Great Planes should have replaced the whole airframe.

I agree, it is a wonderful plane, and flies great. However, things like this really do need to be addressed properly.

When a modeler spends $400 for the plane, $550 for an engine, $450 on a radio system, $200 on servos, $150 smoke system, plus several other accessories the total price of the plane get's very expensive to loose because of some 25 cent piece of metal decided to fail at an in opertune moment, is rediculus.

The way the bottom half of the bracket is held unmoveable, the only place for it to "flex" is at the bend, The flying wires help to eliminate some of the rocking motion of the top wing, but not all of it. But I think a semiflexible material would eliminate the problem altogether, such as a strong nylon "T" shape extrution.

I'm all for helping come up with ideas to help our models last longer, and fly better.

I haven't flown mine yet... Would you recommend that I change them before I even get it in the air? When I got my kit, I think all of the "updates" were already done... Anyone know how I would know if this "update" has been done?

Thanks!

I called today--got my new "updated" brackets on the way--the bad news---they are not for sale--limited supply right now-only can get them if yours are broken--(and hopefully your plane is not!)

Well, I checked them at lunch... But can't really see anything... Other then they "look" okay... But I haven't even had the engine started for more then 5 minutes! (biting fingernails!)

I would change them--better safe than ----- really angry --- or something like that

Hi, All! To clarify, yes, future kits are coming with an updated bracket; however, at this time we only have a small quantity, so PLEASE do not call us and ask for new because you THINK yours might ahve a probem. MOST users who are powering the model as called for are not having any difficulties whatsoever.

Please also be aware that we are NOT responsible for equipment failure caused by overpowering the airframe. Nearly every case of failed brackets we're aware of were powered by single cylinder gasoline engines that exceed the range for which teh model was designed, tested, recommended, sold, AND WARRANTED. So if you're swinging more power plant than what the model was designed for, then this is exactly the type of item you yourself have to make a decision if it requires modification and you are entirely on your own to do so.

I don't believe that the failure is due to overpowering of planes.

I think if you did an analysis of the Root Cause you would find that the extra power to weight ratio will accelerate the failure mode, but it is not the cause.

I tend to agree with The Edge. I have the smoothest 3.2 gas engine on the market-(11cc larger than recommended-would 11cc make that much difference?) I cannot believe that a US41 would be exempt from causing this, when my Taurus does. Also I am spinning a very large prop (22/10) at 5900 (very low) RPM max--included is the fact that I never fly at full throttle. AnnMarie, please understand I am not complaining--just trying to find a fix.

Edge/AJ, I do understand what you're saying adn please know that i'm not disagreeing. However, its important that I DO pass along the caution that overpowering the aircraft voids ALL warranty coverage. That message is often lost and, sadly, many users agree with your mindset to overpower, but don't have the skills/knowledge/etc to show the same restraints as you discuss.

I have a NIB which may or not fail. It will be too late after the fact.

Andys engine is far smoother than any US41 or for that matter a Fuji 50 which Tower is recomending on their site.
That bracket did not break due to over power/thrust more like there are existing stress fractures invisible to the unaided eye caused by bending them into shape.

Thank you so much for your response--yes I ordered my brackets today. Please let me see if I can address the issue of overpowering the plane. I fully agree that if a plane snaps a wing doing snaps at full throttle with a ZDZ 80, you should laugh at the request. Most of the instances I have read about have been stright and level flight. But that is not my point. My point is this--The GP Pitts gets most of my flying time--barely being edged out by my PW Extra--I LOVE THEM BOTH. Every issue with the Pitts has been the top wing attachment and the method used--from missing the spar with the screws to the L bracket breaking. There have been many other large bipes with bigger engines doing wild manuvers without this happening. This plane holds together in some very serious Gs--without a problem. Then a silly bracket breaks in 1/2 throttle level flight--and we blame it on the oversize engine? I cannot tell you how much I love this plane! In my 12 years of modeling, it has to be one of the top 3 of the dozens I have owned. Your staff did a superb job-and the construction is first rate. It just seems to be this one design flaw with the top wing. I just want to keep it around for a long, long, long time.



PS--I am anxiously awaiting the new 70" w/s Ultimate ARF you will be producing soon--based around a 3.2 gas engine (hint-hint )

AJF,
The problems are:
a) just because the part fails in straight and level flight doesnt mean it wasn't heavily stressed previously;
b) MANY pilots who overpower have no idea how to handle that power, nor what stresses it can/will cause;
c) The warranty can't be convoluted, circular, and even begin to try to lay out your situation or the thousand others out there. Instead the answer is simple -- overpowering the model voids the model's warranty. period.

