Pitts S1-S by EMHW
#852
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I will use finishing resin because it gets hard enough to protect but not so hard as to be, well, brittle in a sense. Any of the epoxies get real hard, in an area like these I think it could do more harm than good if it were to get bumped. And it's gonna get bumped.
#853
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Today I picked up some more foam and fabric to finish the seats. Also picked up some construction paper to make the fuse panel patterns with and the aluminum for the panels. Also ordered the switches to finish up the electronics. After tomorrow there should be some good progress made. I have been thinking about making baffles for the cowl air intake, not sure if it is needed though.
#854
My Feedback: (29)
Robert, you have gone this far I think you should do baffles. Not only do they add that bit of scale detail but will lower your engine temps to boot. I usually make mine from 1/16 balsa that has been glassed on both sides. For your Pitts it would look slicker then you know what if you then covered them in flight metal. I'm curious why you chose not to use the fail safe switch that Smart Fly offers for the Turbo Reg that is incorporated into your Expander. I bet your looking forward to covering and painting now that you have those awesome stencils.
#855
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Well, actually, it looks like the scale version without baffles (see pic). If I go with bafflesI will make a Styrofoam insert in the holes and glass the inside of the cowl, sand and finish, The Flite metal is a good idea and I have some. And as for the stencils, Ohhhhhhhhhh Yeaaaaaaa I can't wait. PM me with some detail on this thing you called a fail safe.
#856
My Feedback: (29)
There is a switch available for 20.00 that plugs into the regulator. Without this switch the regulator is always on leaving the option of hooking up batteries and switches where the current runs through the switches. When using the smart switch the batteries plug directly into the regulator without switches and the smart switch turns on a circuit within the regulator. If the switch fails the system stays on. Check the Smart Fly site, I'm sure they have a more complete explanation. IMO the smart switch is the more reliable way to go but will drain the batteries slightly while in the off position.
Shawn
Shawn
#858
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Shawn if you are talking about the flagged pin I have it. But the system still uses a little current when off. So I will use their HD switches to turn off after a day of flying.
Steve, that is what I have been told. And I will find out for myself. I do know just from using it on the bench I really like the way it all goes together.
Steve, that is what I have been told. And I will find out for myself. I do know just from using it on the bench I really like the way it all goes together.
#859
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I have been tinkering on the Pitts all day, little non mentionable tid-bits. But I just finished making the fuse panel templates and thought I would show them. The seat fabric I had went and bout was a bit too good, would not give enough to show the contours. And there is no way I am going out today to get more, tomorrow (after Black Friday) sounds good.
#860
Ken
#861
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
LOL! Sometimes tinkering achieves more than all out working on it. Speaking of, I just finished installing the airspeed indicator.
Last edited by acerc; 11-29-2013 at 02:27 PM.
#871
Robert,
Interesting subject on wing loadings. The Reynolds Factor comes into play. ( I am by no means an expert on it) The larger the airframe the more wing loading per sq. ft. it can carry. My WACO at a 35oz wing loading will not behave the same as your Pitts at 31oz. My WACO has 3996sq in. of wing area. Any small sport model would be a brick at 35oz wing loading. Most .60 size sport models have a wing loading between 20-25oz.
With that being said I still believe you will be fine. I know of WACO's flying at 40oz wing loading and fly fine. Would be interesting to hear from other Pitts guys.
Later!!
Anthony
Interesting subject on wing loadings. The Reynolds Factor comes into play. ( I am by no means an expert on it) The larger the airframe the more wing loading per sq. ft. it can carry. My WACO at a 35oz wing loading will not behave the same as your Pitts at 31oz. My WACO has 3996sq in. of wing area. Any small sport model would be a brick at 35oz wing loading. Most .60 size sport models have a wing loading between 20-25oz.
With that being said I still believe you will be fine. I know of WACO's flying at 40oz wing loading and fly fine. Would be interesting to hear from other Pitts guys.
Later!!
Anthony
#872
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Whoops! That was the wrong number, the wing load was 22oz, and at 45lbs near 25oz. That is length by width by weight by both wings, right?
I have actually had two other owners of the same size kit and same engine tell me their weight. From that I can go to 45lbs and believe I would be very happy with the flight characteristics. I had some concerns on my little one because everyone kept telling me it was going to be to heavy with all the detail. And was also told it was going to be underpowered with the given engine choice. Well that is far from the case. And I hope that holds true through this big one.
I have actually had two other owners of the same size kit and same engine tell me their weight. From that I can go to 45lbs and believe I would be very happy with the flight characteristics. I had some concerns on my little one because everyone kept telling me it was going to be to heavy with all the detail. And was also told it was going to be underpowered with the given engine choice. Well that is far from the case. And I hope that holds true through this big one.
Last edited by acerc; 11-30-2013 at 10:52 AM.
#873
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC
Posts: 4,144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure you will be fine as long as the detailing/ finishing doesn't make you ad weight to balance out the plane at the end. i would leave myself some wiggle room to move the internals for that purpose.
Cheers,V.
Cheers,V.
#874
Robert,
Even at 25 oz wing loading it should handle really nice. What kind of tires are you using on the plane? If you are using air filled tires put just enough air in them to hold the plane up. You should see a little bulge in the tire while sitting on the ground. I had a hard time taming the landings on my WACO until I reduced the air pressure, it helped immensely.
Later!!
Anthony
Even at 25 oz wing loading it should handle really nice. What kind of tires are you using on the plane? If you are using air filled tires put just enough air in them to hold the plane up. You should see a little bulge in the tire while sitting on the ground. I had a hard time taming the landings on my WACO until I reduced the air pressure, it helped immensely.
Later!!
Anthony
#875
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homestead,
FL
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little full scale Pitts action, courtesy of Xjet, out of Tokoroa, NZ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSHiD...em-uploademail
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSHiD...em-uploademail