  |
lonestaracing
Advanced Member
|
      
To all Biplane pilots, We had a very successful race in Ohio, Congrats to John Lockwood on winning the gold race. We had the debut of the great planes ARF biplane ( two of them) and both flew great with no trouble at all. We are hoping to have more in Parker AZ. Holly was picking one up in KS on his way back to CA. we would like to invite anyone with a bipe to come out and race with us. With the gas motors these thing are a real blast to race. Anyone who doesn’t have a bipe but would like to give it a try, the GP 1/3 scale biplane ARF’s are a great way to get started. And at $379 it is cheap too. Good luck to everyone and hope to see you in Parker
-----
Bobby S.
|
Total Posts: 252 | Joined July 2004 | Posted on: 6:58 am on Aug. 23, 2005 | IP
|
|
CG
Junior Member
|
I presume this is the Pitts. Which engine?
|
Total Posts: 93 | Joined July 2005 | Posted on: 10:31 pm on Aug. 27, 2005 | IP
|
|
lonestaracing
Advanced Member
|
The pitts or the CEII. Any gas engine up to 80 cc, we are using the GT80 and the Z445 in ours.
-----
Bobby S.
|
Total Posts: 252 | Joined July 2004 | Posted on: 5:49 am on Aug. 28, 2005 | IP
|
|
Fred Sattler
Race Pilot
|
The information in the above post is not correct. The GP 1/3 scale Pitts has a listed wing area of 1303 square inches, which is well under the minimum 1460 sq. in. wing area stipulated for the biplane class. In addition, the manufacturer warns against over powering this model and increasing its maximum intended weight.
The CEII seems to be a good foundation for creating a legal biplane racer if appropriate modifications are made to the stock model. First, the CEII is not an eligible type, but it closely resembles a Pitts S-2, a type which is eligible to race. The wing area of the stock GP CEII model is also in doubt, with a listed wing area of 1436 square inches.
It is recommended that you start by reading the published Biplane Class Rules found on this web page before you purchase ANYTHING with the expectation of racing it in sanctioned competition.
Fred Sattler
USRA Technical Inspector
|
Total Posts: 17 | Joined July 2004 | Posted on: 8:28 am on Aug. 28, 2005 | IP
|
|
Holly
Driver 1
|
 
Picked up the CE II because it was a fantastic buy. !!!
"The Hangar" in Witchita. (George Knapple).....
Give him a call...
Fred;
Are you willing to call the aircraft a Pitts S2 ???
As we speak a racing wing and the extra 24 inches
are being drawn up. The rest of the numbers seem to
comply. Parker ? Maybe . Do you see any other
problems with this aircraft ??
Holly
-----
Holly
|
Total Posts: 55 | Joined Oct. 2001 | Posted on: 9:12 am on Aug. 29, 2005 | IP
|
|
Fred Sattler
Race Pilot
|
Holly,
The wing area listed by the manufacturer (1436 sq. in.) appears to be in error, and the theoretical area calculated from actual model dimensions totals 1485 sq. in., less the cutout in the center of the upper wing. The model wing is being re-checked this afternoon by Ed Rankin to confirm these figures, and I suspect the wing area will meet the rule requirement. We'll pass the word when we know for sure.
After seeing a couple of them fly the race course at Ohio with the GT80 on board, the airframe seems to be quite sound. My concern would be with the integrity of the stock horizontal stab when no support wires are used. These flat, built up structures tend to be flexible and they may present flutter problems at speed, particularly if the covering material becomes slack. Since you will need some CG weight in the tail anyway, I would not hesitate to beef up the horizontal stab or even replace it with a fully sheeted number. Belt and suspenders, that's me.
The CE II was based on the Pitts S-2 design and the major appearance difference is due to the distinctive paint job of the Christen Eagle. Since most of the models used for racing will be re-covered for identification purposes, this distinction goes away. Call your model a Pitts S-2 to satisfy the eligibility rule and it should be fine.
Fred
This just in from Ed Rankin: The total wing area of the stock CE II model is 1472.74 square inches. Thanks to Bobby and Ed for verifying this for us.
F.S.
(Edited by Fred Sattler at 4:46 pm on Aug. 29, 2005)
|
Total Posts: 17 | Joined July 2004 | Posted on: 11:12 am on Aug. 29, 2005 | IP
|
|
Holly
Driver 1
|
Fred;
One more question ..... on the CE II
Is the dihedrial in the bottom wing
manditory or can it be removed ??
-----
Holly
|
Total Posts: 55 | Joined Oct. 2001 | Posted on: 9:50 am on Aug. 30, 2005 | IP
|
|
Fred Sattler
Race Pilot
|
Holly,
In the Common Class Rules it says that wing dihedral angle may be reduced to 1/2 the original value, but not eliminated entirely.
Fred
|
Total Posts: 17 | Joined July 2004 | Posted on: 12:19 pm on Aug. 30, 2005 | IP
|
|
TomE 
Administrator
|
Question answered!
-----
Tom
Race 18 F1 & Unlimited
Team Extra Air Racing
|
Total Posts: 478 | Joined Oct. 2001 | Posted on: 1:31 pm on Aug. 30, 2005 | IP
|
|
larry lewis
Newbie
|
Props? Are we required to run the GT prop? I looked in the rules, but nothing I see states we must run the GT prop. Is this correct? My GT80 might wind up in a CEII !
-----
Lets get ready to rummmmmmble!
|
Total Posts: 46 | Joined Mar. 2005 | Posted on: 6:19 pm on Aug. 30, 2005 | IP
|
|
| |
USRA Forums
Biplanes
