Pitts for Competition
mar...@torolab6.vnet.ibm.com
Sorry, Gopal, I have to disagree with you on this.
Basically, the S2B is an S2S with an added seat. The airframe is identical,
except for the torque tube (for 2 sticks), canopy, and a couple more
instruments. The Pitts factory says the S2S has the highest penetration
of any factory machine. With only a few more pounds the S2B is not far
behind (flown solo). The B has better penetration that the T model, and
I can get 2 full vertical rolls from straight and level at 185. How many
can one get from a FP 200HP S1S?
The second point to remember is that of the 600-700 competition pilots
out there, only 50 or so fly unlimited, where you really need the
penetration. You can fly (and win) Advanced with an S2A. Most pilots
fly Sportsman or Intermediate, where almost any Pitts (or almost
anything else) will do. Of course, having a snazzy plane in these
categories does make the flying easier.
Gopal, your post indicates that you have 550 hours in Pitts, which is a LOT-
I'm impressed. Certainly more than me. How 'bout some war stories -
what sort of stuff did you do accumulating all that time.
(For the uninitiated flying a Pitts 50 hrs a year is quite a bit -
100 hrs is world level. If you don't think this is a lot, try the
Advanced or Unlimited sequences. Then imagine 50 more hours of it.
Fun, but tiring).
Martin
Gopal Ramachandran
>> S2A,S2B,S2E ...... are not suitable for competition..
>
>Sorry, Gopal, I have to disagree with you on this.
I guess I should qualify my statement. I was thinking about Unlimited
category. For the lower categories, it's a different story. The S2E
would do OK through Intermediate, the S2A could do OK in Advanced, and
the S2B will get through an Unlimited sequence. But these days, the
competition from the super-expensive monoplanes is pretty fierce in
the upper categories and you wont find too many stock factory Pittses
flying Unlimited, or even Advanced, especially 2-holers.
>I can get 2 full vertical rolls from straight and level at 185. How many
>can one get from a FP 200HP S1S?
I used to be able to get 2 vertical rolls out of my 200hp FP S1S as
well, but mine is a home-built, and superior to the factory 180hp FP
S1S. I havent flown any factory stock Pittses except for the S2A so
I'm not sure what they will do. Guido Lepore, a Canadian Unlimited
pilot and member of their National team used to fly a 180hp S1S but
even he has modified his airplane somewhat now. He does pretty well on
a pretty low budget, but the only biplanes that have matched the 3x to
5x more expensive monoplanes have been aircraft like Kermit's Weeks
Solution, or the Pittses that Henry Haigh and Harold Chappell built,
or the Pitts that Sean Tucker flies, or the Pitts look-alike from
Ultimate aircraft in Canada (out of business now) etc
>what sort of stuff did you do accumulating all that time.
Mainly practice and flying to and from contests. Though I first got
checked out in an S2A in '80, and have owned various S1 models since
the end of '82, most of my flying in Pittses was between mid-'83 to
mid-'88, about 100 hrs/year, and only 300 hours of those were in
actual aerobatics. It could take 4 hours each way to fly to a contest,
and then you fly all three programs in a total of 15 minutes. I'm
hoping to have my new Pitts ready by early next year, something which
I've been saying for several years now, but it looks a little more
realistic now.
As for Pitts war stories, I've had my share, probably more than I can
tell on the net. I've had various landing problems, various things go
wrong or break, been disoriented lots of times during akro, been
caught in the dark or in IMC (from forest fire smoke!), or over an
overcast or in weather, but have always had fun. An open cockpit
biplane with no electrical system, no gyros, no radios (except
handheld) can be very demanding even in benigh conditions (like try
refolding a chart in an open-cockpit Pitts with less-than-perfect
rigging).
Gopal
--
Gopal Ramachandran <go...@cirrus.com>
UUCP: uunet!cirrus.com!gopal
Cirrus Logic Inc, Fremont CA PH: (510)-226-2138 FAX: (510)-226-2160
Edan Shalev
Pitts in competition:
I fell that in American competition, S2B's, S2S's and S1T's (mabye even an S1C)
can fly in all the catagories and have a fair chance of doing well
(except at the Nationals). Where I compete (west coast) 90% of the
planes are Pitts. But if you ask me overall, how does a Pitts compare
to other mono-planes in competition, Ill have to admit that the Pitts
no longer has what it takes to make a scratch in the WAC standings.
