jetlag

I had not really wanted to put some strips behind the step, but a couple more might go a long way towards model longevity. The L wing has a crack in the sheeting that needs tending to...no doubt from the packers at the factory. This time the damage was not caused by UPS (I know because this is the third one I've recieved; the first two were damaged badly in shipping). Tower Customer service has been great, though.
Also, the end of the step in the middle (where you would put the 'bailer') was cracked badly. I've sealed the hole, siezed the cracks, and will paint over it. I don't need that bailer, anyway...Aint no water getting in there! (Let's hope!).
What's that stuff in the very front of the plane? Is that lead (Pb) clay? I sealed it in, as I'll probably need it there.
I'm going to put in the E and R servos in with clear silicone to seal 'em up and a synthetic grease blob around the output gear to keep water out...as soon as USC is through beating Ark. today!

Allen

khh1955

Another FYI...

khh1955

FYI...
I'm planning on setting up two different "nose wheel" covers...one for flying off water (fully intact),and another that
I'll cut to fit around the nose wheel assembly. I found out yesterday,that the diecut wood reinforcer is about 1/8" too
wide,it doesn't fit into the nose wheel compartment. So,if you haven't glued it together yet,make sure that you trim the wood
to fit the compartment first!

Kurt

[email protected]

I use a magnetic reed switch on my seaplane. The switch is on the inside and a small removable magnet on the outside of the hull turns the switch on/off thru the hull. A rubber band holds the magnet in place on the hull when the plane is sitting waiting.

When stored, another switch, wired in series inside the hull, is switched off to prevent any accidental oddities. Like, "hey what's this" as some dipswitch :-) pulls the plastic coated magnet off the hull, energizing the servos.

jetlag

Don't forget to remember where the fuel tank is when drilling the holes for the upper cover...I drilled right through it! Oh, well...I guess I'll be on the phone with GP later...

Allen

Cherokeepilot

Well money was spent last weekend at the LHS. A brand new Seawind and an OS91 FX was purchased. Now just need to get building.

I have enjoyed reading the posts so far on the plane. I just finished looking up the specs on a Saito 100 rather than a OS91 FX. The Saito 100 is approx 3.5 oz lighter and would actually sound better than the 2stroker on the Seawind. I believe its time to upgrade the engine. The -3.5 oz of weight doesnt seem like much, but that equals a lot less nose weight to balance the nose. Planning to fly just off water.

I am interested to hear from other pilots how they have powered their Seawinds? How much lead weight was added if any? what size prop used, 2 blade or 3 blade? What type of aftermarket muffler if used? I personally will cringe to put the 10inch long stock muffler on my OS91 FX. If I stayed with the 91 2stroke, wonder if a Pitts muffler would be suitable or any other type more scale than the stock muffler?

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

Actually, the engine is located about 7" behind the CG, so extra 3.5 oz there is equal to less than 1 oz at the nose, which is 28" forward of the CG (4 times the leverage).

I don't think the Pitts muffler for a 91 4-stroke will fit in the cowl. The cowl space looks pretty slender vertically.

If you want a 3-blade, get a Graupner 12.5x7 3-blade, since it looks nicer than Master Airscrew 3-blade, which comes in 13x8 size.

Cherokeepilot

Thanks alot Sean

Will look into using a Graupner 3 blade prop. As for the engine, still leaning towards the lightest one out there, probably a Saito 100 for now. Airplanes fly like stones when lead begins to mount!

jetlag

Keep it light as you can! I'm using an OS.61FX and will need about 6-8ozs of wieght in the nose to balance with no landing gear. I'm thinking a four stroke or a large 2 stroke might need a lot more.
Also, my kit had aileron hinge slots cut for two hinges apiece...I made it three apiece, same as the flaps. Strange, I would have thought it would've been the other way around.

Allen

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

OS 61 FX with stock muffler is like 24 oz. OS 91 FX 2-stroke actually a little lighter. Saito 100 4-stroke is less than 21 oz., lighter than OS 61 FX. Modern 4-strokes are really light, and the fact their muffler don't have to be so big translates into further weight saving. Saito has about the best displacement-to-weight ratio out of any stroke.

Cherokeepilot

Sean

You are correct about the Saito being lighter. I decided to upgrade my OS91FX to a Saito 100 today after discovering a whopping 5.2 oz difference in weight, both mufflers were weighed too. I weighed them both with mufflers on a digital postage scale. The OS91 weighed in at 26.5 ounces and the Saito 100 weighed in at 21.3oz. I hope this will prevent me having to put 8-12 oz of weight in the nose of this Seawind. The plane is gonna fly much better without it and its not going to have a 10inch eyesore of a muffler sticking off the nacelle!

