MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Bo, the Seawind is the best flying seaplane that i have ever flown - hands down! And it is one of the nicest looking planes I have ever seen.

That's the good news.

The bad news is that it is difficult to get off the water.

The problem seems to stem from the weight of the engine being back so far. On a typical takeoff run with a seaplane, you increase speed to full throttle, bring the airplane up on step, pick up flying speed, and rotate.

With the Seawind the problem is that once you are on step, if you dip a wingtip (Which is fairly likely due to the position of the engine) the plane will auger itself into the water.

Cross-wind takeoffs are just about impossible. I have been sucessful by taking off directly away from myself so I can really see the position of the wings to keep them level. However, one RCU member claims that the way to get excellent results is to start with half-flaps, only apply 3/4 throttle and not let it get on step, but instead, drag the tail in the water on the entire run. He says that it takes a little more room, but he gets airborne every time.

I haven't had a chance to try this yet, but it sounds promising.

It's also advisable to throw away the Automatic Bailer - Mine let more water IN than it let OUT.

I also threw away the landing gear, and beefed up the keel area with some extra fiberglass. Now I can easily take off and land on a grass field with out having to add the wheels. I really enjoy flying this thing off its belly, and with grass, it can't auger in

There's a huge thread in the Seaplanes Forum about it. And here's my review of it with videos:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/a...article_id=723

boingram

Minnflyer,

That's what I have read. This eliminates the Seawind as our lake is pretty small and we have few options for takeoff direction.

I might try the Balsa USA Northstar. I am not fond of the Cub on flaots as most people are doing.

Bo

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I had a Northstar too. It was pretty, but not the most stable plane I've ever flown.

IMO the best all-around plane for water flying is the Seamaster (or the Neptune which is a Seamaster clone that's built stronger)

boingram

...who manufacturers the Neptune?...

...or, if we are really nuts..how anout a twin on floats!

Bo

R/C Foolish

My Feedback: (6)

We are a lot off track but take a look at the Lanier Mariner 40. Put a 61 fx and it flies great. I fly mine off water and snow. With the fiberglass fuse, no water gets inside.

R/C Foolish

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Not sure exactly who it's manufactured by, but here it is:

https://www.quicktechhobby.com/Airpl...eptune_arf.htm

If I didn't already have a Saemaster, I would get one myself. And the day my Seamaster bites the dust, I fully intend to replace it with a Neptune.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Yes, I had the Mariner too. Mine was great with a .46, but I still like the Seamaster better

boingram

Minnflyer...plus, it's a hundred bucks less expensive...Bo

dbrown711

What rpms are your 46s turning with the 11x6 props? Have you measured the thrust? I'm going to my LHS tomorrow, so I want to gather as much 'prop info' as possible. My 310 definately needs more 'balls'. Anyone with good advice on props for the .46fx please chime in.

My setup:

2 OS 46 FX
2 APC 11x7 props
rpm 11,300
pull/thrust 10lbs

MMallory

My Feedback: (1)

A lower pitch should pull more. Try 12x6 and the 11x6 to see which works better.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I have not checked the RPM or thrust.

Next time I break it out I will put a tach on it, but I have no accurate way to measure thrust

dbrown711

Well I don't know how accurate my method is but, I just place the plane on level cement and use a fish scale. It's accurate enough for reference at least.

jetnuno

Hi all....

Never had a reply from anyone regarding my previous post, so I decided to go on my own.

I have made my maiden with the 310. OS .50, BCM mufflers and Graupner 11x6 props. After running in one of the engines I sicronized both engine to a whooping 13.400 rpm. With a 5 point mix in the FF9 made the engines run at same rpm in these points. It flys at arround 1/2 throtle but to take of I needed all full power. This is an heavy one. With landing flaps the plane balloons a lot , maybe because I was going too fast, so at half flaps made a nice landing. I am trying a mixing with 5% up elevator.

It was too hot, so it is not a healthy thing for the engines, but they were ok. I am trying Graupner 12x6 next time. I think these are the best option and maybe I can get arround 11.500 to 12.000 rpm. 10% nitro fuel.

Safe landings everyone....

Nuno

frank99

My Feedback: (29)

forgive us for not helping you, great flight post some pics or vids thanks frank

timothy thompson

My Feedback: (1)

go electric power! flys great no engine out worries

jetnuno

Thanks Frank

Just waiting to cool down a bit. More than 35 celsius degrees.

Thimoty, I have some electric planes, but I like things that take a bit more work than plug and play. I guess I like the thrill to be worried about something, or else I would stick at home playing videogames.