Now does that mean we don't even consider special circumstances, known defects, etc? Absolutely not. But what it DOES mean is that if you choose to overpower the model, you must realize that ALL responsibility for anything the model does from that moment forward is 100% in your hands, and your warranty has been voided by your decision.

thanks for understanding.

get a copy of the warranty please as it was not in the box with my kit and I would like to read it's details realtive to the equipment I will be choosing

edge, the warranty statement is in your manual.

Thank you for your prompt response.

May I inquire whether or not there have been any recognized failures of this nature whilst using the recommended equipment ?

We have had a very few cases of the uper cabane brackets stress cracking and failing. this is one of the many areas of an aircraft like this we recommend the modeler keep an eye on throughout its use, just as you would clevises, control horns, flying wires, etc.

Future kits ARE using a slightly different bracket to try to avoid the few failures we have seen; however, by FARRRR the majority of users have had no difficulty whatsoever with the stock configuration.

I fully understand-and agree (for the most part)-----NOW---WHAT ABOUT THAT ULTIMATE? I'm waiting.

Ann, I have the Pitts Biplane. I too agree it is a marvelous plane. I have had both of the described problems happen on my plane. It was first flown with a ST 3250 (which is in the engine size range) but felt it was not enough power to fly the bird like the real one flies. I have seen the real one fly, and it does fly fast, and maneuver every quickly. Lost the top wing in flight because of the front screws being to close to the edge (I wasn't aware of the problem until after it happened). I was just very glad that I managed to get it down reasonably safe.

I did repair the damage, and beefed up the areas that had caused the mishap. Installed blind nuts behind the screws for added security. I am also flying it with a smoke system. with the added realism of the smoke, and the added weight associated with it, the ST 3250 just isn't enough motor. So, I installed a G62 to even things out. I must also point out, that I like many other modelers, with larger engines in their planes, don't fly straight and level, or down lines, full throttle. The extra power is for the vertical maneuver's. Still I suffered the brackets breaking once on mine.

I use flying wires, stiffened the landing gear on it as well, to carry the additional weight, double check everything before and after every flight, and try not to take un-needed risks. The air frame it very strong and durable, as most everyone will acknowledge to.

We are not knocking the design of the model. We, as modelers, have found a few areas (the offset holes, and the bracket breakage) that troubles us. So, I would like to think that we are bringing this to Great Planes attention, in hopes of maybe offering ideas of how to improve an already marvelous model.

I am presently looking into finding a nylon type of material in a "T" shape configuration of about 1" in length. I believe a semi flexible material would all but eliminate this troubled spot. I would also appreciate any of your thoughts on this as well.

Best regards Ricky Rocket

ricky, thanks for your added feedback and please do know and undestand that we DO understand and appreciate the input greatly. Please look at how we handled the spar issue to know how seriously we take our modelers' input.

My first thought on your bracket failure would be the excessive stress the brackets would've seen just before the top wing mounting let loose. I would not be at all surprised to see this type of damage and would be surprised NOT to see some other types of damage from such a failure.

Again, thanks all for hte input you've provided. I am off on vacation starting tomorrow, so please don't think i'm ignoring you if the discussion continues. however, unless something distinctly new and different is presented i will not likely respond again to this thread.

Ive been following this thread as I am putting together a pitts. But I just had to chime in and say, Ricky Rocket you da man! To land that plane in that condition is awesome. Congrats!

Stinker

Stinker,

I appreciate the complement. I'm just glad my years of experience reminded me to not panic (although being terrified at the same time). I was fortunate, and am glad I was able to save it, to yet fly it again. You will love flying this plane. It does wonderful 3 point lands. Just go over everything and inspect everything real good. I do have my rates turned up a little more than the recommended, but everyone has their own taste as to how much they want to move the sticks. On that landing, I was glad of the little extra throw in the controls.

So, finish you beautiful plane and go out and enjoy it. That why we got them!

Ricky Rocket:

Wow!! I was puckered just sitting here reading this... And Mine wasn't even out of the garage! GREAT SAVE!!

I'll keep my Pitts ARF.

Thanks to all for the instruction and encouragement.

Have a great vacation Anne Marie.

Called Monday--got my brackets today--with a holiday in the middle. Quick work GP. The holes did not line up exactly, but a little dremel work fixed that. The difference I can tell is the the new brackets are a more dull metal-also do not seem to be a hard and brittle-same thickness. AnnMarie, when you get back from vacation, would you be able to comment on the difference between the two. Thanks a ton--(in advance)