Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ab
June 03, 1997 - October 14, 1997
Are there any other list members in the Central Texas area?
I will be at the Bartllesville Biplane flyin this weekend in the
Tri-Pacer (White and Blue N4540A).
If any body else is there stop by!
Kevin
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "McNarry, John" <mcnarry(at)accnet.assiniboinec.mb.ca> |
________________________________________________________________________________
no repeats
>yea!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles) |
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>From: peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles)
>Subject: Re: test post
>
>Steve,
>Received your test post ok along with 15 repeat 15 copies from Kevin Macdonald.
>My Piet is about 85% complete with the left wing finished today, and a
start on the right wing. When I say finished I actually mean ready for
covering. I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am wondering if
anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
>
>When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as soon as
the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very slack,
and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking my
brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing somthing
here? Can anyone out there HELP.
>
>Peter.
________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Knowles wrote:
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >From: peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles)
> >Subject: Re: test post
> >
> >Steve,
> >Received your test post ok along with 15 repeat 15 copies from Kevin
> Macdonald.
> >My Piet is about 85% complete with the left wing finished today, and
> a
> start on the right wing. When I say finished I actually mean ready for
>
> covering. I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am
> wondering if
> anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
> >
> >When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as
> soon as
> the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very
> slack,
> and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
> haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking my
>
> brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing
> somthing
> here? Can anyone out there HELP.
> >
> >Peter.
Peter,
At first stab, I would asume that your walking bar is mispostioned when
the stick and elevator are neutral. I don't have any slack in my
controls. My walking bar is tilted about 25 degrees counter clockwise
from vertical (\) looking at the fuse from the port side. It would also
help to know where and which cables go slack.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
For those of you relatively new to the list, repeat messages
occasionally happen. It is not the fault of the sender, rather the mail
server that I use. I have done my best to fix the problem, but I cannot
get rid of it. The problem stems from the fact that we have so many
users that mail going through the system sometimes times out before mail
is sent to all participants, thus it starts again at the top of the list
and resends. To help this problem I have tried to limit the number of
participants and also weed out bad addresses. You can help by sending
me a message to unsubscribe when you no longer want to be on the list.
Also if you are a sys admin with the capability of taking over this list
on a more powerful machine I would be glad to give it up to you. Email
me if you are in this position.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Slack in the cables |
I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am wondering if
>anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
>>When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as soon as
>the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very slack,
>and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
>haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking
my>brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing somthing
Peter.
Peter- According to Frank Pavliga this is a normal part of the geometry
layout of the Piet elev. control system. I had fits with the same thing
until checking this out w/ other owners. With turnbuckles in both the
up and down elev. cables you can get a happy medium of tension in
each cable (still some slack though) If you try to make them too tight
you just never can get full up elev. They bind up too soon. Pulley
guards over your cables will help you sleep better too. Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "McNarry, John" <mcnarry(at)accnet.assiniboinec.mb.ca> |
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles) |
Subject: | Re: Re: test post |
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>From: peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles)
>Subject: Re: test post
>
>Steve,
>Received your test post ok along with 15 repeat 15 copies from Kevin Macdonald.
>My Piet is about 85% complete with the left wing finished today, and a
start on the right wing. When I say finished I actually mean ready for
covering. I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am wondering if
anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
>
>When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as soon as
the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very slack,
and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking my
brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing somthing
here? Can anyone out there HELP.
>
>Peter.
Hi Peter: It might help to think of the cables as a parallelogram and
the positioning of the pivot on the walking beam to the cable attach
points must be the same as the elevator hinge line to the control
horn's cable attach points. I met a Mr. ? Price (from Kansas) at Brodhead last
year
he had excellent drawings that addressed this problem. He also moved
the pivot of the walking beam up and the cables didn't rest on the
horizontal stab., with the stick full forward.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Skinner <jskinner(at)hurstmfg.com> |
Subject: | Elevator cable slack |
Peter,
The Pietenpol I have also has a similar problem. When my dad first
bought it (1972) we discovered the bellcrank in the rear of the fuselage
was installed backwards (or so we thought) and we flipped it over. This
greatly improved the situation but did not completely solve it. The
plane underwent some major repairs recently and I noticed the problem
still exists. I forget how bad it was before so I can't compare the
slack. Most of the slack in my plane was (and is) between the bellcrank
and elevators while yours is in the forward part of the system. Perhaps
others in the group can provide more input....