Greg

jetlag

Greg
You're right. It took 13.5oz to balance with no LG. Total wieght is about 10.5lbs. I'm using the OS.61 since I already have one NIB. Hope to fly it tomorrow as soon as I put something bright on the wings so I can see it in a white sky. Still looking for an inverted pitts so I don't have to cut out the cowling to such a large degree. Plan to test fly without a cowling so I can fine tune the motor easily. Hope it goes well...
Allen

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

I think if you side mount your Saito, you can complete hide the muffler by utilizing a 90 deg coupler. Have the 90 deg coupler turn the header rearward, and then connect the muffler to the header so it's like 45 deg in the front view.

I think with a 2-stroke, there is no nice way of hiding the muffler. Might as well get a pretty muffler like the Performance Specialist or Jett Stream muffler. You will need the power boost too. 61 FX stock is not a powerhouse by any mean. At over 11 lb and modest wing area., the take-off ride will be a while...

Stevenhilton

What prop works best? It is not specified in the manual and I have read the posts preeviously but who is flying what with what prop. Do you think a 4 stroke OS 91 will be sufficient?

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

For 91 4-stroke, the Graupner 12.5x7 3-blade will look and work best.

http://www.hobby-lobby.com/grprop.htm

RVman

I am going to pick my seawind up this weekend. I have a brand new saito 82 for it which weighs 17.6 oz. Hopefully it will be powerful enough for the plane. I also plan on getting the retracts for it.
Tom

Cherokeepilot

The weight of that Saito 82 would be great on the Seawind. Not too sure about a decent amount of performance though like a 91FX or Saito 100, particularly if you add a pound of retracts.

In regards to the 90 degree manifold extension for the saito, I am currently using one on a brand new Saito 82 in a .40size YAK. You are right, it routes the muffler just about 180 degrees opposite direction from the crankshaft. Very nice to keep the muffler totally in the cowling on the YAK!

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

Saito 82 scales very well with nitro, so you get over 500 rpm of boost by going from 15% to 30% nitro, with which the 82 will go head to head with OS 91 Surpass. So it's same power for 2/3 the weight, but 3/2 the fuel cost.

It will swing Graupner 12.5x7 3-blade at over 10000 rpm, which should be adequate for flying this plane around. Again, this is a heavy plane w/ high wing loading, so take-off is the main concern when it comes to power. I believe that Saito 82 on high nitro will generate more thrust than 61 FX when properly propped.

Stevenhilton

Thanks I think I have the first one shipped Canada hehe

scalebirdman

My Feedback: (6)

Easy now boys. The Seawind might not work as a "true" amphib. right out of the box, but with some ingenuity, you should be able to make it so. I haven't seen the product myself, but you just need to seal off the nose well. Easy enough to seal around the air lines. The stearing cables might be more difficult, but I beleive Dubro has a part that allows stearing cables to pass thru a bulkhead with out transfering water, or you could just let the nose wheel caster.

If there is a will, there is a way:

drbebob

I too received a Seawind for my Birthday last week. I must say it is beautiful. I always admired the full scale bird. I have a 3.5 acre pond to fly off with hills surrounding so I need some takeoff power. Mine will have a YS .91 swinging a Bolly 12.5X11 three blade and lots of nitro. I will upgrade the rudder and elevator servos to Hitec 5245 mini digitals.
My main concern about the kit is the balance procedure. GP states that it should be balanced with an empty fuel tank; but the tank is behind the CG so when you fill the tank you will be adding 10 to 12 ounces of weight behind the CG. I will be placing my tank in the hull right on the CG so I will avoid the full tank/empty tank balance changes. Did GP allow for the weight of fuel when calculating the recommended CG using the tank they supplied? If so do I need to change the CG to allow for my situation with the tank right on the CG down in the hull? Anyone with info on this? Thanks,

Bob G.

Strykaas

I would start with advocated "per plan" cg location, then afterwords play with it rearwards...

Marathon Man

I just received my Seawind today. This is my first airplane with flaps. Could anyone give me advice on using them on water and also land? What kind of mixing with the elevator should I be aware of? I will be using a 4 stroke 91 for and engine.

Kev

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Of course they did. The recommended CG is determined by flight test, not theory. (At least in GP's case.)

The recommended CG with the tank empty is, in reality, the most forward recommended position. Balance the airplane there with the empty tank sitting in it's stock location. Then fill the tank and see where the airplane balances. That is the most rearward recommended CG. Take the tank out, put it in the center of the fuselage and then rebalance the airplane halfway between the recommended CG and the balance point you measured with the tank full. That is the recommended "average" CG and a good starting point for your setup.

Jim

drbebob

Jim--- I think you are right. They had to allow for fuel weight. I will follow the procedure you outlined. Thanks

Bob