RE: 40 pitts structural problem

RE: 40 pitts structural problem
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> ARF or RTF >> NitroModels Support >> RE: 40 pitts structural problem

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 2/10/2007 7:50:45 AM

kamikazejoe

Posts: 16
Joined: 12/11/2006
From: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: yamahaexpress

The mini servo just sqeezes in. No way a regular servo will fit.

Thanks will HS 81 work ?

(in reply to yamahaexpress)

Post #: 26

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/1/2007 3:34:08 AM

bkrfrmhell

Posts: 85
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Tofield, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

If its a mini it will fit, just make sure it has enough torque, it is running 2 ailerons.

(in reply to kamikazejoe)

Post #: 27

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/21/2007 12:39:12 PM

Crashtruk

Posts: 126
Joined: 11/29/2004
From: Brisbane RAMAC, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline

I maidened my Pitts the other day. Grass strip. came in a little hot (not alot) Undercarridge block had virtually no glue. Gear ripped off (still attached to block), plane nosed over, cartwheeled and got pretty messed up. Beef up yer gear blocks. There ain't much holding them in. This was entirely my own fault. A, I should have landed slower and b, I should have checked the gear block before flying. Will repair and fly again....soon

_____________________________

If God had wanted us to fly, he would have given us more money!

(in reply to bkrfrmhell)

Post #: 28

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/21/2007 1:25:05 PM

opjose

Posts: 5830
Joined: 11/26/2005
From: Poolesville, MD, USA
Status: offline

Yup, sound advice for any model from any manufacturer!

Why does EVERY manufacturer insist on saving weight in this important area?

A beefier block will earn many kudos.

_____________________________

-
Build em'', fly em'', crash em'' and build more.

(in reply to Crashtruk)

Post #: 29

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/21/2007 5:07:34 PM

kamikazejoe88

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/21/2007
From: India, INDIA
Status: offline

Hi there,
Here is my update for the Pitts too. I had my test flight last week and it was beautiful , very peaceful flier. I have powered it with a os70 4 stroke and it balances the plane at 3.1" from the LE of the top wing.

My Ailerons are at 50% throw so its not twitchy and flick dual rates for a sweet roll. The plane will not knife edge without a lot of aileron mixing so dint get to try that

The os70 is ideal power for it and not too powerful. The plane has ok sink rate and will land slowly and smooth. I also had a dead stick and knocked the LG out taking the support out from the fuse. I guess if it had been stronger then it would have broken it. The LG does not flex backwards so it pulled it out.

Also a major mod I had to do was to have to reduce the length of the cabane struts by about 10mm ... yes i had to cut them and drill them again as the present length if put just wouldnt fit. I am surprised as i did not hear anyone else needing to do this mod.

Other than that I would say this is a BEAUTIFUL PLANE. GET IT and enjoy

Cheers
KJ

(in reply to opjose)

Post #: 30

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/21/2007 6:09:26 PM

opjose

Posts: 5830
Joined: 11/26/2005
From: Poolesville, MD, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kamikazejoe88

My Ailerons are at 50% throw so its not twitchy and flick dual rates for a sweet roll. The plane will not knife edge without a lot of aileron mixing so dint get to try that

Out of curiosity what servos did you use for the ailerons?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kamikazejoe88

Also a major mod I had to do was to have to reduce the length of the cabane struts by about 10mm ... yes i had to cut them and drill them again as the present length if put just wouldnt fit. I am surprised as i did not hear anyone else needing to do this mod.

I ran into this, but I found that all I had to do was move the struts out to about 1/8" of the edge the hardwood support in the fuselage.

This with a tiny bit of bending, of the carbanes, fixed the height difference.

In other words I made the struts slightly "wider" and thereby lower to account for the difference.

I haven't maidened my plane yet.

Mine is powered by a T.H. .46 2 stroker using a Bison Pitts Muffler.

With an 11x6 this engine HAULS on my Ultimate 40S, so I was considering putting on a 13x4 prop on this plane to slow it down a bit.

I also ended up NOT inserting a spacer for the wing struts.

Rather I installed them as is, then I used thin CA on the base of the strut supports to harden them in their new canted position.

This worked rather well.

_____________________________

-
Build em'', fly em'', crash em'' and build more.

(in reply to kamikazejoe88)

Post #: 31

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/24/2007 3:40:07 PM

kamikazejoe88

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/21/2007
From: India, INDIA
Status: offline

I am using the HS81 servos. Here are some pics of the Pitts Enjoy

Attachments

Click for fullsize	Click for fullsize	Click for fullsize	Click for fullsize
Click for fullsize

(in reply to opjose)

Post #: 32

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 3/24/2007 5:34:19 PM

opjose

Posts: 5830
Joined: 11/26/2005
From: Poolesville, MD, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kamikazejoe88

I am using the HS81 servos.