Thanks to Steve for cleaning up the repeat messages and such! It is
looking much better.
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Peter Knowles[SMTP:peknow(at)midcoast.com.au] |
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 1997 10:32 PM
Subject: | Re: Re: test post |
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>From: peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles)
>Subject: Re: test post
>
>Steve,
>Received your test post ok along with 15 repeat 15 copies from Kevin
Macdonald.
>My Piet is about 85% complete with the left wing finished today, and a
start on the right wing. When I say finished I actually mean ready for
covering. I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am
wondering if
anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
>
>When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as soon
as
the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very
slack,
and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking my
brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing somthing
here? Can anyone out there HELP.
>
>Peter.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Graham Hansen <grhans(at)telusplanet.net> |
Subject: | Re: Elevator cable tension problems |
Peter,
I encountered the same problems with my Piet when I built it back in 1970.
Some tinkering reduced the simultaneous slackening and tightening of both
the forward and aft elevator cables and I flew it that way for three years
with
no problems except at the extreme limits of elevator travel. Tension
changes
were minimal up to about 25 to 30 degrees of travel either way and any
extra
deflection was not required because Pietenpol elevators are POWERFUL, re-
quiring little movement to get a reaction.
As designed, Pietenpols have no elevator stops. I wanted to limit the
elevator
travel with stops because of the variable cable tension problem and the
fact
that it is considered good aeronautical practice to incorporate control
stops.
Ideally, these should be located at the control surface itself, but the
light construction of Pietenpol elevators precluded this. So I welded
adjustable
stops to the torque tube just ahead of, and behind, the rear stick. With
these,
the travel is 32 degrees up and 25 degrees down. There is no lack of
elevator
authority and the variable tension problem is minimised (but not totally
elimin-
ated). I have flown this setup for nearly 600 hours with no problems.
I hope this may help you solve your problem.
Graham
> From: Peter Knowles
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: test post
> Date: Tuesday, June 03, 1997 8:32 PM
>
>
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >From: peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles)
> >Subject: Re: test post
> >
> >Steve,
> >Received your test post ok along with 15 repeat 15 copies from Kevin
Macdonald.
> >My Piet is about 85% complete with the left wing finished today, and a
> start on the right wing. When I say finished I actually mean ready for
> covering. I have what I consider to be a major problem and I am wondering
if
> anyone else has experienced it, and if so what the fix is.
> >
> >When I tension the elevator cables,control column to bellcrank, as soon
as
> the cables move toward the up elevator position, the cables go very
slack,
> and I mean slack. Everything is as per Orrin Hoopman's drawings and I
> haverepeatedly checked and rechecked my measurements. I am wracking my
> brains to find a solution but so far to no avail. Am I missing somthing
> here? Can anyone out there HELP.
> >
> >Peter.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | searching for vac t&b and alt. |
I would like to purchase a 3 and 1/8" vacume turn and bank and a two
needle altimeter that are very reasonably priced Ernie Hagness 2337
Willow Dr. Portland Texas 78374 ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | replicraft aviation |
Steve speidel ,from replicraft aviation posted an offer to reproduce
piet parts ect. Lost your e mail address steve would like to chat with
you about subject .could not find your e mail address on the net.
ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net Ernie Hagness 2337 Willow Dr. Portland,
Texas 78374
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: replicraft aviation |
ernest l. hagness wrote:
> Steve speidel ,from replicraft aviation posted an offer to reproduce
> piet parts ect. Lost your e mail address steve would like to chat with
>
> you about subject .could not find your e mail address on the net.
> ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net Ernie Hagness 2337 Willow Dr.
> Portland,
> Texas 78374
Ernest, are you looking for Steve Speidel or Steve E?
stevee(at)byu.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: replicraft aviation |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> ernest l. hagness wrote:
>
> > Steve speidel ,from replicraft aviation posted an offer to reproduce
> > piet parts ect. Lost your e mail address steve would like to chat with
> >
> > you about subject .could not find your e mail address on the net.
> > ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net Ernie Hagness 2337 Willow Dr.
> > Portland,
> > Texas 78374
>
> Ernest, are you looking for Steve Speidel or Steve E?
