33% Pitts S-1 Special
- Thread starter abaser
- Start date
andy29847
Active member
I like Pitts
Back in the day....I had a 1/3 scale Pitts. My plane was a Byron originals kits with a Quadra 50 gas engine. I didn't feel like the plane had enough power, and I was worried about what a gas leak might do to the Styrofoam that formed the plane, so I converted the engine to alcohol. Woo-wee, that made a difference - it would do 4 vertical rolls before it fell off the line. Of course, it would burn through 20 oz of fuel in the blink of an eye and it was much harder to start. I eventually changed it back to gas. Ping me if there is something I can do to help with the project.
Back in the day....I had a 1/3 scale Pitts. My plane was a Byron originals kits with a Quadra 50 gas engine. I didn't feel like the plane had enough power, and I was worried about what a gas leak might do to the Styrofoam that formed the plane, so I converted the engine to alcohol. Woo-wee, that made a difference - it would do 4 vertical rolls before it fell off the line. Of course, it would burn through 20 oz of fuel in the blink of an eye and it was much harder to start. I eventually changed it back to gas. Ping me if there is something I can do to help with the project.
Last edited:
jeffpn
Well-known member
When you switched over to alky........ did you run the "Byro Drive" ?
Back in the day....I had a 1/3 scale Pitts. My plane was a Byron originals kits with a Quadra 50 gas engine. I didn't feel like the plane had enough power, and I was worried about what a gas leak might do to the Styrofoam that formed the plane, so I converted the engine to alcohol. Woo-wee, that made a difference - it would do 4 vertical rolls before it fell off the line. Of course, it would burn through 20 oz of fuel in the blink of an eye and it was much harder to start. I eventually changed it back to gas. Ping me if there is something I can do to help with the project.
Jeff - response is slow.
Hab - Don't know "Byro Drive"
The pic is from the early 90's. IIRC, I used a bigger prop - maybe from 18x10 to 20x10 (or 12).
Byro Drive :
Yes ... 3:1 I believe. Allowed the use of a 2 stroke mounted
with its own pulley ( can see the mounting bay).
Not sure about running glow / alky fuel in gas engine if thats whats
Andy was referring too. That I see chewing ~wasting a lot of fuel up fast,
if it survived ....
with its own pulley ( can see the mounting bay).
Not sure about running glow / alky fuel in gas engine if thats whats
Andy was referring too. That I see chewing ~wasting a lot of fuel up fast,
if it survived ....
Wow!
andy29847
Active member
It was a simple conversion - bolt on another carb with bigger jets. It burned a lot of fuel but it made serious power (think NASCAR vs INDY car). I did a search to see if the carbs are still available. I found them being used to hot rod scooters.
http://www.scooterpartscatalog.com/walbro-alcohol-carburetor-114-18.html
Hmmm....don't get me started on racing. The 1st longtime passion - way of life / before R/C.
Yeah, I know what it takes when setting up a motor, drag anyway, for alky- methanol use. Never converted a gas 2s to alky though.
Yeah, I know what it takes when setting up a motor, drag anyway, for alky- methanol use. Never converted a gas 2s to alky though.
It was a simple conversion - bolt on another carb with bigger jets. It burned a lot of fuel but it made serious power (think NASCAR vs INDY car). I did a search to see if the carbs are still available. I found them being used to hot rod scooters.
http://www.scooterpartscatalog.com/walbro-alcohol-carburetor-114-18.html
Gear looks good Andy. Like how your using flat aluminum gear, and not having the struts attached to the fuse itself. Cool. Yea, the fuse bottom isn't round.
Pic shows
Pic shows
Attachments
abaser
Well-known member
Ive gotten most of the modeling done, I believe. All that I see that's left is the connections for the aileron rods, center top wing supports, spinner, and the tail gear. Just out of curiosity, can I assume the aileron rods would connect just as a servo arm would? These are much larger than the ones on my late hog bipe, but that's how it connected.
Hab, here are some close ups of what I have. let me know what you think.
As of right now, Im somewhere just below 12k polys. Since I havent figured out how to get the poly count in Blender yet, Im just doubling the face count in my head I know Im less than double the count because there are several tri's already from adding the ribs.
Hab, here are some close ups of what I have. let me know what you think.
As of right now, Im somewhere just below 12k polys. Since I havent figured out how to get the poly count in Blender yet, Im just doubling the face count in my head
I know Im less than double the count because there are several tri's already from adding the ribs.Attachments
abaser
Well-known member
Quick question for the vets. The vstab on this plane should be as seamless as possible. All of my other models have had a separate vstab, but if I try to separate this one, a visible seam appears. Am I opening myself to troubles by leaving it a part of the fuse when it comes to the physics once it's in RF? Or should I deal with the seam and go the conventional route?
Madratter
New member
I also have been doing the Vertical Stab as part of the fuselage with the rudder separate. If you look at my latest EA for the Yak, you'll see how I do that.
I think whether it is best to do a separate Vertical Stab depends in part on the kind of aircraft. In the case of a foamy, there is basically little or no benefit to doing them separately. The airfoil for the vertical stab is the same as you would use for the airfoil for the fuselage as a whole.
With other planes, I think it is more debatable. In your case, the bottom half of the vertical stab is essentially an extension of the fuselage and is well modeled by being part of it. The top half on the other hand isn't and perhaps would benefit from separate treatment, although depending on the airfoil you choose for the fuselage, it might matter little in terms of actual behavior.
I think whether it is best to do a separate Vertical Stab depends in part on the kind of aircraft. In the case of a foamy, there is basically little or no benefit to doing them separately. The airfoil for the vertical stab is the same as you would use for the airfoil for the fuselage as a whole.
With other planes, I think it is more debatable. In your case, the bottom half of the vertical stab is essentially an extension of the fuselage and is well modeled by being part of it. The top half on the other hand isn't and perhaps would benefit from separate treatment, although depending on the airfoil you choose for the fuselage, it might matter little in terms of actual behavior.
