm) and it was wrong!!I was reading this forum and got many good instructions.
Thank You and best wishes

ALO 111

The factory settings are wrong, the seawind should be CG,ed at 26mm from the leading edge if the tank is empty and 35 to 40 mm if the tank is full. CG the plane upside down.
It flys like a dream and its not really that difficult to get off the water.

micboy

Hi...

I have decided to change the current CG location to 26mm behind the leading edge....I will see how it goes


I have already flew this once cg set no 90mm but only once I had to add 3lb of lead in the front ((( anyway I will let you know how it will go good or bad..

I am using an evo 61 hope this should have enough pull to take off from the water what engines are you using...that successfully flew..?


Michael

ALO 111

26 MM UPSIDE DOWN WITH EMPTY TANK SHOULD BE FINE. I HAVE IT AT 35MM WITH FULL TANK.
FLYS GREAT BUT TENDS TO BOUNC ON LANDING. TAKE OFFS ARE EASY IF YOU DO IT RIGHT. HANG ONTO FULL UP ELEVATOR AND FEED IN POWER SLOW AND AS SPEED BUILDS YOU CAN RELEAS UP ELEV.KEEP WINGS LEVEL AND LET HER TAKE OF BUY HERSELF. NEEDS PLENTY SPEED.
I AM USING A OS 61

Avaiojet

I read some of this Thread, especially spyder79, and his issues.

Maden flight. Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't it take place with gear attached and off land?

This model does have a place to bolt gear.

I have 377 hours of flying time in this aircraft and about 2 hours total time with a Sikorsky S-39 built with a Cub wing. Don't miss the seaplane, and I'm recovering the S-39.

Charles