>
> stevee(at)byu.edu
Steve E. Sorry I was not too clear on my ID. Was looking for
SteveSpeidel of replicraft.I have found an old letter from him so I now
have the information I needed. I have been on the road for five weeks
that included a visit to oshkosh and the mail ect got out of hand and I
had pitched a bunch of paper out along with the many "you may be a
winner " letters from Ed McMahon.After a search of this mountain of
trash I located the lost letter. Ed went on to the recycle unopened this
am. Thanks. Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Alternative coverings |
Still looking for alternative coverings. I am going to do some
experimentation on my own with what I know about latex acrilic paints.
Fuel resistance is about my only concern at this point.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil |
Subject: | re: Alternative coverings |
Steve,
How do you plan on providing UV protection?
Dave
-------------
Original Text
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Steve Eldredge , on 6/6/97 12:35 PM: |
Still looking for alternative coverings. I am going to do some
experimentation on my own with what I know about latex acrilic paints.
Fuel resistance is about my only concern at this point.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
Subject: | Re: Alternative coverings |
I think I missed the start of this thread but...
If you are looking for paint to use over Dacron - assuming it is through
silver then the toughest is probably Stits Aerothane (a polyurethane).
I have this on my Tri-Pacer and it tough stuff. It is virtually fuel
proof,
and more resistant to lacquer thinner, acetone, battery acid and MEK
than anything I have seen. the down side is that it is hard to apply
well,
hard to repair, and is heavy.
Hope I didn't miss the topic completely.
~ktm
Steve Eldredge wrote:
> Still looking for alternative coverings. I am going to do some
> experimentation on my own with what I know about latex acrilic
> paints.
> Fuel resistance is about my only concern at this point.
>
> Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
test
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Alternative coverings |
Kevin McDonald wrote:
> I think I missed the start of this thread but...
> If you are looking for paint to use over Dacron - assuming it is
> through
>
> silver then the toughest is probably Stits Aerothane (a polyurethane).
>
> I have this on my Tri-Pacer and it tough stuff. It is virtually fuel
> proof,
> and more resistant to lacquer thinner, acetone, battery acid and MEK
> than anything I have seen. the down side is that it is hard to apply
> well,
> hard to repair, and is heavy.
> Hope I didn't miss the topic completely.
> ~ktm
>
> Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> > Still looking for alternative coverings. I am going to do some
> > experimentation on my own with what I know about latex acrilic
> > paints.
>
> > Fuel resistance is about my only concern at this point.
>
> >
> > Steve E.
Kevin, and all,
I am trying to come up with a coating system that will eleviate the
financial burden of having to use a STC'ed type of covering. Covering a
piet with the PolyFiber system is going to cost about $2000 or so. Since
I only have about $3500 in to my whole airplane (including engine) this
is not a real tempting way to go. There have been several examples of
other painting procedures that have cost around 1-200 bucks with
satisfactory results. Craig Aho painted his piet with a foam roller
and polyurethane for about $150-- and won an award up at Arlington (I
think.) This is the direction that I have in mind to go.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Alternative coverings |
dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil wrote:
> Steve,
>
> How do you plan on providing UV protection?
>
> Dave
> -------------
> Original Text
> From: Steve Eldredge , on 6/6/97 12:35 PM:
> Still looking for alternative coverings. I am going to do some
> experimentation on my own with what I know about latex acrilic paints.
>
> Fuel resistance is about my only concern at this point.
>
High grade exterior piant is all UV protected. I talked at length to a
Sherwin Williams distributor before the weekend and he verified the
fact. In addition, the first primer/filler coats are done in flat
black. The high carbon content is a great UV inhibitor. After the
first coat on my fabric, which was very light, I can hardly see any
light comming through.
STevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your strut drawing. It's very similar to the way Jack Watson has
done his with the exception that he has no welding. He has simply put the
end fittings in place with bolts and washers on the inside to spread the
fittings.
I've now sanded the fuselage twice and painted the primer for the third
time. It's pretty smooth, but I'm debating sanding again. All other parts
have been prime twice and sanded once. This sure is a lot of work. Last
night I've started top prime one wing. First I prime over the tapes to help
blend in the edges, then the remainer. I can't sand the edges as if nitrate
dope was used because my tapes are glued down with a latex glue. This would
ruin the integrity of the glue joint of the tape and would most likely start
to lift at the edges.
