I've had the fortunate experience to fly both, though not for much time -
only a couple of hours in each.

They're both wonderful airplanes but for different reasons. Pete's
description of flying the Pitts is spot on and I couldn't add anything
useful to what he's already said. The Stearman surprised me in that it
flies and handles like a big Cub - similar control feel and responsiveness.
It trims up beautifully and is steady as a rock. Having said that, the
Pitts will do that too.

In the Stearman, because you're dealing with much less power (I was in a
stock 220 hp model) and a hell of a lot more drag, you don't get the
performance of a Pitts and maneuvers must be flown with a greater
sensitivity of energy conservation and a slightly different feel. For
instance, I can loop a Pitts with no real problem. Hit 140 or so, pull back
to 4 gs, let off a bit on top to round it out, let it fall out of the top,
then increase the pull from the 3/4 mark until you're straight and level
again. In a Stearman, that technique had me spinning out of the tops of the
loops every time. In the Stearman, the initial pull has to be much more
gentle, say 2-3 gs. Otherwise you bleed off too much energy too quickly and
can't make it over the top without stalling. Also it seems they do a loop
better if you don't ease off on top but just keep steady pressure in (though
guys with more experience will have a better description of it).

Stick forces in the Stearman aren't too bad. This is where they feel like a
Cub. Rolls don't really need two hands but the rate is a bit "pedestrian".
They do lovely wingovers and barrel rolls, though. Having the wind in your
face and the truly exposed feeling of an open cockpit, especially inverted,
cannot be matched by any other sensation. There's something about looking
up over the wing and knowing there's nothing between you and the sun. And
hearing the clatter of a vintage radial chuttering along in front of you is
pure bliss. A Stearman is the kind of airplane you fly when you don't
actually want to go anywhere because the simple act of flying it is the joy.
Arrival merely means the flying is done.

I've thoroughly enjoyed both machines but for entirely different reasons.
It's kind of like having a vintage MG roadster and a Ferrari. If I could
own one, I'd always want to have the other as well because they are
different kinds of flying.

Shawn


Nooker wrote in message <3A3FCF00.8D6EE1F5@mindspring.comedy>...
Well for my birthday, my wife got me a ride in a Stearman. Real fun
having the wind in your face, but not sure I would want to do it all the
time.

My question is related to the differences between this big bird & a
Pitts. I've been up in the Pitts before, and had a stick to be able to
do some acro myself. Unfortunately, the Stearman had the stick removed,
so I couldn't play along. I'm wondering if there is much difference in
stick forces between the two, and other things that may account for some
of the differences in acro performance (other than roll rate (obvious)
and such)

Mark

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: aero in a Stearman, KJKimball
Next message: rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ, Dr. Guenther Eichhorn
Next message in thread: Re: aero in a Stearman, stuart
Previous message in thread: Re: aero in a Stearman, KJKimball