mobi

Looking for people who have built this kit. What modifications and suggestions will improve performance and quality of build? Also I'm wide open for power. Any suggestions?

Thanks

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Don'y use less than a 1.6 2 stroke. You can run up to a 2.4 or 2.8 gas. Build it so at least one of the servos can go in the tail, preferably two.

I doubled the ply at the fuselage cabane mounts. You may want to extend the tank floor depending on the engine. Plan your engine installation carefully to get the correct distance from the engine mounting box to the front of the cowl. I added solid balsa between the spars at the upper wing center section and shear webbed over it to give a little better compression strength. Make the spar cuts carefully at the center section.. Measure 3 times and cut once.

The supplied PVC cowl is a POS. Give Stans' FiberTech a call for one of his. Wheelpants too if you're thinking about it.

You will have to design a cover to close up the opening where the landing gear mounts. It's not hard, just a nuisance. Try to make it removable.

Check the wood carefully. A lot of the stick balsa in the pair I built was warped and twisted pretty bad and had to be repaced.

There was an update on the c/g a year or so back. The booklet calls for a 1" aft of lower leading edge. It was changed to 1' up to 1-1/2" aft of lower leading edge. I think you find the update on the Lanier website. You can go more safely if you need to.

I used only two servos for the ailerons, mounted in the bottom wing, at the bottom side, and slaved to the top. There is no need for 4 aileron servos. 75 oz. in. servos or better will be fine.

It's an excellent flying bipe, better than a Pitts, and possibly better than an Ultimate. Set up right with weight and C/G, it will land slow and soft. It even will have a fairly decent power off glide compared to most bipes. If you want to 3D with it, you will have to extend the ailerons in closer to the fuselage to get into the prop blast. If you don't, leave them alone. It's got one heck of a roll rate.

mobi

Thanks for the speedy reply.

I already got some input from some local guys and your points seem to duplicate theirs. I can't see anything less than a gasser in this plane. It will be my first gasser but it seems as if this plane demands one. Gasser are the way to go anyway considering the price of glow fuel and the new performance curves of new gassers.

I have inspected the kit and see that some of the components will have to be exchanged out. I plan on contacting the manufacture to voice my discontent.

I also agree that the cowl is a POS and will replace with something appropriate.

The CG seems to be a point of contention and I will get into it when I move the servos to the tail (as everyone is suggesting.) It seems as the CG is critical for slow landings?

I've seen a lot of bipes around and have always wanted one. It looks its going to be different but an enjoyable build.

Don't be surprised if you get a few more questions! The better the input the better the output!


Thanks for the help,

Ted

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

The questions will be welcomed. Some of my answers may differ from some others, but I've been building for a long, long time. That doesn't mean that I'm closed to better ways, but some methods never change. Just the materials used.

I'm not going to say that you need an aft c/g for good landings. What I will say is that the c/g noted in the manual was mis-calculated, or deliberately kept forward to make the plane extra stable (read as nose heavy) for those relatively new to flying. The plane is easy to fly, and one heck of a performer. As far as landings in general are concerned, if you take a look around, the nose heavy planes always come in fast and/or steep. They have to for the elevator to remain effective.

When you voice your opinions to Lanier, let me know if you ever get a reply. I'm still waiting, and it's been a couple of years now.

Give a shout when you need or want to. Use the pm method to assure that I see the post.

Pat

chasrb

I have just finished my Ultimate Pitts and did some mods as well. I placed a digital servo in the tail rather than use the pull-pull setup, I put in a FEMA on-board starter for the Saitio 180 I put in the plane, I ordered a custom TNT landing gear setup - went to 3/16" an 1" wider stance and an 1" forward sweep to place the cg of the landing gear under the firewall. Yes get rid of all the ABS and go to Stans for the cowl and pants. I chose not to use the upper faring on the landing gear. The plane I followed for the scheme did not have them. I also set up a header tank config to reduce any fuel foam problems and to add an add'l 4 oz to my 16 oz tanks set up. I had to reduce the size of my fuel tank because of the FEMA setup in the engine box.