Having only about 75 hours in an S2B, I recently had the oportunity
to fly a SUKHOI 26MX which i competed in the Nationals with.
The Sukhoi is by far the most impressive aerobatic plane I have ever flown.
After flying the sukhoi, I went up in the S2B and I sware it felt
like a Decathalon (the roll rate felt real mushy in the S2b) where
if you asked me a few months ago, I would have said the S2B rolls
great, 2 vertical rolls, lotsa fun. But after going ballistic in the
Sukhoi I kinda got spoiled and lost my appreciation for the performance
of the Pitts. I still love the S2B, its a classic plane.. but for
world competition Pitts no longer can hold up.
You all probably know this, but the new Sukhoi 29-T (single seat
version of the 2 place sukhoi) supposidly can HOVER in the vertical
position, however the engine (400 HP i believe.. just a pumped up version of the SU-29 engine, only has a 50 hour runtime.. not to convienent i guess)
anyway I love aerobatics, its the only type of flying I do. Im glad to see
other fellow aerobatic pilots on the internet, mabye we will/have bumped
into eachother at a contest.
Andrew Boyd
>You all probably know this, but the new Sukhoi 29-T (single seat
>version of the 2 place sukhoi) supposidly can HOVER in the vertical
>position, however the engine (400 HP i believe.. just a pumped up
>version of the SU-29 engine, only has a 50 hour runtime..
One thing I've never understood is why no one has put a (used) PT6
600HP turbine in a pitts (or aero monoplane) for better vertical
penetration. You could probably even sustain a vertical climb with
a good prop, if you kept the weight down.
Sure, a good used turbine ain't cheap, and they do drink the kerosene,
and getting the systems to work inverted might be a pain in the ass,
but I'm really puzzled as to why the money-is-no-object aerobatic
crowd (eg doctors, lawyers, purchasers of new sukhois, etc) haven't
sponsored this, esp with the TBOs that turbines have.
Jeez, you can even buy a maule stock from the factory with a
420HP allision turbine, which is smaller & weighs less than
the IO-540.
----
#include <std.disclaimer>
Edan Shalev
success. I know for a fact that they made a PT-6 version of the
Buker J. As I recall reading from a long time ago, the turbine Pitts
did not perform as well as expected (poor vertical i believe) and
it was to complicated to fly during aerobatics, i think it was
over heating or somthing.
If you think of it, who would want a turbine anyway, i love the sound of
the AIO-540, and i love the sound of the M-14 (i think thats the name) of the
Sukhoi, sounds like a mellow version of a p-51.
Steve Pennypacker
>
> One thing I've never understood is why no one has put a (used) PT6
> 600HP turbine in a pitts (or aero monoplane) for better vertical
> penetration. You could probably even sustain a vertical climb with
> a good prop, if you kept the weight down.
I know of one example where someone put a turbine on a Skybolt, I think
based at Hanscom (Bedford, MA). My understanding is that the project flew,
but had a number of, uh, unsuccessful landings, and that it was eventually
dismantelled. Does anyone know more about this one?
--
Steve Pennypacker PP-ASEL
Michael Corvin
|> 600HP turbine in a pitts (or aero monoplane) for better vertical
|> penetration. You could probably even sustain a vertical climb with
|> a good prop, if you kept the weight down.
|>
|> Sure, a good used turbine ain't cheap, and they do drink the kerosene,
|> and getting the systems to work inverted might be a pain in the ass,
|> but I'm really puzzled as to why the money-is-no-object aerobatic
|> crowd (eg doctors, lawyers, purchasers of new sukhois, etc) haven't
|> sponsored this, esp with the TBOs that turbines have.
|>
|> Jeez, you can even buy a maule stock from the factory with a
|> 420HP allision turbine, which is smaller & weighs less than
|> the IO-540.
|> ----
|> #include <std.disclaimer>
Turbines have been put on acro biplanes. A few years back (memory
is decidedly foggy...) I saw a picture and short article about
a Buecker Jungmeister re-engined with an Allison turbine (possibly
the same type now offered in the Maule). At the time they hadn't
flown it yet, but performance promised to be fairly dramatic.
