Can anyone shed light on this little shrimp?

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
4,034
Location
Thunder Bay
Please tell me that it's not meant to be man-carrying?
I really wish I could find my info on it but yes, it was a manned airplane. A small man, I'm sure.

TS100 would wet himself with delight that such a tiny plane actually exists then flood us with six million concepts of similar planes. Some days I kind of wish he had his own forum that I could lurk on.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2021
Messages
5
Built in the early sixties sounds right. It was around that time that the small biplanes were becoming popular as air racers. The knight twisters were phenomenal but when the eaa got involved they changed the rules and requirements for the biplanes, essentially making the eaa biplane the de facto size and eliminated the smaller faster biplanes from even competing.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
13,977
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
when the eaa got involved they changed the rules and requirements for the biplanes, essentially making the eaa biplane the de facto size and eliminated the smaller faster biplanes from even competing.
The Pitts S-1 has less wing area than the EAA Biplane, and is a popular biplane racer at Reno.

Rules here: Reno Air Racing Classes and Rules Note that the EAA Biplane wing area is close to 108 square feet, much larger than the minimum.


BJC
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2021
Messages
5
The Pitts S-1 has less wing area than the EAA Biplane, and is a popular biplane racer at Reno.

Rules here: Reno Air Racing Classes and Rules Note that the EAA Biplane wing area is close to 108 square feet, much larger than the minimum.


BJC
The point being that knight twisters and the like were eliminated from competition.
knight twister wing is 60 sq. Ft and they moved the limit to 75.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
13,977
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
The point being that knight twisters and the like were eliminated from competition.
knight twister wing is 60 sq. Ft and they moved the limit to 75.
The knight twisters were phenomenal but when the eaa got involved they changed the rules and requirements for the biplanes, essentially making the eaa biplane the de facto size and eliminated the smaller faster biplanes from even competing.
OK, but why did you blame it on the EAA and the EAA Biplane? Is there some documented history?


BJC
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
13,977
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
When I was flying a Pitts regularly, I flew a close-in pattern, remained at pattern altitude under reduced power until turning onto a very short final at about 90 MPH, reduced power to idle, and slipped, steeply, down to the runway.

I practiced the impossible turn, but a more likely scenario was a slip back to the runway straight ahead. Turning back took lots of altitude, even after climbing at faster than Vx. Depending on the prop, a Pitts can have a fairly steep climb. The glide is equally steep, but better with a fixed pitch (which is a floater, compared to a CS) than the S-2X with a constant speed.

BJC
 

pylon500

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
415
Location
Taree Airport Australia
I saw this thing in '13 as well, and determined that it is what I call a 'penguin' plane.
Almost a real aeroplane, but not really intended for flight, maybe just tail wheel ground practice.
Loved the little radial, but if that was the standard prop for it, then it was very powerful (or useful).
Tessier.png
 
Top