Nuno

skaap2k

I did my first ground testing last weekend, found the plane to have too much momentum on the ground (even on grass) ... have ordered brakes from intairco, OS 55AX's are running super smoothly now with no unexplained engine losses, i have 12x7 props on, which give her really good accelaration. TwinSync is working amazingly, getting the firmware updated before my maiden flight!

timothy thompson

My Feedback: (1)

trust me with e power she is heavy and while not difficult to fly she is interesting. im learning more and more on e flight and am e powering the new tf b-25 run on 8s 8000mah lipos. my 310 is 6s 5000mah each side. i may change this to two batts in the nose over the winter tto cut a pound of weight. no mess or engine out issues

Seinfeld

There has been a lot of discussion on the TopFlite Cessna 310. I have followed the threads on both RCGroups and RCUniverse since the kit came to the market and ever since I saw it at the local hobby shop I wanted one - badly.

However before I could purchase one, I needed to be sure about a few things.

- I needed to know how I would reduce the weight of the plane down and have a ready to fly weight of around 7kgs.
- I needed to power the two motors using just 1 battery pack and pull less than 25A total when cruising around.
- I wanted to use inrunner motors with gearboxes – specifically Hacker because I love the sound they make and from experience are a lot more efficient than outrunners.
- I wanted the plane to be able to fly really slow and scale like without it being unstable ie reduce the wing loading.

With all this in mind I set about researching, experimenting with motors and props and asking questions from those who were building or had built the plane.

Unexpectedly I encountered a lot of negativity and discouragement from fellow modellers when I told them what I wanted to do [:@] . Some of the remarks i got included;

- Don’t remove the lead shot from the nose, it’s there for a reason and it’s too hard to get out
- The plane will be too tail heavy if you take out the lead.
- Outrunners are more efficient
- 16 gauge wire is too thin. You won’t get enough power to the motors
- You can’t run two motors off one battery pack in the nose because the wires to the motors are too long
- You can’t get that much weight down

I found it a battle to try and convince people that it would work and in the end I just kept quiet and did it.

Well, I achieved everything that I had originally set out to do – weight, motors, amps everything. I got every single steel ball bearing weight out of the nose and immediately lightened the airframe by 953g. I reduced the weight further by using carbon fibre rods and making up my own parts from light balsa and aluminum sheets instead of using the very heavy plastic parts in the kit.

This final video is a testament to what was accomplished.

People who see the plane fly ask what did I do, what’s my setup – that’s expected. What I found interesting is that those who didn’t believe me in the beginning don’t say anything – it’s like they have been ‘told’ without me even saying a word.

Some details about my 310 include;

Motors – two Hacker B50S inrunners with planetary gearboxes
ESC – two Hacker Master Spin 66
Main battery – one 6S 4800 mAh Kokams
RX battery – one 2700 mAh NiMH
Lights battery – one 400 mAh NiMH
Props – 15x8E APC
Retracts – Robart air operated
Ready to fly weight – 16.5 lbs
Servos – HS 85MG
Radio equipment – Futaba 14MZ with Spektrum module and 9 channel receiver

7.5 min flight uses 2000 – 2300 mA

I don’t reveal exact details of my motors ie wind and gear ratio. I’m not being rude – I want something about my planes to remain unique and more importantly my setups work for me ONLY because I build my planes to fit around my motors and battery, think about it, – I don't build strictly to the manuals. There are better setups out – trust me.

Besides, you don’t want to have the exact same setup as someone else right?. One of the best traits of electric modeling is that every plane can be different and that’s getting harder to do with the quantum of ARFs on the market.

As this is my last post on this magnificent kit, I hope this video will encourage those who want to try something different and new and have been discouraged by "old school thinking" and maybe, widen the minds of those who in the past, had been quick to argue and refute.

Enjoy and get the plane if you’re in the position of thinking about it!. I have recently installed the retracts and in my opinion, it looks amazing with the wheels up ! - see for yourself

Flying low and slow, day and night, the TopFlite Cessna 310...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyiDtpmfB6c

Tsutomu Mabuchi

My Feedback: (1)

I am ready for assembling the kit.
Is there any building tips including modifications or replacemant.
This thread is so long that I am having difficulty in finding those.
I will use YS63S four stroke and Sierra Precision TF310 retract.
Thank you in advance for your help.

Tsutomu Mabuchi

boingram

Tsutomu,

Please take these comments in a positive manner...

You will spend dozens, if not hundreds, of hours assembling and perfecting this airframe. The financial investment will be substantial.

To take a few hours to study the entire thread with all the valuable information contained therein seems a small investment in time.

Bo

Tsutomu Mabuchi

My Feedback: (1)

Bo,

OK, I'll try again. I had been reading this thread when it started,
but have not recently.
I understand and agree with you. Thanks for positive comment.

Tsutomu Mabuchi

DrDeath

My Feedback: (3)

Very good job M898.

Never let the neysayers get you down.

DD

Seinfeld

thanks DrDeath. Great usename u have - i like it !!

mustang105

My Feedback: (12)

m898,
Another great video. The camera work is as good as the flying. Do you fly with partial flaps? Next video lets see some real scale flying with that 310, maybe an inverted ribbon cut.

Chuck