Nice. And I see that you have learned my way of landing. 😜 Did not expect to see you back at that field. It was a bit surprising to see where you were, when you launched. 😊
Nice to see you at the field again Andrew...That huge VTX was dissapointing in that it had no LC filtering onboard, par for the course it seems...🤔🤔😳🇬🇧
Great flight demonstration Andrew and I really like that FPV view from the tail. I'm looking forward to how this plane will slope and other cool things you will certainly do with it ;-) See you in the Air!
Morning Andrew. if you're going to use long runs of camera cabling, past the motor, ESC, receiver and everything that can cause interference, try running the signal through thin RG174 coax (signal inside, shielding to ground) - costs pennies but makes a world of difference.
I also saw someone use copper foil tape. They wrapped it around their signal wire and it works wonders! I ordered some copper foil tape for myself and will give is a try.
Good to see you flying again! Looks like your original flying field, is it a long drive from your new house to the old field? Also I saw someone use copper foil tape and wrapped it around their video signal wire to help clear up interference and it works wonders so I ordered myself some to give it a try. Happy flying Andrew!!
Was just going to mention that Ground Control RC did add a bit more down thrust to the motor and it seemed to help. [Edit] Just saw that you also saw it.
Oooops, Crash test! 😮 If you were in a gliding club, they would probably say: “Got a bit rusty with no flying over the winter time, Andrew. Please go see the CFI, you need to do a check-ride again”… 😁 Anyway, no harm done, good to see you out flying again! 👍
Thanks Andrew for sharing! It would be interesting to ear how does the AtomRC-Eachine Seal compares to one of your favorite planes, the Volantex Ranger 1600?
I prefer the Ranger 1600 for it's toughness and great flying. The Seal has more internal space and easier access, but it's not as efficient as the Ranger
@@AndrewNewton thank for aswer. I was also interested in this question. Only I am looking at the Ranger 2000 which is cheaper anyway to The Seal price.
Good to see this particular plane in the air, it looks and obviously is very stable. I have a question would a 3s power pack provide sufficient power I ask because I have loads of those but no 4s packs. Great to see you in the air again.
Very nice. Seems a bit like a cross between the Bixler and the Ranger. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts after testing the Eachine Seal's soaring abilities. Hopefully the ESC allows setting of motor brake. For better CoG, perhaps 2x 4s, or 4s2p lithium-ion? Would allow to fly for an hour or more!
Andrew: Did I hear you say that the Seal is like the Bix 2? My club needs to buy some easy-flying, floaty, pushers. We found the Bix 3 planes to be prone to tip stalls without flaps (I need to test one WITH flaps soon), when trying to turn at slow speeds. My memory tells me that others have viewed the Bix2 planes as easy fliers, floaty, without bad flying characteristics. Do you agree? Have you completed your move yet? Keep em coming! Jim
Thanks for the video, Andrew. I was interested that you mentioned this plane would be ideal for beginners. Hmm... How times change. As an old-school aeromodeller I still think it's 'wrong' [personal opinion only!] that full-house has become the default set-up for planes. Wings are cut from thin foam, and carbon-fibre spars are flat, so dihedral is difficult to incorporate. If a beginner's model is too twitchy, flight control boards or gyros or whatever are easily obtainable. But a plane with ailerons and no dihedral needs extra attention. Neutral stability isn't always desirable; not every situation calls for extreme manoeuvrability. A properly set-up plane doesn't need ailerons and will fly perfectly well without them. But... having 4 active channels is more grown-up. More manly. 'Real' pilots NEED ailerons; only little kids don't use all of the controls all of the time, so we see planes like this, which would still fly superbly with a few degrees of dihedral and just rudder and elevator [and throttle]. As a camera platform, a bit of hands-off stability would be a good thing, but dihedral is now apparently taboo. I presume that's because it's cheaper to make flat wings for flat carbon spars, but today's modellers are missing out on a whole world of relaxed flying by opting for ailerons. You could easily replace the flat carbon wing joiner with a bit of bent piano wire. Weight gain would be negligible. I wonder if people who haven't done much basic modelling are put off rudder and elevator set-ups after trying to fly their flat-winged aileron models on rudder and elevator alone (just to see what happens), and being disappointed by the poor response and handling. Well, give the wing an inch of dihedral under each tip and try again. It'll fly beautifully AND still respond to ailerons, should you choose to use them. Yes, it will. The bonus is that the plane will be even more stable and forgiving, especially near the stall. That's nice for beginners AND for experts using cameras, because it'll give them smoother video footage. It's a pity that the commercial convenience of using straight carbon-fibre spars has resulted in so many models with flat plank wings. A bit of dihedral won't hurt, even if you're into extreme 3-D aerobatics, and it makes ordinary 'stooging about' flying so much more pleasurable. Also, flat wings look cheap and crude and ugly and should all be destroyed with hammers. 😲 (Whoops, sorry, got a bit carried away at the end...)