I haven't performed any test as yet with the nitrate over the blue river
primer. I'm still holding my breath on that one. I hope it works out
othewrwise I'm out $480.00 CDN.
Anyway whether you drive or fly I'll have my trailer there and you are
welcome to stay with me. My family can't come this year. Cristina has to
study for finals. I decided not to fly I feel guilty taking the plane for
the weekend and not having put any maintenance effort into it while a new
member has done a lot. However he may fly to Brussels for the day. Check
with Earl on those gears before you come up.
Regards,
Dom.
________________________________________________________________________________
Looking through Sport Aviation and Kitplanes completions section, I have
found and contacted a couple of builders who have used Exterior Laytex
over fabric.
Last night I called Bill Brown, a Minimax builder who has been flying
for 1.5 years with a laytex coatings. I gleened some very good
information from him that I thought I might pass on.
Bill used the superflite system fabric and cements. The first coating
was Benjamin Moore impervex Flat Black Exterior paint. This seals and
fills the weave, and provides UV protection. The following coat was 3
to 1 black to white. The reason for the mix is to provide a lighter
color base for light color coats. I have also seen one example of going
with a straigh white for the second coat. Following are very light
coats of the colors of your choice. Standard colors are best, because
you take your chances on custom mixes being the same shade if you have
to go back for more paint. Bill said that he used 5 light coats on the
blue he used and 6 for the yellow.
Concerning durability, Bill said that very small cracks were developing
next the rib cap strips. He did mention that the cap strips were
only1/4" wide and there was no rib lacing. The airplane is hangared.
Paint was applied with at foam brush in very light coats. I asked about
fuel resistance and he said that it wasn't a concern, and that a
non-petroleum based wax helps shed any spilled fluids.
I plan on spraying this weekend. I guess time will tell if this is
really a good way to go.
Any other tips or experience here? please post it!
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
I initially glued the leading edge (split round stair rail) on by just
glueing to the nose of each rib. However, some of the glue joints have n=
ot
held, so it became clear to me that there is not enough glueing surface t=
o
hold the leading edge in this manner.
The plans show using #8 machine screws to bolt the leading edge to the
ribs. I figured I ought to go back now and add these fasteners. I wonde=
r,
though, if hardware store bolts are good enough for this purpose, or is
there any loading in this area. Are a/c grade #8 machine screws in order=
here?
What do y'all think?
John
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Leading edge |
John m. Greenlee wrote:
> I initially glued the leading edge (split round stair rail) on by just
>
> glueing to the nose of each rib. However, some of the glue joints
> have not
> held, so it became clear to me that there is not enough glueing
> surface to
> hold the leading edge in this manner.
>
> The plans show using #8 machine screws to bolt the leading edge to the
>
> ribs. I figured I ought to go back now and add these fasteners. I
> wonder,
> though, if hardware store bolts are good enough for this purpose, or
> is
> there any loading in this area. Are a/c grade #8 machine screws in
> order
> here?
>
> What do y'all think?
>
> John
I used #8 stainless 1 3/4" countersunk screws bolted through the LE to
the rib. Stainless just becaus if I ever want to get them out I don't
want corrosion to have found it's way in.
stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jholgate <jholgate(at)Southtech.net> |
Subject: | Re: Laytex coatings |
Steve,
Using the laytex sounds like a good idea. I was wondering if any of
the people you contacted used any type of flex agent to avoid the cracks
you mentioned? Or can you even use them with this type of paint? Also,
how are you able to spray with this "thick" paint?
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Laytex coatings |
> From Steve_Eldredge(at)byu.edu Thu Jun 12 23:37:07 1997
> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:30:29 -0700
> From: jholgate <jholgate(at)Southtech.net>
> Subject: Re: Laytex coatings
> Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) (via Mercury MTS v1.30 (NDS))
> X-Listname:
> Content-Length: 281
>
> Steve,
> Using the laytex sounds like a good idea. I was wondering if any of
> the people you contacted used any type of flex agent to avoid the cracks
> you mentioned? Or can you even use them with this type of paint? Also,
> how are you able to spray with this "thick" paint?
> Jack
>
A Wagner or similar airless spray gun will give a beautiful satiny finish
with semi gloss latex. Rather like the "classic" dope finishes. Gotta
be careful with it.
