That was fast!! Thanks a lot.

OK, I've spent a day doing my homework before I start gluing anything.
A couple of loose ends on my list you guys could help with:

1. How critical are the tail braces on this plane (I'm assuming they're functional on this one)

2. I'm now leaning towards only to have servos on the bottom wing. (Save weight)
Could someone post a few pics or a sketch of how to mechanically link top/bottom ailerons.
(Quick assembly and teardown at the field is important to me)

3. I didn't see any incidence measurements anywhere in the instructions or plans.
Should I align everything at 0-degrees relative to thrust line

4. How much downthrust did you guys end up trimming into the motor?

martyg

Looking at the size to the tail components tells me they will be functional. I think they should be installed and tensioned to help kept everything in line.

Two servos mounted normally in the bottom wing with a control horn from the top of that surface to the exact same position on the bottom of the upper surface using 4/40 rod is what is mostly used to connect the control surfaces. The location of the horns is critical to achieve equal throw of both. Using this method will make taking the upper wing off somewhat of a pain and may require adjusting of the rods necessary for any changes in the instillation of the upper wing. This may be one plane that needs to be kept in one piece?

As far as the incidence the plans show the centerline of both wing are parallel to thrust line. Therefore I am assuming that there is 0 degrees of incidence. However I agree the plans say nothing regarding this subject.

I'm not sure what you mean by down thrust?

I was experimenting with the incidence of the upper wing and the best that works for me is -1 with respect to the lower wing. The stab is O with respect to the lower wing. I am using flying wires, they are functional because the stab is not covered with balsa sheet, but I assume that you can do it and avoid flying wires. There are easy to install and looks nice anyway (I am using it recently not in my pics) I am using 4 servos for ailerons. Also the upper wing is attached to the cabannes via 3 mm wire that cross trough the 2 holes were is supposed to be 2 screws. The forward end is bended in v shape so I use a rubber that attach to the other end. It is like the Carl Golberg Ultimate method. Easy to install at the field!.
The plane has unlimited performance with the Saito 180, but I noticed a "lack"of pull in middle to low range, but still fly very very good with this combo using menz 17 * 6 anyway, I am glad that I replaced it, the fuel economy has improved about 25% . The Perry is not needed, so I took it off.

My engine has a little bit of down trust (dont know exactly how much) and 4 degrees of side thrust. I think you will not have the proper snap rate with two servos only. I use 4 standard and it rolls pretty nice, it is also faster at the field this way.
The ultimate flies very good, all is possible, knife edges need some coupling, but it is an excellent flying bipe.

Deliberately angling the engine slightly downwards.
You adjust this to compensate for power on/off pitch variations in flight.
(Same idea as angling the engine to the right to compensate for power on yaw variations)

I'm thinking either (4) HS-5475HB or (2) HS-5625MG digital servos for the wings.
(I really like the Hitec line of digital servos)
Either setup should be fine on torque.
The ailerons are pretty small, and I figure Vne at no more than 70mph.

I don't think non metal gear servos (Karbonite) would be a problem in this application.
(I'm using a 40cc gas engine)

The 5475 is a little slower (even on 5 cells) but I can live with that.

I figure the two-servo option willl save 2-3 ounces.
But maybe that is the price to pay for simpler engineering and quicker assembly at the field.

I guess I'm starting to flip-flop back to the 4-servo option.

Two good servos will effectively handle the ailerons quite well. I used Hitec 5925's in mine. I have since moved away from that brand, but they worked exceptionally well. The aileron slave struts end up quite long, and after experiencing a lot of flex using 4/40 wire for the struts i changed them out to carbon fiber rod and tip inserts from central Hobbies. Not the cheapest way, but they're stiff, strong, and the effort expended in building shouldn't be wasted by going cheap and experiencing a failure. Using only two servos for the ailerons will save about 4 ounces from an area that's behind the c/g. It matters a lot.

The flying wires at the tail should be considered mandatory. also insert wood dowel hardpoints for the attach points. Use a wood dowel that has a corresponding brass tube in the same size. Sharpen the end of the tube from the inside of the tube with an Exacto blade and use the tube to make clean cuts for the dowel. Removing the backbone from an old exacto saw blade will provide you with a tool to cut the dowel off flush with the surface of the horizontal and vertical stabs.