I have posted pics in the Giant form post number 27.

I can't wait to fly this thing...

chas

Skymac

My Feedback: (8)

Heres some chat about the Ultimate Pitts and Engines.


[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_1286140/anchors_1286140/mpage_1/key_lanier%252Cultimate%252Cpitts/anchor/tm.htm#1286140]http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_1286140/anchors_1286140/mpage_1/key_lanier%252Cultimate%252Cpitts/anchor/tm.htm#1286140[/link]

mobi

I'm well on my way to finishing my Ultimate!

I can say that for the most part I am very happy with the Kit and how it builds. The parts fit very well and after replacing some of the sheeting (which Lanier did not replace) I am more than happy. The only down side to the kit are some poor pictures and some ambiguous instructions. I can't believe for the length of time this kit has been in production that someone at Lainer would'nt have done a little proof reading. A few corrections would save a lot of time and aggravation. I'm sure they have been told about the problems. A couple of different views on the plans could also help. Well thats enough *****ing!

I'm to the point of construction where I need to finalize my power plant. I can't finish the engine box and get the servos and controls mounted so the CG winds up in the right place.

I'm heavily looking at an RCS 180 for power. What do you think? Second the the 180 comes three ways: Rear induction / side exhaust; Rear induction /rear exhaust; or Front induction side exhaust. Which is the best choice? Also is there a preferred installations on how to mount the engine? On it side or inverted? Which engine for which mounting position? The plans show the engine on its side? I'm leaning that way.

I think I've given it to much thought. I need someone to give me some ideas and suggestions.

I just noticed the Rep from RCS Showcase recommends using the RCS Roto 35! Any body have any comments on that baby?

Ted

rc-sport

My Feedback: (12)

mobi, i'm also going to be building this plane soon. I was thinking about the RCS 180, almost ordered it as a matter of fact. I contacted RC Showcase for advice and they recommended that I move up to Roto 35 instead. So that's what I plan on using.

v-snap

My Feedback: (18)

I had a brison 2.4 and all servos in rear on mine, it balanced right at the factory 1"..I slowly moved the receiver and battery rearward to acheive the CG I wanted.
This plane flew great, and all. I did not double the ply at the cabanes without problems..I did break a few upper wing aluminum mounts in the center of the cabane.'

This plane ended up snapping in from about 30' when a friend turned his TX on without thinking.. the structure at the cabane mount stayed intact so I don't think that is needed.

I will be getting another to replace it soon...

Scott

mobi

Thanks for the reply v-snap,

It appears that I will not be over powered with the 180. The 2.4 must have given you all the response you needed.

I see a lot of guys are using Brison. I assume you like it? I may have to take another look around before investing. This will be my first large plane and gas. Considering the price of glow fuel gas it seems the logical way to go?

rc-sport

My Feedback: (12)

mobi, I was going to go the Saito 180 route myself but then I remembered how much it cost to keep my last 180 flying, so I elected to go gas.

martyg

My Feedback: (42)

I'm about to start this plane too, after finishing up a couple of minor repair jobs.
I'm planning on a Brison 2.4 for mine.

For you builders who haven't found this yet, a fellow modeller from Canada put up a bunch of pictures from his building of this plane. Good stuff to look at before starting.

Here's the [link=http://s87679533.onlinehome.us/Inside%20the%20Hangar.htm]link[/link].

rc-sport

My Feedback: (12)

I saw that link but he didn't finish it []

v-snap

My Feedback: (18)

Yea the Brison has been good to me, including the service dept. It really pulled this plane hard and was quite fun to fly it with.

Good luck with yours,

beachflier

I to have one of these kits waiting to be built. I am planning on putting an MDS 2.18 in mine. I am not a big fan of MDS engines but my LHS was getting away from the MDS line and I got it for $110.

mobi

The MDS sounds like a great deal. I'm sure it was hard to pass up! The only thing I question is its overall reliability.

