Pitts S1S vs. One Design
die...@austin.ibm.com
Back to the main topic. I do think you could build the One Design faster
due to the single wing. The fuselage is more complex to weld up however,
based on comments from the shops that provide prewelded fuselages.
The rest would be about the same, but probably lower time in rigging and
in fabric covering and painting also.
About the size, the OD is about the same size as the Pitts so I don't see
how it would judge much different. It may have a cleaner line from the
side view so may judge a litter better on the 45s and vertical.
There is one negative on the OD. It takes a lot more fwd pressure to fly
inverted than a Pitts does. This makes it unbalanced in feel.
Paul Donner flew the OD at the nationals this year as his Pitts was
being repaired. I was not there, but I talked to a friend who talked
to Paul at the contest and he said he would be glad to get his Pitts back
as he did not like the inverted/outside handling of the OD.
The OD also has a strange wing in that if you apply back pressure too fast
it shudders (stalls). If you load it up progressively, then all is OK.
Many people that have flown the OD do not like this feature. Some think
I will kill some low time acro pilots.
The Pitts S1S has been quoted by people like Charlie Hillard and Gene Soucy
as being the best handling aerobatic plane they have ever flown.
It is probably a one design as well, but many have been modified in one way
or another to get the extra ounce of performance out of it.
One thing that I don't like is that I see lots of people that want to build
a OD and they have no aerobatic experience. I hope they get some real training
before flying the OD. Several have even discussed here building the OD
for a Xcountry AC. They like it because it looks good. I think you only
build the OD if you want to fly aerobatics. It is single place, limitted
fuel, small wing area, etc. The same goes for the Pitts.
Structurally, I "think" the OD is OK, but it is not proven like the Pitts
is. There are a few problem areas to watch in the Pitts but they are well
known or have been fixed. I would feel much better about the OD (that goes
for any new AC) after a number are flying and we have a few 1,000 hours on
them. If you build the OD now, you are a bit of a pioneer (they are the ones
with the arrows in their backs :))
The good news is that Dan R. has worked on a number of designs before so
he does know what he is doing.
Things I do like about the OD are its good looks, the cockpit seating
(seat back is adjustable and it has more leg room than the pitts.
It rolls nice, but my Ultimate wing Pitts has approx the same roll rate.
Both have limitted view over the nose in landing.
I have a Pitts S1 with Ultimate wings that I fly in Intermediate now.
I practice Advanced level stuff and hope to fly Advanced level soon.
I flew the OD a year ago at nationals before Dan did some fine tuning on it.
The handling has been well documentedin various reports.
This is a hard decision. If you really want to do aerobatics now, I think
you can buy a good flying Pitts for less than you could build a OD or a Pitts
for. If you really want to build or can not afford to buy now, but can
pay as you go if you build, then the OD has more appeal. It is a more modern
AC and can probably be built in less time for probably the same or a little
less money than a Pitts. The resale value may also be higher for the OD as it
is new and there are people that want one that don't want to build it.
In either case, if you have the money, you can
buy factory parts. Starting with a factory fuselage in either case is
highly recommended. You can get a OD 'factory' fuselage now from several people.
If you have a factory fuselage from Pitts, then you
can buy any other part from them and it will fit. It will also help the
resale value. I would not care to do serious acro in either plane that
was welded up in someones garage as their first welding project. It also
ensures it is straight as they are jig welded. Many homebuilts have a
number of problems with gear allignment, twisted or warped, etc.
This goes for buying a used one. Find a Pitts with a factory fuselage if
possible. But so it goes, before long you have big bucks in it and it
is a long way from flying. I have been building a RV4 now for 6 years.
It is all done except for painting and a few details. Having the Pitts
has not helped as it is more fun to fly aerobatics. One last point.
If you buy a flying AC (even if you have to finance it), it is a known
quanity and you can always resell it (usually for more than you paid for it).
Some of these projects go on for years and then get sold off for much
less that was invested in it. You really have to get it flying before
it is worth more than you put into it.
Brantley Coile
be faster to build because it has only one wing. I was under the impression
that the one design has a tapering wing and that each rib on a side
would be different. The Pitts has a constant airfoil and a single jig
can be used to make all but 4 ribs (the last ribs on the wing).
If you get the jigs already made, I guess this isn't a problem.
Brantley Coile
b...@tbcc.com
Pitts Classic (S1C) under construction
Marc Goroff
>Several people in this thread have said that the one design would
>be faster to build because it has only one wing. I was under the impression
>that the one design has a tapering wing and that each rib on a side
>would be different. The Pitts has a constant airfoil and a single jig
>can be used to make all but 4 ribs (the last ribs on the wing).
>If you get the jigs already made, I guess this isn't a problem.
>
all 9 of them. Once I figured out how to make them, they only took
around 2 hrs a piece. I'd estimate the taper wing cost me around an extra
20 hours on the wing ribs. Personally, I'm more worried about cutting the
taper in the main spar. Since this is my first airplane construction project,
I can't really say how it compares to a Pitts wing, but the wing
hasn't been particularly difficult or time consuming to build.
Marc Goroff
N80DD - A Mudry CAP 10B
One Design under construction
Michael Corvin
The G-200 is another candidate to consider if you want to build an
acro plane. Mike Jones, our Chapter prez, is about to start building
on his. He has flown the prototype G-200 on several occasions and
finds it delightful. At sea level it was on a par with an Extra 230
in performance and Mike liked the G-200 handling better. It is
intended to be a more capable performer than the One Design.
Trying it on for size, I found the G-200's front office very comfortable.
It has outstanding visibility, even over the nose. But then, I'm used to
the back office of an S-2B :-). The straight trailing edge of the
wing is perfectly lined-up with the pilot's eyeball position for
sighting. The stick is finger-tip light - it must be sweet in flight.
The G-200 is about the same size as the One Design, but uses all composite
construction vs. the 'conventional' construction of the One Design.
My impression is that if one is going to build an acro monoplane, expending
the effort on the more capable one makes the most sense, ie the G-200.
The factors in favor of the One Design are the potential for one-design
competition and if one has a preference for conventional construction methods.
The latter might make it possible to build a One Design for less than
the G-200, but I have no information about relative costs.
They're both cute as a button, though nutin' is as Special as a Pitts!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin Space Launch Systems GN&C
PP-ASEL,G, IAC Chap.12 Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
zw...@starfighter.den.mmc.com Denver, Colorado
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=============== My views, not Martin Marietta's ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Senol
There is another plane that should be considered ... the LASER Z-200
This plane was one of the first and still is one of the best !!!
The Z-200 started life as the Stephens Akro ..... in fact Walter Extra's
first prototype was officially registered as a "Stephens Akro Laser
EA.230"
I have flown many different aerobatic planes and this one is definately a
favorite !!!
For Laser plans contact:
Laser Aerobatics
1455/1457 Mount Dandenong Rd.
Olinda, Victoria 3788
Australia
Phone (61) 3 751 1745
A Manufactured version is available from:
Mark Jefferies
Aerobuild Ltd
Little Gransden
Sandy, Beds., SG19 3BP
England
Phone (44) 767 651156
Fax (44) 767 651157