I'm not so sure about a finish that develops cracks after a year and a
half of inside storage though. Any fabric covered wing has a lot of flex
along the ribs as the fabric bulges up in flight.
John Kahn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Laytex coatings |
The folks at Fisher Aero say that over thier primer laytex coats they
spray on DuPont Dulux automotive enamel color. They stressed that
the system will last a long time without cracking if you avoid totally
filling the fabric weave. You will get a nice satin finish, but if looking
for a full glossy coat it will greatly decrease the chances of staying
pretty. Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Latex coatings |
> >
> A Wagner or similar airless spray gun will give a beautiful satiny
> finish
> with semi gloss latex. Rather like the "classic" dope finishes.
> Gotta
> be careful with it.
>
> I'm not so sure about a finish that develops cracks after a year and a
>
> half of inside storage though. Any fabric covered wing has a lot of
> flex
> along the ribs as the fabric bulges up in flight.
>
> John Kahn
Admittedly John, we are not going for show class finishes here. Bill
Brown did say that the cracks were very small. Not visible unless you
are looking very close. I'd like to know if he used tapes over his
ribs. I can't imagine that he didn't, but, I'm hoping that with
reinforcing tape, rib lacing and 2" wide tapes fully wetted out will
minimize flexing in this area. As far as flex agent goes, exterior
latex is designed to be flexible to meet the demands of heat, humidity
and shrinkage of wood on outside surfaces of homes.
We will see.
Stevee.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
Subject: | Re: Laytex coatings |
Hmm.. I have not had experience with other than FAA
certificated covings but one idea is to cover one tail surface
all the way through and see how it goes. Let it dry for a week
or so, check the flexibility, hit it with a maule tester at
80 pounds to see if it debonds from the fabric etc.
It is easy to recover a tail section but the wing or
fuselage is a huge job...
Just a thought.
Kevin.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dean Dayton <deandayton(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Laytex coatings |
>Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 10:17:53 -0400
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>Subject: Re: Laytex coatings
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>
>The folks at Fisher Aero say that over thier primer laytex coats they
>spray on DuPont Dulux automotive enamel color. They stressed that
>the system will last a long time without cracking if you avoid totally
>filling the fabric weave. You will get a nice satin finish, but if
looking
>for a full glossy coat it will greatly decrease the chances of staying
>pretty. Mike C.
>
>
I've seen several of their planes and they look great. Mike Fisher told
me they prime it with black exterior latex house paint and then use
DuPont Dulux. Both are sprayed on with either a traditional paint gun
or using HVLP. Mike also said that DuPont Dulux is getting hard to find
because it is lead based.
Dean Dayton - deandayton(at)hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Check out my updated webpage |
I have added content to my webpage including some photo's of Dwayne
Woolsey's Air Camper
check out
http://steve.byu.edu
stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dick Dery <dickdery(at)teleport.com> |
Subject: | Engine mount fittings |
I'm getting ready to glue my fuselage halves together, but I was wondering
about the engine mounts. Do they have to be fitted on the fuselage before
they're joined, or can they be attached after the fuselage is assembled? The
upper mounts probably could be attached any time, but the lower mounts have
a flap that looks like it would interfere with the placement of the lower
cross strut.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Engine mount fittings |
I don't see any reason why you should not go ahead and join your fuselage=
sides.
I used a router to cut the ends off the lower cross strut (with ply
firewall in place) in order to mount lower mounts. In other words I cut
slots through the firewall/lower cross strut to accomodate the inside low=
er
motor mounts. Works fine.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Your cost to build. |
I havent written anything in a while but we want to know how much it
will cost us to build using a direct drive Soob ea81 engine.
Thank you and hi again
Emelita W
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Check out my updated webpage |
>I have added content to my webpage including some photo's of Dwayne
>Woolsey's Air Camper
>
>check out
>
>http://steve.byu.edu
>
>stevee
>
Steve- See, I told everyone at work I wasn't the only guy with a wing
panel in my living room :) Both your and Dwayne's projects look good.
Could you tell me how many coats of color he sprayed ? Did he use
the DuPont Dulux automotive enamel ? I think you said polyurethane
though on the homepage. Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Your cost to build. |
Emelita W wrote:
> I havent written anything in a while but we want to know how much it
> will cost us to build using a direct drive Soob ea81 engine.
