I have always been a big fan of biplanes; just something about them that is enticing. Watching the FF Gotha Gaggle unfold was a real treat, especially with the "skins" that Stephen ( Rasterize) designed for them. The only thing missing was the biplanes. I started to design a Sopwith Camel, but decided that a better initial design/build would be the PT-17. The goal was to make it as scale as possible, with out being overly complex.
MM size PT-17 Stearman
FT Power Pack F
CG = 1 3/4" from leading edge of top wing
MM size PT-17 Plans
MM PT-17 Plans ( full) MM PT-17 Stearman Plans (tiled)
40" PT-17 Stearman
FT Power Pack C
CG = 2 3/4" from leading edge of top wing
Flying weight = 31oz
40" PT-17 Plans ( Updated )
40" PT-17 Stearman fuselage ( Full ) 40" PT-17 Stearman fuselage ( tiled)
40" PT-17 Wings ( full) 40" PT-17 Stearman wings ( tiled )
40" PT-17 Poasterboard ( full) 40" PT-17 Stearman Posterboard (tiled)
40" PT-17 Stearman maiden flight
Twins :-)
The MM size appealed to me with the 24" wingspan, so that is what I started with. It took a couple of modifications to get it to fly the way it should. Slight scale variances were made, but unless you really know the aircraft, you would not even notice them.
The MM size PT-17 is made out of two sheets of foam board, poster board, and skewers. I opted to add the landing gear and wheels for scale appearence sake. Because of the heavy radial engine on the full scale, additional wieght in the nose is needed to get the correct CG.
I would clasify the MM size PT-17 as an intermediate build and flyer. It floats rather well, but does have a definent stall point. Because of the short wingspan it is very nimble. I used the FT "F" power pack on it . This gives it ample power for scale flying.
Here are some build sequence photos with descriptions.
Top wing built, Bottom wing ready to assemble.
Fuselage and tail assembly built, bottom wing attached.
Top wing ready to be attached. ( Note the wing guides that set the proper distance and incidence.)
Top wing and power pod installed. Power pod angle is specific to this aircraft.
"Dummy" engine and landing gear installed. Ready for maiden flight.
Maiden flight
After building the MM size PT-17 and successfully flying, I decided to enlarge the plane to a 40" wingspan. The build progressed relatively well and with surprisingly scale flying characteristics, it is a very stable flyer. The large wing area enables the aircraft to float really well. No extra weight was needed as the battery provides the correct weight/ CG. I would classify the large-scale build as intermediate and a beginners second plane to fly.
Here are some build sequence photos with descriptions.
Fuselage assembled with covering. ( I later removed the covering on the top side as it is covered with posterboard.)
Lower wing assembled and covered.
Power pod inserted, as well as horizantal stabilizer installed.
Rudder installed and lower wing glued in place.
Canopy hatch finished.
Upper wing ready to be glued in place. ( note wing assembly guides included in plans)
Upper wing attached, Landing gear installed.
Rear view.
Close up of cockpit area. This style of landing gear differs from the plans. Aluminum flat stock was used instead of a wire rod. Extra reinforcement needs to be added inside the fuselage floor for this type of landing gear.
Decals installed. Rear view.
Servos location. Battery sits inside back of power pod mount.
Finnished bottom af the 40" PT-17
Top view. Ready for maiden flight.
40" PT-17 Stearman second flight
Building the two PT-17 Stearmans has been a lot of fun. The 40" Stearman flyes more scale then the MM size does, however the MM PT-17 can still slow down for some gorgeous fly-by's. The MM is a little easyer to assemble, and the 40" PT-17 is easier to fly. The ailerons on just the lower wing are very effective. Both are well worth the time to build and fun to fly.
-You don't have any construction video like Flite test team showing step by step to avoid mistakes?
-The wings for the 40" airplane can build in half's? because the foam board I have is less than meter.
-Can that airplane build on 3.5cm foam board thickness?
Thank you
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
I don't have a construction video at this time. I did take some during the MM PT-17 build, but have not edited it.
Yes, you can build the wings in half's... no problem.
I would think you could build it from 3.5 mm, I think 3.5cm would be too thick.
Tim
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
From the pictures we just have the shape but not the details. If is possible please to upload that video it will help to make the airplane fly. Thank you for attention!
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
I am going to be building this one.