Bottom wing and horizopntal stab should be a zero incidence. The top wing works best with 1 to 1-1/2 degrees of negative incidence. The engine down thrust, depending on the engine size and type, should be between 2 and 3 degrees. Use 2 degrees for a gasser.

Do everything you can to fit the engine to the mount with the cowl in place before you set the box permanenty. It's a major pain to do, but you will be rewarded with an engine that's perfectly centered in the cowl. You may have to use some temporary sheeting around the nose of the plane to do this since it has to be done before the final sheeting is installed.

I use Hitec 5475's in a few of my planes but I did not opt to go with them on this plane. If you're going with only 2 servos for the ailerons I would chose a servo with higher torque. Yes they ailerons are small but there are 4 of them and the plane will come in at around 12lbs, thats quite a bit of mass. I'm going with 4 Futaba 9003 coreless sevos on mine.

I used four servos on the ailerons, you could go with two no problem..I flew a 68" Christen Eagle at 17lbs with two futaba 9201's on the ailerons with never a problem. I used aluminum tube found in a airfoil shape (name ?) most hobbyshops carry this, solder a piece of 4-40 rod to each end for aileron attatchment. Attatch the rod link to a control horn on the trailing edge of each aileron just behind the strut. I also used 4-40 rods for tail braces on the pitts, with a gasser up front it helped with the balance, 2-56 would be fine. I flew my Pitts with (-) 1 degree on the upper wing and 0-0 else where. I never put down thrust into the engine as it did not need it.

Sorry, I can't find specs on the S9003. Is this really the number you meant?
Just want to get a view of how much torque/speed you're going to throw at these little surfaces.

Sorry, I meant 9001. 54 oz at 4.8v, 72 oz at 6v. They are coreless.

Hey they will work fine..I used 9201 on mine with 6 volts no problem.

Mine is coming together smoothly. I have about 45 hours labor into it at this point.
Everything is framed up, aligned to +/- 1mm. It's downhill from here.
Anyone else putting together one of these?

Marty, I'm working on one. I'm at about the same stage you are.

Hi again,
I am powering it again but with a BME 44 cc. This time I will use a 6 volts battery pack and (2) 9001 back for elevators, 4 standard on the ailerons and ? to be decided on rudder. This is the 3rd engine I will try on this pitts, it was the red wine pitts posted here before.... I am recovering and reinforcing it again. Quite a job. I think I will use JR 4721 for the rudder.

Martyg,

I used a thick balsa sheet to sheet the stab. I was using the flying wires before, but now, after covered it with balsa, it is strong, so I will try to fly it with my Bme 44 cc without flying wires. The flying wires looks nice anyway, buy I think that I can live without them now.

Have you guys figured out where these parts go?
I can't find any references on the plans or in the instructions.

Martig,
I am just in the process to peel off the cover of my wings. I will take a look inside. I dont really know where those formers are located. On the other hand, as they are marked T, I guess they should belong to the tail section, but really dont know/ dont remember. I will take a careful look over the plane again.

I haven't run across those yet.

It has been a while but those might be the fuse side plates for where the control rods exit in the tail section around the stringers. My servos were in the tail to balance the engine so I did not use them.

Redrata, why did you replace the Saito 180 with a BME44. It looks like this plane can really use a lot of power. Wounder how a DA50 would be in this bird?

Da-50 would tear it apart. It flies good with a 2.4 I would not go any bigger. Flies light with the 4-strokes.

I agree with v snap. I am using the Bme 44 because I took the Saito 180 for another plane where I cant use gasoline. I am just trying to save money on fuel, nitro is way too expensive in Denmark and this Bme was on the shelf. On the other hand, this saving would be kind of relative, I know, because It might tear the plane apart. A DA 50 will do it sooner or later.
My Saito 180 was a very good combo. The DZ was just perfect. I am afraid that I will have to use throttle management. I am taking the risk with the 44. At idle it will shake some, but I am going to try. A well balance prop will help a lot. I have been flying this plane a lot, I will be very careful to any negative sign. This is definitely, kind of an experiment. Lets see what happens.

The plane flies extremely good when light. If I have a Brisson 2,4 I will use it, but I think is the same weight as the Bme 44. I dont know if I am crossing the boundary where the plane/weight combination will not make it so lively as it was. I used to do wild aerobatics and soft landings with the other two engines. I am giving the Bme a chance. I have to try it.
Please keep posting some pics of your progress !, I really want to see what you are doing.