>
> Thank you and hi again
> Emelita W
$7241.34 Including freight for the instruments shipped from JCWhitney.
stevee.
:)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Subject: | Third Annual Grass Roots Flyin at Hearts |
Hi Brian,
Here's the Flyin particulars, and it's not Hearts Content in
Newfoundland (oh yes today is the 500th anniversary of John Cabot's
discovery of Newfoundland).
Who: Held by R.A.A. Toronto Region
Date: August 8, 9, and 10th, 1997
Place: Dundalk, Ontario, Canada
N44 deg. 11', W80 deg.21.5'
Runways:Turf 05/23 1500' x 110', (wires on approach to runway 23)
Elevation: 1700'
Radio Frequency: 123.2
Details: Nick Bruzzese @ (905) 453-5408
On field telephone: (519) 923-9870
Fuel: None on the field, Please don't flyin on fumes.
A/C Types: Homebuilts, Ultralights, Antiques, Production, Surprises?
Camping: On the Field $10.00/ site.
Planned Activities: Bar-B-Q and campfire Saturday night ( stories will be
provided by the membership and visitors at large). FLYIN: FREE. Gate: $5.00.
Take Hwy.10 N past Shelbourne to Dundalk Road #9. Turn right to 2nd line of
Melancthon. Turn right onto 2nd line (south) and go to second house on the
West side. You can see the runway and the windsock from the road.
Please come, bring your family for the weekend.
Regards, Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: Your cost to build. |
You know, when I first started this project, I thought a lot about cost t=
o
build and it concerned me somewhat whether I could pay for it etc. The
project has now stretched to nearly five years and still going, though I
am
nearing the covering stage. The cost has ended up being stretched over
such a long period of time that it has not been as significant as expecte=
d.
Some things I did to control costs: Most of my lumber is lumber yard
stuff. The only pieces of certificated lumber are the longerons and the
spars, and those are not absolutely necessary to be certified if you can
find a lot of good lumber yard stuff. I used some 'bargain bags of spruc=
e'
from A/C S&S. Great lumber to cut various braces, etc. from. The wing
leading edge is 1 1/4" full round douglas fir molding (stair rail).
Gussets are from that Finland gl-2 birch a/c ply. The floor and sides ar=
e
Baltic birch marine ply. Friends have given me old instruments they were=
not going to use, used turnbuckles, etc. A number of the shackles have
been replaced with moter-sickle chain master links.
The areas you are going to spend some dollar bills that you probably
haven't thought about, especially if this is your first ship: Turnbuckle=
s.
I have counted up 38 turnbuckles in my ship once it is completed. List
price is about 10 bucks a piece. Scrounge them. Come to know and love B=
&B
Aircraft Supply. Shackles cost four to six bucks a piece list. Covering=
=2E
I plan to use the Poly Fibre system as it appears to me to produce the be=
st
results for a beginner. No matter how fine the woodwork, etc is, all mos=
t
people will see is the fabric, and dang it, I want it to look good. The
bid I have had for materials is something like 1600-1700 bucks.
The up side is the way airplane prices keep climbing, I have heard of nic=
e
Model A Piets selling for 13000-15000 bucks. (Probably values your time
building at about .50/hr.) So, at least you have a nice asset when
finished.
Hope this sheds a little light on the cost subject. I haven't added my
costs up, (don't want to) but I think they are in line with Steve's. I a=
m
using a Model A, so think I have less than two grand in the motor.
See y'all at Brodhead!
John
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Your cost to build. |
John m. Greenlee wrote:
> Hope this sheds a little light on the cost subject. I haven't added
> my
> costs up, (don't want to) but I think they are in line with Steve's.
> I am
> using a Model A, so think I have less than two grand in the motor.
>
> See y'all at Brodhead!
>
> John
Actually my costs right now are at about $3800, including everything
but the cowl and a new tach. My previous post was a little tounge in
cheek, but the joke is on me I guess. I have just finished the painting
with latex this weekend. I am pleased with the results, but learned
plenty in the process. I post further notes on my homepage and here
when I get time to put it all together.
STevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <ken.beanlands(at)aurean.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Third Annual Grass Roots Flyin at Hearts |
Hi,
>
> Hi Brian,
> Here's the Flyin particulars, and it's not Hearts Content in
> Newfoundland (oh yes today is the 500th anniversary of John Cabot's
> discovery of Newfoundland).
