RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Digital servos would be nice, but I don't see where they are a MUST HAVE. I'm flying mine with JR Sport servos!

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Thanks G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Dasintex, I'm flying with OS .52 Four strokers, 11 ounce H-9 fuel tanks. Work's "peachy". Also added a rear strut to the mains. That stiffened them up. Plus dual nose wheels too. Tinted the inside of the windows, looks better. Three blade prop and spinners work fine for scale flying. nto the next. MM

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I've been flying trainers for about 2 years. I can do basic aerobatics. I'm ready to go to something else. I love the looks of this plane. I considered the Twinstar as my next plane but too many experienced pilots said the twinstar was too big of a leap from trainers. I was told the Twinstar could be difficult to land. Is this plane easier to fly and land than the Twinstar?? I'd love to fly a twin but I haven't lost my mind yet.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I don’t know about digital servos for this airplane. I use Futaba 3004, the movements and torque on the control surfaces are not large. I see no reason for a higher servo. The upgrade I did for the servos was the battery – 6V.

Jimmy, do I understand you right – you canceled the project? I have my new retracts and it will be tricky to install the nose one. There will be a door to “seal” the nose wheel. The wing ones will be very close to the fuselage.
Right now I have to finish my P51 D. One wing left to cover and then put everything together, this will take this week. Maybe I can start on this the coming weekend.
If you have pictures – let’s see! thanks

Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Well, just look around and count how many twins you see on your field. Twins are well known for their short lifespan. I don’t want scare you, but if you look into the twins – you should have some lowing experience, especially with fast ones.
My buddy build a Twin Star right now – if you can wait I could give you some insight look of this airplane. He flies a Nextstar for a year and a Seagull PC 9 - he put OS .40 in this plane...

The Twin Star is a way smaller airframe and weight pretty much the half. I have to mention she flies at the simulator pretty good.
Most comments about the Twin Star are positive and if you not fail and panic – you can fly here around with one engine and safe land. In the first minute you will not even notice you lost an engine – your speed just drops.
Here is a [link=http://www.rcgroups.com/links/index.php?id=4790]LINK[/link] about the twin star
Good luck to you Caboose, I hope your plane do not make caboom!;)


Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

G-Pete:

Yes,am not going to install retracts...The part of the Rhom -air retracts that fits down into the wing. is too long...Maybe the ones you're getting the body is smaller.....Just be careful when you start cutting the wood..have mine all repaired now...Just have to put on the bottom sheeting....Don't know how to put pics on here (The ones I took with my digital camera)...just give me your e-mail address and I'll send you some..Just watched your video that showed your engines running...Man,what a sound...I think they are broken in :-))...........

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Jimmy,
Just too sad you had to cancel your project. I sent you an PM with my e-mail address. Yesterday I tried slower landings --- that’s a no no. She will drop a wing very fast, if you don’t keep the speed up. The low rates on the elevator are too low for the landing approaches. If you try to flair the plane the elevator input is to small for touchdowns on the main gear. The angle of attack would be also bigger, so the plane slows nicely down. Today I try the high rates on the elevators…

Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Got mine today,....everythings good,..no damage....looks great..
Glad I've got you guys experience to follow in the assembling process.
G-Pete..took your advice..picked up a couple Sullivan 10 .oz flex fuel tanks...test fitted them already...perfect fit...
Can't wait to get started on this and get this plane in the air.

George

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I just finished my Seagull Dual Ace with 2 Evo .46's and it's on charge for a test flight tomorrow.

I did add 10 ounces to the nose for balance. I'm going to test it that way, then start pulling some out to see what happens.

In my opinion, the instructions leave a lot to be desired. Some steps are pictures with no words. Some areas are totally left out like gluing on the ply washers on the holes for the wing bolts.

Pretty nice hardware as ARF's go. The spinners don't look like they will last.

There is a long, unsupported run for the rudder pushrod. If you have to hold right rudder, you might not get much against air loading. If the plane flies well, I think I'll look into changing to pull-pull with cables. They'll be lighter in the rear and much more positive.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Good luck with your maiden flight Ed.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

This support info has been on Horizon's site for a while now:

Dual Ace 46 Twin ARF Team Tips
Mounting the Nacelle

I found it easiest to mount the nacelle by first cutting the engine openings as stated in the manual, then I installed the bottom half of the nacelle with 2 screws on the wing, one screw in one of the front screw locations on the wing and one screw in the back of the nacelle on the wing, making sure that the front of the nacelle lines up with the spinner. I then installed the plywood strap/nose ring, which holds the 2 halves together in the front of the nacelle as shown in the pictures. Then I installed the remainder of the screws in the top and bottom half of the nacelles on the wing keeping the front of the nacelle lined up with the spinner, followed by a couple screws on each side going into the ply of the motor box holding the 2 nacelle halves together. Be sure if you drill holes for the screws on the side that you do not puncture or damage your fuel tank.



Balancing

The proper CG range is 80-95 cm from the leading edge of the wing at the fuselage. This is roughly 3 1/8" to 3 3/4". To achieve this CG, this model required roughly 10 ounces of weight in the front of the cowl, with the battery placed as far forward as it will go inside the fuselage. Be sure that your CG is within the CG range for proper flight performance.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

That reads like how I did mine. The same for the 10 ounces, although I have mine inside the fuselage.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I got one test flight in today because it was windy, 15-18 kts and gloomy, cloudy, threatening rain.