Intelligent minds think alike... heh.

Cool pics, nice shots

O'my GOSH!

There's NO PILOT!!!!

---

I ended up with a white plastic 2 1/5" spinner on mine to match the scheme... It looks pretty good with it.

I don't see a charge receptacle or switch in the pictures. Did you add one?

Also any idea as to what the intent was with the mounting holes on the servo plate, for what looks like an inner switch?

I've been trying to figure out what is supposed to go there.

< Message edited by opjose -- 3/24/2007 5:38:17 PM >

_____________________________

-
Build em'', fly em'', crash em'' and build more.

(in reply to kamikazejoe88)

Post #: 33

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/1/2007 9:30:11 AM

kamikazejoe88

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/21/2007
From: India, INDIA
Status: offline

I have hit the Achilles heel on the pitts. I had a rough landing and knocked off the prop and later i noticed the Wing strut had broken. I was lucking to notice it on the ground and have taken it out to see what can be done on it. The plane designers should really look into this part of the plane because otherwise they have fantastic plane here

Cheers
KJ

(in reply to opjose)

Post #: 34

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/2/2007 12:12:12 PM

Crashtruk

Posts: 126
Joined: 11/29/2004
From: Brisbane RAMAC, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline

I had to do the same with my cabane stuts. Also the plastic fitting inside the tank are not fuel proof, mine melted from the fuel

. There was just a little white blob rattling around inside the tank.

< Message edited by Crashtruk -- 4/2/2007 12:24:37 PM >

_____________________________

If God had wanted us to fly, he would have given us more money!

(in reply to kamikazejoe88)

Post #: 35

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/4/2007 9:15:41 AM

kamikazejoe88

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/21/2007
From: India, INDIA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crashtruk

I had to do the same with my cabane stuts. Also the plastic fitting inside the tank are not fuel proof, mine melted from the fuel . There was just a little white blob rattling around inside the tank.

Funny the same thing happened with me

This plane is good it has its small issues though but the struts issue maybe the non seller part unless the manufacturer works on it

KJ

(in reply to Crashtruk)

Post #: 36

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/27/2007 5:14:37 AM

bkrfrmhell

Posts: 85
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Tofield, AB, CANADA
Status: offline

Finally maidened my pitts today, gusty wind at about 15 - 20 mph, not the best conditions, but i needed to see it fly. Other than lowering the aileron travel and some down trim it flies great. The saito 65 is insane power on it, cruises great at about 1/3 throttle. Snap rolls are very tight, very manuverable little plane. No structural problems at all, everything very solid after 2 good flights and 2 bouncy landings!

(in reply to kamikazejoe88)

Post #: 37

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/27/2007 8:20:10 AM

freeonthree

Posts: 2562
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Red Bluff, CA, USA
Status: offline

I don't want micro servos ! This is not a park flyer ! If what you just said is true, I won't finish the plane.
I just got my wing test mounted, and I don't see a problem with them. My Kyosho Super Stearman 40 struts sit at about the same angle, so it looks normal to me. Guess it doesn't matter now though... I was going to put my Saito 56 on my Pitts, but now I'll just hang it for display... Micro servo's are for park flyers, and I have all Futaba S3151 digital servo's for the Pitts, and I ain't buying no more servo's. I'd rather get something else my digital's will fit. The Pitts will make a good lookin hanger display...

_____________________________

I dont crash, I just land hard

(in reply to yamahaexpress)

Post #: 38

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/27/2007 8:33:16 AM

freeonthree

Posts: 2562
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Red Bluff, CA, USA
Status: offline

I just checked, and your right. My servo's won't fit... Nope, im not going to put my Saito 56 at risk with micro servo's in the wings. I guess I should have read the ad better... I never would have thought that a plane made for a 70 4 stroke (says that right on the front of the manual) would call for micro servo's. Well thats $160.00 down the tubes. Oh well...

_____________________________

I dont crash, I just land hard

(in reply to freeonthree)

Post #: 39

RE: 40 pitts structural problem - 4/27/2007 4:40:47 PM

opjose

Posts: 5830
Joined: 11/26/2005
From: Poolesville, MD, USA
Status: offline

Eh, no.

I have high torque mini servos on mine.

e.g. the Hitec 81's.

Not micro servos.

These have far more power than needed.

Just check the dimensions of the servos.

< Message edited by opjose -- 4/27/2007 4:41:16 PM >

_____________________________

-
Build em'', fly em'', crash em'' and build more.

(in reply to freeonthree)