Bummer, I already booked my vacation to Hearts Content, Newfoundland! You did
have me wondering, though. Being probably the only one on this list who has
actually flown into Hearts Content, Newfoundland, I was thinking that everone
would have to start shopping for FLOATS ;-).
Happy 500th!
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Check out my updated webpage |
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> >I have added content to my webpage including some photo's of Dwayne
> >Woolsey's Air Camper
> >
> >check out
> >
> >http://steve.byu.edu
> >
> >stevee
> >
> Steve- See, I told everyone at work I wasn't the only guy with a
> wing
> panel in my living room :) Both your and Dwayne's projects look
> good.
> Could you tell me how many coats of color he sprayed ? Did he use
> the DuPont Dulux automotive enamel ? I think you said polyurethane
> though on the homepage. Mike C.
Mike, sorry, it was really acrylic enamal. It is a product like the
Dupont Dulux line, but it is supposed to be better and It is called
Nason brand. I think he did about 2-3 coats.
stevee
Michael D Cuy wrote:
>I have added content to my webpage including some photo's of Dwayne
>Woolsey's Air Camper
>
>check out
>
>http://steve.byu.edu
>
>stevee
>
Steve- See, I told everyone at work I wasn't the only
guy with a
wing
panel in my living room :) Both your and Dwayne's projects
look
good.
Could you tell me how many coats of color he sprayed ? Did he
use
the DuPont Dulux automotive enamel ? I think you said polyurethane
though on the homepage. Mike C.
Mike, sorry, it was really acrylic enamal. It is a product
like the Dupont Dulux line, but it is supposed to be better and It is called
Nason brand. I think he did about 2-3 coats.
stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Check out Kitplanes! |
Wow,
Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to read it
yet, but is sure is impressive. About 8 pages. Definate addition to my
favorite issue pile!
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Anyone use a direct dirve Soob ? |
Has anyone used a direct drive Soob EA81 in there Piet??
How did it perform?
Did it take a long runway?
ETC ETC!
Thank you
Emelita W
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Owen Davies <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Subject: | Re: Anyone use a direct dirve Soob ? |
Emelita W wrote:
>
> Has anyone used a direct drive Soob EA81 in there Piet??
> How did it perform?
> Did it take a long runway?
> ETC ETC!
Not I, but I did once chat with Merle Neyman (of Ohio?), who
has a Piet with an EA-81 and one of Dave Johnson's Reductions, Inc.,
redrives. He had gone with what then was the middle of three
available ratios, something more suitable for a moderately fast
airplane, and regretted it. Said he needed a higher-ratio reduction,
which now is available only as a special order. The worst symptom
was his climb rate, which he found very disappointing. Unfortunately,
I've forgotten all the hard numbers, but it did not argue well for
putting a direct-drive engine on it. Pretty much the same problem
you'd have with a VW--tiny prop, high rpms, and no thrust worth
mentioning.
Of course, if anyone has managed to make a direct-drive Soob work
on a Piet, I'd love to hear about it!
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Wow,
>
> Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to read it
Got it! Looking forward to sitting down in a quite corner and soaking up
some "real culture"...
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles) |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
>Wow,
>
>Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to read it
>yet, but is sure is impressive. About 8 pages. Definate addition to my
>favorite issue pile!
>
>Stevee
>
>Which issue? Kitplanes doesnFrom: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Peter Knowles wrote:
>
> >Wow,
> >
> >Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to read
> reach Australia for about two months. I
> normally pick it up and thumb through it but put it down again if
It's the August issue. Real good article... Just when I thought about
doing away with my Kitplane subscription, I get a surprise! Guess I'll
renew for another year now...
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dick Dery <dickdery(at)teleport.com> |
Subject: | Extended fuselage question |
The extended fuselage drawings show what appears to be a piece 11 3/4" below
the top longeron, between the two front uprights. I think this is the
1.25"x1.5" ash engine support. Is this piece notched and bolted as it is for
the Model A Piet, or is it glued between the 2 uprights.
is this support the base for the forward fuselage cutout, or is another
piece used for that?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil |
Subject: | What is the stretched Piet? |
What is the reason for the stretched Piet and who sells the plans, Orrin or
Don?
Thanks,
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: What is the stretched Piet? |
>What is the reason for the stretched Piet and who sells the plans, Orrin or
>Don?