Thank you for posting and sharing.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Sorry to be picky because I think this is a great design and am really looking forward to flying it.I just wanted to suggest these couple of changes to make it more obvious to less experienced FT builders.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Tim
Log In to reply
Just a question on the lower wing dihederal- you provided a template which I assume is for that purpose. I am not sure how the dihederal is established fot the wing which is initially flat. Also, is the template for setting total dihederal or the dihederal for each wingtip? I am assuming also that incidence for the LW is established by the fuselage cutout for that wing.
This is a beautiful airplane constructed from foam board!
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Thanks for your previous response. Build is coming along, but I have a few more questions.
1) Is the power pod supposed to be removable? If yes, what holds it in place, and how is it supposed to be positioned in the pod mount seeing it's much longer then the mount?
2) Are the dummy engine pieces of foam glued to the front of the fuselage, if not how are they attached? If they are glued it may answer my question #1. The dummy engine foam would hold in the power pod, and the power pod could be removed through the rear of the pod mount, and taken out the canopy hatch.
3) The bottom front fuselage looks like it has 2 options as there is a foam board piece, and a poster board piece. Both look like they cover the same area. It appears the poster board set up is a battery hatch with a locking piece. Not sure why it would be needed as the canopy hatch has plenty of room to insert the battery. Is the battery hatch in the front bottom of the fuselage an optional set up?
4) How do you keep the canopy hatch locked down? There are several methods I can use such as magnets, but was wondering how you did it?
5) What size battery do you use? I'm hoping to use a 3s 2200mah.
Log In to reply
1) The power pod is removable to the degree that you have to pull off the dummy engine first. I used a skewer to hold the power pod in place once I was happy with the location. I use the dummy engine to set the location of the power pod. ( The back piece of the engine allows for the power pod to be inset.... I push the engine against the power pod till the back of the engine meets flush with the front of the fuselage. )
2) I use just a small amount of glue to hold the dummy engine in place. That way it can be removed easily later. ( and only after I am satisfied it is ready to fly )
3) I only use the foam piece glued in for the 40" PT-17. I must have not deleted the poster board piece on the plans. ( The MM size uses the poster board piece for a battery hatch ) I use the back of the power pod mount as the battery holder for the 40" model.
4) The canopy is just a friction fit. The sides are folded in a little extra to provide a little grip. You could use magnets to hold it , but I haven't found it necessary.
5) That is the battery I use . It works very well.
I will start a build tread in the Forum " Swappables and other FT designs so pictures can be posted of the builds. I would love to see them.
Tim
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Paul
Log In to reply
Tim
Log In to reply
Thanks in advance!
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
1) I'm assuming there is no dihedral in the top wing, correct?
2) I have plenty of alum flat stock, and plenty of 3mm or 4mm piano wire for the landing gear. Do you recommend the alum flat stock over the piano wire? I don't mind doing the reinforcement you mentioned.
3) What size wheels did you use (40" plane)?
Thanks,
Log In to reply
1) You are correct. There is no dihedral in the top wing.
2) I personally like the alum flat stock, but it is purely the builders choice; with the wire you can use the strut covers. If you use the flat stock it would be more scale looking if the gear slanted forward a little.
3) 2" wheels
Tim
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Windows10 may not have shipped the correct driver for your printer.Have you checked the support section for your particular printer to see if there may be an update or new driver for your printer?
Just a suggestion
Log In to reply
Thank you again.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Are both of the main wings parallel?
Log In to reply
The top wing leading edge sits in front of the bottom wing, with the bottom wing having dihedral . The top wing has no dihedral.
Log In to reply
The only thing that concerns me is how the top wing is attached to the bottom wing do you just add hot glue to the bbq sticks and push in?
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
this is in no way a criticism, merely an observation . . . . .it took me a couple of minutes to clue in on this. then again, i AM 74 and not as bright as I once was.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Thank you.
Log In to reply
ed
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
This week i build your stearman!
why the engine is crooked.
Why such an angle for the engine?
What’s the point of this?
I widened the ladder to 47 inches.
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
2) on the battery placement, I slide it in the back of the power pod ( through the cockpit)
Log In to reply
2) on the battery placement, I slide it in the back of the power pod ( through the cockpit)
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Log In to reply
Its the first plane I put a steerable tail wheel on and its just fantastic for touch and goes, wheelie landings, and to taxi out to the runway. Thanks for taking the time to refine the design and show us how to build a great looking Steerman!
Log In to reply
Log In to reply