I need some advice and help. I test flew the Pitts this past weekend and after trimming it flew fine. The problem is with the elevator trim I had to input at 3/4 throttle setting. I almost ending up with using most of the trim available to stop it from climbinmg at this power setting. I'm used to added down trim on most of my airframes but not this much. The engine is set at 0/0, that is no down or right offset. Before I start checking the declanage angles and horizontal stablizer could it be anything else causing this problem. Yes, I went inverted and it took 3/4 down stick to keep it level. I always trim at 3/4 throttle and fly the sticks above and below this position. Naturally I ran out of elevator at low throttle settings for landing and had to land hot on the mains to keep the tail up. Please feel free to advice me on my lack on knowledge.

The help I'm asking for is where can I purchase a scale tailwheel assembly for this plane. When I say scale I'm refering to the appearence of the unit in relationship to its' full scale counterpart.

I would really not fly again until you have checked the incidences, do this slowly and thoroughly.

I am surprised you would not have done this, before you flew, especially being a Biplane. Even a 1.5 degree misalignment will make a big difference.

Good luck and hope you find the cause without hassles.

This is my second biplane. The first being the GP Stearman and it had no trim problems like the BH Pitts. The instruction manual for the Pitts provided no information on incidence angles nor did the manual supplied by GP. I assumed the engineers did their home work for the modeler. We all no what assumptions can and do make and ass out of you and me. The only modification I made to the Pitts was moved the CG back torward the TE of the top wing. I did this because their location would make the plane extremely nose heavy. I'll guess I'll live with this problem because there is no way you can reconfigure the mounting of the top wing assembly.

Dont give up so fast, at least do the measurments acurately and see what you have to work with.
Play with the CG afterwards. The plane will be so much more enjoyable after you made any possible mods.
I would asume the GP Stearman could be a a turnkey biplane as they have better QC and the BH may need builders input to ensure correct fit.
Of course there are ways to correct incidences.

Start with the body, engine and the stab, then the top wing.
Others will chime in eventually.

Flycatch,
Nitro beat me to it, but your incidence angles relative to stab sound incorrect. I too have the Black Horse Pitts and in stock form both wing incidences were backwards IMO, right out of the box. Notonly were the incidence angles wrong they variedbetween wing panel as much as 2.5*.....No bueno..... I have never "assembled" an ARF and not verifed a setup, as wing incidences,DT and RT willofferpoor handling characteristicsthatleave the new owner with a sour taste.If these important steps arent verified your simply assuming the manufacturer got it all right and there was/is minimal variation in their jigs when the ARF was built.....Get these nailed down for your style of flying and application or what "you" want the model to do and then dial in the CG.You can set it up a multitude of ways, CG/balance on the top wing or the bottom wing, but I wanted mine to be dependable.....period. Scale aerobatics was my goal... Im running .5*+ bottom wing, 1.5+ top wing, 6*DT and 2*RT.The CG is setup on the bottom wing via the MAC.... It a solid flier at these angles, my approach speed is nice(bipe benfit!), but I could use a tad less positive wing incidence on both, maybe 0* bottom and 1*+ for the top wing.....

After re-reading all this....again....

Great Planes "normally" does a solid job engineering with themajor airframe build, construction and flight characteristics, but BH does not...period, so check everything. Besides, nose heavy is fine, the CG could be off the LE of the bottom wing and it wouldve flown fine. Now move it aft just a bit TOO far.....again no bueno. FWIW the top wing CAN be re-configured completley if you so choose. Its actually very simple depending on what kind of top wing incidence you are wanting to use youll only need to shim/adjust the wing a minor amount. To correct my top wing, I simply re-drilled the top wings fwd mount hole a bit deeper into the wing tab. This allowed the LE of top wing to drop, hence loosing some of the positive wing incidence I had. I went from +3.8* incidence to roughly +1.8* incidencemoving the hole less than 1/4".....

Get creative and simply take your time.....make it want you want....

ColeTrane,

I've read some of your other posts on this topic. What is "DT" and "RT", please?

Okay, never mind. I assume you mean down thrust and right thrust.

OP from Flycatch: What you are describing sounds like a classic case of nose-heavy to me. At slow speeds, the decalage is taking care of things, but at higher speeds (your three-quarter throttle setting), the decalage becomes more pronounced, and you then have to correct by reducing it with some down elevator trim. The fact that you need to carry a lot of down elevator in inverted flight substantiates this suspicion, as that is also an indicator of a nose-heavy condition. Running out of elevator in the flare clinches it for me. You need to move your CG back.

And yes, I agree with others here that you need to know how much decalage you have, and how much incidence you have in each wing.

If your flying with the recommended cg no doubt your nose heavy. Mine is balanced at the leading edge of the lower wing. Flys well and could even go back more.

Mine is not balanced per factory setting. I did move it back to the point were yours is balanced.

I have a line of nice scale pilots that would go well with your scale tail wheele , they are 25% scale and stand 8.5 inches high . check out my facebook for more photos. http://www.facebook.com/index.phplh=d262a04d8374882e282ef6ac32ff7668&eu=Ul ep580RD_pGJCtoTzH1Yw#!/media/set/set=a.10150283006405098.334357.557245097&type=3

For those who have responded to my post I thank you. I found the problem and I believe it was the CG placement. I'll no for sure when I fly it again this Sunday.

Yes please give us a flight report. Those pilots that are getting ready to fly this plane will have a much better chance of success if they ready these reports. Thanks again.