The turned up wingtips give the same polyhedral effect that dihedral would, and all the "bixler type" pushers can be flown around perfectly well with just throttle, rudder and elevator. BTW, "full house" would include flaps, which are not present here
Yes, a bit more manufacturing required for dihedral joiners I guess. This is more a model that could be used by beginners, rather than specifically designed for beginners.
Very nice maiden, good to see some one that knows how to maiden a pusher glider, this looks a great plane but proving a little expensive
Nice. And I see that you have learned my way of landing. 😜
Did not expect to see you back at that field. It was a bit surprising to see where you were, when you launched. 😊
Great to see you back in you're natural environment Andrew !! Nice one
Been 3 months! It was nice to be back there
Thanks for the vid Mr. Newton! I also really appreciate you showin' the crash, even a master like you still crashes just like us newbies!
No problem. We lean more from our crashes
Well done #1. Great to see you again!
Nice to see you at the field again Andrew...That huge VTX was dissapointing in that it had no LC filtering onboard, par for the course it seems...🤔🤔😳🇬🇧
I was seeing lines even at zero throttle
@@AndrewNewtonMakes you wonder when you realise how simple an LC filter is. A big ass VTX but no filter onboard...again..🤨🤔
Have a happy long life with good health and long flights mate👍
Many thanks, same to you
Great flight demonstration Andrew and I really like that FPV view from the tail. I'm looking forward to how this plane will slope and other cool things you will certainly do with it ;-) See you in the Air!
A few of your tweaks will improve it
@@AndrewNewton Thank you much Andrew and for the mention. I was very humbled by that and it made my week ;-)
Good seeing you back Andrew, winter is over :-D Looks like your old flying grounds there.
Cheers and thanks!
Correct. Here for a few more weeks
Thanks Andrew!
Morning Andrew. if you're going to use long runs of camera cabling, past the motor, ESC, receiver and everything that can cause interference, try running the signal through thin RG174 coax (signal inside, shielding to ground) - costs pennies but makes a world of difference.
I also saw someone use copper foil tape. They wrapped it around their signal wire and it works wonders! I ordered some copper foil tape for myself and will give is a try.
Great tip thanks. I'll try that.
Are you back in the same spot Andrew. Ground looks a lot dryer there.
Still here for a month
great to see you flying again.
Thanks mate. Nice to be out again
Good to see you flying again! Looks like your original flying field, is it a long drive from your new house to the old field? Also I saw someone use copper foil tape and wrapped it around their video signal wire to help clear up interference and it works wonders so I ordered myself some to give it a try. Happy flying Andrew!!
Haven't moved yet. Still have another month here.
I like ya new rug mate..
Also that is exactly how I land at times even after 3 years flyin!!!
Hope all is well??
Neoprene picnic rug is sweet. But I need to get another little blue tarp
@@AndrewNewton: Especially if you are back at ya old swamp mate!!
Thanks for crash testing it too! It seems like a great flying plane and durable too.
A little more down angle on the motor and more aileron differential will improve it I think
@@AndrewNewton please can you explain alerion differential?
Was just going to mention that Ground Control RC did add a bit more down thrust to the motor and it seemed to help. [Edit] Just saw that you also saw it.
He has done a great series of reviews on the Seal
Ranger 1600 has more space inside + the strong plastic fuselage. Thanks for the Ranger 1600 video, because I bought one.
Good choice
@@AndrewNewton Cheers.
Oooops, Crash test! 😮
If you were in a gliding club, they would probably say: “Got a bit rusty with no flying over the winter time, Andrew. Please go see the CFI, you need to do a check-ride again”… 😁
Anyway, no harm done, good to see you out flying again! 👍
Definitely need some supervision after 3 months off
Thanks Andrew for sharing! It would be interesting to ear how does the AtomRC-Eachine Seal compares to one of your favorite planes, the Volantex Ranger 1600?
Good question I have a ranger 1600 and would like to know the difference in characteristics.
I prefer the Ranger 1600 for it's toughness and great flying. The Seal has more internal space and easier access, but it's not as efficient as the Ranger
@@AndrewNewton thank for aswer. I was also interested in this question. Only I am looking at the Ranger 2000 which is cheaper anyway to The Seal price.
Ranger 2000, also a favourite of mine.
@@AndrewNewton ranger or raptor better?
Good to see this particular plane in the air, it looks and obviously is very stable. I have a question would a 3s power pack provide sufficient power I ask because I have loads of those but no 4s packs. Great to see you in the air again.
Yes 3S would work OK as it is. Even better with an 8x6 prop
@@AndrewNewton thank you. I will take your advice and use 8x6 prop.
Great video. Would like to see how you address the interference.
Most likely use a flight control board for the OSD and RTH. That will have filtering included.