I know by the time I'm finished I'll have at least 200 hours of time, 500 bucks in the airframe, and a thousand or more into power and electronics. Sinking that kind of money in a new plane makes me want to have a little more reliability under the hood! Since you got a great deal on the MDS and you said your "not a big fan of MDS engines!" you might want to consider selling off the MDS and using the profits to upgrade to something a little more reliable and last you a lifetime.

From what I have heard these babies come out of the air like a rock!

Just an idea EH!

Taildrager-inactive

My Feedback: (11)

I have this kit also for a winter project. Have a Moki 2.1 that would work but the fuel cost and glow goo almost have me convinced to go with gas. Was the stock landing gear ok with the 20" prop using the Brison 2.4? What inch oz servos did you on the controll serfaces. Also what CG did you end up with if the instructions are wrong.

rc-sport

My Feedback: (12)

Taildragger, I heard the stock gear is soft and that TNT has a replacement. I plan on getting it.

v-snap

My Feedback: (18)

Yea the gear is soft..If going with the gas engines stiffining is needed.. I added a couple 2-56 wires, one either side with a spring from the axle mount to one of the gear bolts. Just get acouple of springs for diffrent tensions (pull) and that worked great..

Redrata

My Feedback: (3)

Hi Mobi, I have the Ultimate, actually is my best flying bipe, not bad tendencies. The kit is laser cut, it was a great experience to built it. I am using a DZ in this one, the power is great, it lands very slow. I am going to replace the DZ for a Saito 180, I need better fuel economy, I would like to fly it more often.

mobi

RC Sport

Based on the number of custom gear on the market today tells me most kits come with crap for gear. They all seem to have to be upgraded. The Ultimate seems to fall in the same category!

There's something wrong when you pay 200 bucks for a kit and then pay half again to put decent landing gear on.

Therefore, since I can't see the money they want for custom gear I’ve decided to try building my own. I just finished building a mold for carbon fiber gear for a four star 60 I built this last winter. I’ll probably order material from the Composite Store today. If everything works out I’ll make another mold for the Ultimate. Since making the mold is the majority of the work I would be more than happy making a second pair if you’re interested.

I estimate the cost of mold to be about 3 dollars, and the resin and carbon fibers to build them in the twenty-dollar range!! Even cheaper if I order material in a reasonable quantity. Its far better than 80 bucks!

Ted

mobi

Youre plane looks great!
What did you cover it with. and what does yours weigh?

Redrata

My Feedback: (3)

Mobi: I forgot to mention that I am using the Midwest Super Stinker LG, which is two piece aluminum, thicker and stronger than the stock. It cost me around 20 bucks (dont remember exactly). My Ultimate is covered with metallic red wine and jet white monokote, it looks good in the sky, no way to miss it... Thank you for your compliments. The model is around 11,7 lbs, but you can add or take something because I dont have a precise balance (bathroom´s balance shows around 5300 grs). It is very light, so I enjoy pretty nice soft landings. I dont need to have any servos at the tail . All are up front.
During winter I am going to replace the DZ for a Saito 180 (already have one) or for the new 3w 28 i engine. I just bought one (from Cactus Aviation) selling the YS140 DZ. This new gasser is only 1200grs and it promises a lot of torque. It could be a very nice option, I guess that is good for any plane around 12 lbs that calls for a light engine. Take a look at Cactus, it is definitely, another option (is 95 dollars more than a Saito 180, but on the other hand it means no glo fuel costs).

Redrata

My Feedback: (3)

Could any of you would give me a hand and tell me were the CG is located?????? I have changed today the DZ for a Saito 180 and I can´t find the manual. I have also installed a new perry V30 pump and it does work fine, the engine gets truly rich at high throttle settings . Hoping to test it on Saturday. Help please.

beachflier

Redrata,

Here is what is in the manual.