Dakota Done

Your engine needs downthrust. It actually looks from the pic as if it has upthrust. Do you have a eyedropper on the the engine? A 15 second engine run can put the plane out of sight.

Ok, first I would start with obtain some clay. I know for a fact the plane needs nose weight. Put washers under the backplate but don't stress the ears by overtightening. I would offer 5 deg down and even more if needed. On release, LAUNCH INTO THE WIND. DO this for two reasons, it provides lift and it will circle to the left and come back into the wind and gain altitude. When a Dakota is out of balance it flies weird as could be. You don't want the tail end down and the nose pitched up high. It will loop and come back and slam the ground.

Of the 3 I've had, all were tail heavy and you now have a Pee Wee which is lighter than any engine I had on mine. I know BMJR offers that plate behind the Pee Wee to send it out a little further but I would still add a quarter sized chunk of clay about 3/4" thick.

Trying to time how a integral tanked bee will run is difficult, you need enough to get it to run and you can't see how much fuel is in the tank.

PROP ON BACKWARDS, lean it out and launch. I mentioned this before, if it doesn't work, it's easy enough to flip it around. The Dakota can go out of sight if not careful. I lost one of mine and I was pretty hot about it.

The plane will turn to the left due to torque, you should add a slight amount of rudder to the right which will cause the plane to turn to the right when the engine quits. Don't add too much rudder as it also impacts the turn on take off. Just add small amounts, you don't want it to spin in and stall when the power cuts.

That way the lawyers find you faster

Run or floor it nowadays.

I personally wouldn't do that. Vibration can cause wear all inside the tank due to the BB's rolling and shaking. My buddy Dan used plastic balls in a .049 Babe bee. It works to a point, you can't get back to back timed runs.The bigger concern I would have is that if it begins starving for fuel, it could really lean up which puts the nose up and stalls the plane. However, a test is always worth it.

Have you test glided the plane? Do this in high grass if possible.

Not to detract from Brian's advice.( KEEP IN MIND NOTHING I OFFERED IS PERMANENT) I will say he put in left thrust. A lot of it mind you which is actually too much. The original didn't have any left thrust dialed into the firewall and the original plans which I have calls for downthrust. I can post a video of why.  I'm not certain as to what you sealed the eyedropper with. I take the rubber bulb on the top and drill a small hole in it. I cover the hole with my finger and pull the bulb up and down which pumps the fuel into the engine prior to starting. In addition, the fuel line where it attaches to the eyedropper, I use a little CA and that's it.

              So here's a video of the Dakota, no downthrust and prop on normal position. This is what happens when too much power is offered. No one hurt in the making of this video, just my pride   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaFw4YfBw-k

             The Pee Wee is low on power for this plane, however, when running the prop backwards it's performance is very low. This is exactly what your striving for. I never built one with the Pee Wee, I used OK Cubs, Attwood Wasps and Spitzy's. All very anemic engines but also heavier than the Pee Wee. Again, I can only offer advice from the 3 I built and the others that my club members have built. My flying partner Dan lost his at the NATS 3 years ago and he lost one at Brodak's . I lost mine last year at our r/c flying field. This was a result of not enough downthrust and props working too well. Under strong power, this plane will climb fast in a corkscrew climb, it will roll out and essentially fly straight for a fair distance until it begins it's right hand turning decent. If not careful and you get this up high enough, just wave bye bye to it.

          Some more video, from last yr. I like watching it, good stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwZPbcIFAo8

I'm not trying to tell you what to do so don't be offended by what I suggest. I see your eye dropper on the outside of the plane. I also have no idea of how large your field is. Your length of fuel tubing alone from the bottom of the eye dropper to the engine holds enough fuel to send the plane out of sight. When I launch with the eye dropper, I don't even have 1/4" in the bottom of the dropper. My OK engine uses a lot of fuel so I use more but keep that in mind. Remember my statement above, a 15 second engine run can put a plane out of sight.

There's a fellow on You Tube who's named Ritchie. He built the Dakota and flew it with a Cox .049. He launched with it screaming and lost it. He found it months later but the video had me cracking up. I contacted him and we exchanged many e-mails. It was funny to watch probably not so much for him to experience but he did get the plane back and the engine still is in use. He was concerned for not having anymore engines and I wanted to send him another. Don't be discouraged by what doesn't seem picture perfect. It's all fun and these things even in a short flight will provide so much enjoyment there's no way you can't smile after it flew.

Keep in mind, that you need to vent the top of the dropper. If the cork is sealing the dropper off, the fuel will not go into the engine. This is why I drill a hole in the top of my dropper bulb. You need to use caution here as it can easily flood due to the weight of fuel in the dropper gravity feeding into the engine.