Since I was doing a kit review, I played novice with the 2 Evo .46's and installed them out of the box, no break-in, no tuning in the driveway, just crank, give a quick tune and fly. Each cranked with 1 back flip-I have witnesses. One flip each. I leaned them out. I didn't touch the low end. I taxied out, took off and flew. Take off was smooth without any woopsies. I have this tendency to put in 3D controls so my test take offs, at times, can be exciting. Excellent flight. My ailerons were a little sensitive. I put in all the throw I could get and got interrupted and forgot to set any expo so I wiggled the wings at times. Landing was nice. I taxied back in with both Evos still turning. This was my first use of the Evo .46 in a twin and right now I am impressed.

My plane came out at 11 lbs 15.6 ounces, say 12 pounds.

Tomorrow, I want to try some acro and then during the week, I'll take some lead out. I think I'll also ditch the Master Airscrew 11-6 props for some APC 11-5's and kick the speed up a little.

The red spinners have to go. I also think I'll paint the nacelles blue to match the wing. Ultracote doesn't have paint to match the turquoise.

I like the plane. Barring any unexpected mishaps, I'll have it at Multis Over McDonough and hope to see some of you there.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Glad your maiden flight went well Ed....couple more days mine will be ready for flight.

George

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Hey Ed, I am pretty sure I read somewhere (RC Report maybe?) that the Evolution engines are actually broken-in at the factory before they are boxed. Probably explains why they run out of the box.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I agree with you, Ed, the red spinners are an insult to this beautiful model. They really stick out in the air. Mine made it's debut today on a mild wind and blue sky day, flew great much to the delight of an anticipating crowd. I also agree with the APC props. I'm running twin OS .46 AX engines (with Top Flight wood 11x6 props today). The OS's tached at 10,500 (using 10% fuel) on the first flight (I had run them on the ground twice for about 5 min each time). Second flight, we cracked the RPM up to about 11,500. Roll rate on recommended high rate is impressive. Low fly bys are astounding except, as we said, for the red spinners. I'm running the stock tanks but plan to go to the 10 oz flex tanks for more run time. I use flaperons and I think it needs a little more flap to slow it down. I have rates on rudder and it needs high rate for landing ground steering. Our runway is only 30 feet wide. I had trouble turning it around on low rudder rate. I put a couple of trim stripes on the nacelles to break up the bland look. They really need dressing up a bit. This bird really needs retracts. I'm sure I will retrofit some in soon.

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Well, add me to the list of happy fliers. Maidened mine just "peachy". Three bladers just fly it at 4500 feet altitude so we'll go back to APC's standards. VERY NICE INDEED ! :D. Seeya, MM

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I don’t know what they do but they not run the engine. There is no residue anywhere, even in the exhaust. My guess is they run them without the glow plug with and high grade oil to break the edges of the casts and machining. My experience with the Evolution engines is, after a while and not run right away full throttle for long time – the run better. Everyone else has problems after a period of idling – the engine hesitates or dies after you give some throttle.
This is the major experience here with the Evo’s .45, .46 and .61. Other then that, they run fine.

Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

How big of a prop will fit this model? Reason I ask, is I am thinking of converting to e-power, and the motors I would use, since I have two on hand, normally use a 15" prop. I can go 3 blade and maybe reduce that to a 13" or 14". Extending LG is easy, but nacelle spacing is another matter altogether. Those using 12" props, how close to fuse are you?

thanks,
David

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

David,

There is plenty space between the engine and fuselage and I think a 14 inch would fit. I will measure tonight the distance between the shaft and the fuselage.
I have 12 inch props, and I had to get 3inch wheels to clear the props for our rough field.

E-Power, the only problem which I see is the amount of weight you have to add in the nose. You could pack the nose full of batteries and stay up for an hour or so…just kidding.:D
But serious, what do you think doing about the weight issue? :eek:

Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I need some ideas. I am using two O.S. 46's on the Ace and I am having a tough time working out the linkage from the throttle servo to the throttle. Perhaps I am going brain dead in my old age but I just can't seem to get a workable linkage going. How about sharing some ideas with me on how some of you did the trick.

TIA

John

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Here is what I did, my engines are a little bit bigger (OS .60) but the linkage and throttle position in relation to the nacelles are the same.
Hope this helps…

Happy landings[sm=thumbup.gif]
G-Pete
http://photos.imageevent.com/germanp...e/DSC08387.JPG
http://photos.imageevent.com/germanp...e/DSC08389.JPG

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

Jfail1,

I am also using OS 46's in my Dual Ace. I switched my stock throttle linkages out and added two dubro cable linkages that I resurrected from my rc boating days and they give enough bendability, if that is a word, and worked perfectly in mine. They are available from your LHD. I was having trouble with the way that the stock linkage and the way it had to bend to get to the control surface of the servo too. Sorry there is no pictures.

Hope this helps!

:)

RE: Seagull's "Dual Ace"
 

I measured 8 1/2" from the crankshaft to the fuselage, but only 6 1/4" from the crank to the goround. There is plenty of fuselage clearance for a larger prop, but you'll need larger wheels and/or a longer gear.