Anyone know more about this?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin zw...@starfighter.den.mmc.com
GN&C research & development Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=============== My views, not Martin Marietta's ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Pennypacker
>
> Turbines have been put on acro biplanes. A few years back (memory
> is decidedly foggy...) I saw a picture and short article about
> a Buecker Jungmeister re-engined with an Allison turbine (possibly
> the same type now offered in the Maule). At the time they hadn't
> flown it yet, but performance promised to be fairly dramatic.
>
> Anyone know more about this?
The Jungmeister has since been used to set one or more time to climb
records. I recently saw a blurb in one of the magazines that it is or has
been re-engined with a piston engine in order to go after more records
(different class of aircraft).
Anandeep Pannu
questions to offer the netters. (By the way my father was an Indian Air Force
pilot who started out on T-6s and never really liked jets/turbo-props after
-wards ; so maybe the comments are biased!)
(i) Isnt there a lag between throttle application and power output in
turbines ? I know that jets like the Vampires my father flew needed
5-6 secs of throttle anticipation but also have a feeling that even
turbo-props do not give the kind of NOW power required in competition
aerobatics.
(ii) I read a "Flight" magazine article maybe in '88-89 about competition
aerobatics (it was a cover story) and there a Su-28 pilot liked flying
something called a Pitts Ultimate made by some Canadian pilot. He
said he was impressed by it and that it was the only biplane that could
compete with the Sukhois. What happened to it ? It was also the only
biplane in the list of aerobatic aircraft whose static thrust exceeded
normal takeoff.
(iii) Isnt the roll rate of a biplane with 4 ailerons more than that of
a monoplane ? Since wing area in planform will be about the same
the power required for rolling will not be much more than the
monoplane. Are there any other variables involved in the roll rate ?
(iv) Inverted flight in turbines should not be a problem because the
fuel is injected. Any other things that need to be considered ?
Eagerly awaiting replies.
Anandeep Pannu
Andrew Boyd
> aerobatics (it was a cover story) and there a Su-28 pilot liked flying
> something called a Pitts Ultimate made by some Canadian pilot. He
> said he was impressed by it and that it was the only biplane that could
> compete with the Sukhois. What happened to it ? It was also the only
> biplane in the list of aerobatic aircraft whose static thrust exceeded
> normal takeoff.
I believe Gord Price (ex-RCAF CF-104 pilot) was behind the "Ultimate"
pitts ... there are still plans available in the _Sport Avaition_
classifieds. Everyone raves about the wings.
These days Gord Price is involved w/importing the czech zlin a/c ... a
friend of mine in barrie just got a zlin checkout from him. Apparently
the zlin has pretty fun inverted spin characteristics.
----
#include <std.disclaimer>
Gopal Ramachandran
..
>One thing I've never understood is why no one has put a (used) PT6
>600HP turbine in a pitts (or aero monoplane) for better vertical
It's been done. I think Sam Burgess, an IAC old-timer from the midwest
has had one in a Pitts for some time. I believe he's used it only for
airshows because IAC rules preclude turbine-powered competition
aircraft.
Edan Shalev
The average Pitts Rolls about 270 deg/sec
The average monoplane rolls about 360 deg/sec
Pitts's seem to be the fastest rolling bi-planes and since the average
monoplane rolls in the 360 deg/sec range, it is safe to say that monoplanes
roll faster than biplanes.
When I flew the Sukhoi-26mx, i noticed a HUGE diffence in the roll rate
compared to the Pitts S2B.
A Pitts S2B can do about 2 1/2 vertical rolls, where a SU-26 can do
about 4 times that. After flying the SU-26, I went up the S2B and it
felt 'sluggish' in the roll rate.
RE: pitts wanted.
if you are looking for a Pitts S2B or S2A, the BEST place to look is in
TRADE-A-PLANE, just about every pitts owner who wants to sell his pitts
advertises in there. Usually there are at least 10 Pitts S2B's and
15 S1's for sale in there.
I also know someone with an S2B with 90 hrs on the plane who is selling it
because he loves competition and wants an 'unlimited' performer.. so he
is considering upgrading to a Su-26. This pitts has a brand new set
of wings because it failed the punch test (the pitts is only 1 yr old)
I dont know what he is asking, but if your interested let me know
However I highly recomend looking in Trade-A-Plane.