Andrew did you use any spacers on the motor to change the angle? If so would it be the top two screws?
Bottom screws
What's the most easy to fly? This? Raptor? Mini skywalker? Skysurfer? Xbird 800?
Skysurfer or Bixler
Very nice. Seems a bit like a cross between the Bixler and the Ranger.
Would be interesting to hear your thoughts after testing the Eachine Seal's soaring abilities.
Hopefully the ESC allows setting of motor brake.
For better CoG, perhaps 2x 4s, or 4s2p lithium-ion? Would allow to fly for an hour or more!
They all have merits. Bix - easiest to fly, Ranger - toughest, Seal - internal space and access. Would make a good video thanks
@@AndrewNewton Great answer. 😃
Sonicmodell Skyhunter Mini vs AtomRC Eachine Seal for beginner?
Bixler 2
AXN cloud sky awesome too for beginner.
Trying to find your clip on putting a 2m skysurfer wing on the Raptor body. Main point, was it easy to do, I keep looking till I hit gold
I think the video title is Cloud Raptor. Should show up in a search
Relaxing looking flyer, Just for fun :-))
Yes, but mostly aimed at FPV. Would probably float OK on the lake!
Hi Andrew, did you ever sort the esc brake? i cant any info on the included esc. Cheers!
Cant remember sorry. Try one of the methods in my ESC video. ruclips.net/user/AndrewNewtonAustraliasearch?query=ESC
Andrew:
Did I hear you say that the Seal is like the Bix 2? My club needs to buy some easy-flying, floaty, pushers. We found the Bix 3 planes to be prone to tip stalls without flaps (I need to test one WITH flaps soon), when trying to turn at slow speeds.
My memory tells me that others have viewed the Bix2 planes as easy fliers, floaty, without bad flying characteristics.
Do you agree?
Have you completed your move yet?
Keep em coming!
Jim
Bix 2 is the best flier, best for beginners and very cheap for the kit. Cant be beaten.
For $79 for the kit. Should I pull the trigger or spend a bit more for the Ranger by volantex
For me the ranger is the best. Can use 1600 or 2000 wings. The seal is OK but the ranger is tougher
Nice plane 👍
Indeed!
Thanks for the video, Andrew. I was interested that you mentioned this plane would be ideal for beginners. Hmm...
How times change. As an old-school aeromodeller I still think it's 'wrong' [personal opinion only!] that full-house has become the default set-up for planes. Wings are cut from thin foam, and carbon-fibre spars are flat, so dihedral is difficult to incorporate. If a beginner's model is too twitchy, flight control boards or gyros or whatever are easily obtainable.
But a plane with ailerons and no dihedral needs extra attention. Neutral stability isn't always desirable; not every situation calls for extreme manoeuvrability. A properly set-up plane doesn't need ailerons and will fly perfectly well without them.
But... having 4 active channels is more grown-up. More manly. 'Real' pilots NEED ailerons; only little kids don't use all of the controls all of the time, so we see planes like this, which would still fly superbly with a few degrees of dihedral and just rudder and elevator [and throttle].
As a camera platform, a bit of hands-off stability would be a good thing, but dihedral is now apparently taboo. I presume that's because it's cheaper to make flat wings for flat carbon spars, but today's modellers are missing out on a whole world of relaxed flying by opting for ailerons. You could easily replace the flat carbon wing joiner with a bit of bent piano wire. Weight gain would be negligible.
I wonder if people who haven't done much basic modelling are put off rudder and elevator set-ups after trying to fly their flat-winged aileron models on rudder and elevator alone (just to see what happens), and being disappointed by the poor response and handling.
Well, give the wing an inch of dihedral under each tip and try again.
It'll fly beautifully AND still respond to ailerons, should you choose to use them. Yes, it will. The bonus is that the plane will be even more stable and forgiving, especially near the stall. That's nice for beginners AND for experts using cameras, because it'll give them smoother video footage.
It's a pity that the commercial convenience of using straight carbon-fibre spars has resulted in so many models with flat plank wings. A bit of dihedral won't hurt, even if you're into extreme 3-D aerobatics, and it makes ordinary 'stooging about' flying so much more pleasurable.
Also, flat wings look cheap and crude and ugly and should all be destroyed with hammers. 😲 (Whoops, sorry, got a bit carried away at the end...)
The turned up wingtips give the same polyhedral effect that dihedral would, and all the "bixler type" pushers can be flown around perfectly well with just throttle, rudder and elevator. BTW, "full house" would include flaps, which are not present here
Yes, a bit more manufacturing required for dihedral joiners I guess. This is more a model that could be used by beginners, rather than specifically designed for beginners.
nice job : )
Thanks!
Finally
👍👍
✌✌
🔥💕😍👍
Crash tests are good it shows me what not to do. LOL
Haha, happy to oblige
That's the usual field. I thought you were moving somewhere far.
In the process of moving. Here for another month