>
>Thanks,
>Dave
Dave- Other members please correct this info if in error: Bernard
Pietenpol lengthened the Piet in the 1960's to accommodate lighter
engines like the Corvair and 65 hp Continental. (My motor mount
plans are dated by Pietenpol in 1966 for the Cont. 65.....available thru
Bernard's son Donald Pietenpol.) I think you get about 4" more in the
front cockpit, a few in the rear cockpit and some in the tail. I want to
say a total of about 9" to 10". All Piet plans and other info can be
purchased thru Donald Pietenpol
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Geez, our drugstores only carry the July issue so far. I'll have to snag
somebody with a subscription.
(don't you love all the folks who visist your Piet project and want to know
where you got your kit ?)
OK- Fabric question: what's the treatment you used around control
horn exits, etc. Did you PRE-shrink the fabric and tack it up with
a coat of poly tak first and then glue it down or did you use the fabric
'as is' and glue it down ? Thanks- mc
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> Geez, our drugstores only carry the July issue so far. I'll have to
>
> snag
> somebody with a subscription.
>
> (don't you love all the folks who visist your Piet project and want to
>
> know
> where you got your kit ?)
>
> OK- Fabric question: what's the treatment you used around control
> horn exits, etc. Did you PRE-shrink the fabric and tack it up with
> a coat of poly tak first and then glue it down or did you use the
> fabric
> 'as is' and glue it down ? Thanks- mc
On fabric. cover the part and shrink the fabric to 350 degrees. Then
make a gussett of preshrunk fabric (225-250degrees) and apply with
polybrush. Let dry and do a second coat. One thing that really helps
is to apply the gusset in a bias to the protrusion. This makes the
shrinking process much easier. After the second application of poly
brush is dry, shrink evenly around the protrusion. I lapped the fabric
up about 3/8" on the horn itself for better adhesion.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Michael D Cuy wrote:
>
> Geez, our drugstores only carry the July issue so far. I'll have to snag
> somebody with a subscription.
>
> (don't you love all the folks who visist your Piet project and want to know
> where you got your kit ?)
>
> OK- Fabric question: what's the treatment you used around control
> horn exits, etc. Did you PRE-shrink the fabric and tack it up with
> a coat of poly tak first and then glue it down or did you use the fabric
> 'as is' and glue it down ? Thanks- mc
My vote is to pre-shrink...
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
Mike,
I used the pre-shrink method and just glued it on with fabric cement.
I was out in the Piet for about an Hour and a half last evening. It was
perfectly smooth. The only bumps were when I hit my own wake. The Piet
is so much fun to fly I haven't been doing any cleaning or working on it
and ect. just been flying a bunch around home. Your photo's look great.
When do you think you'll be ready to fly?
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Subject: | fabric shrinking temp. |
Stevee wrote, "...shrink the fabric to 350 deg. ..."
You've got to be careful of which fabric system you are using. The system I
used must be shrunk at exactly 400 deg. or in time or on cool days the
fabric relaxes (memory in the fibre) and you then have to wait untill the
sun warms up the surface thereby temporarily shrinking it. this has
happened to a friend of mine who used an regular iron that could only reach
385 deg. After 10 years he is now recovering. I took a regular iron apart to
get to the calibration screw, placed it on a wad of fiberglass and a
thermocouple and adjusted the temp. untill it stablized to 399.9 deg. This
can be done for whatever temp. you need. Oh yes, don't use a candy
thermometer to calibrate, they are not accurate. The one I had previously
used was 100 deg. higher than the reading showed. Consequently I already
have my first repair on the Piet. and it hasn't flown yet.
Regards to all,
Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Test (please dont answer) |
1,2,3,4,5 testing... 1,2,3,4,5
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Test (please dont answer) |
Gary Gower wrote:
>
> 1,2,3,4,5 testing... 1,2,3,4,5
678910 read you ok
________________________________________________________________________________
When is Broadhead?
Where is Broadhead?
I am flying to Oshkosh, Can I fly my '56 172 to Broadhead? How is the runway?
Where do you sleep at Broadhead?
What is the best day to attend Broadhead if one can only spend one day?
Any other information I need to know?
Thanks
Barry Davis
bed(at)mindspring.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Piet: Broadhead |
Barry Davis wrote:
>
> When is Broadhead? Should be the weekend of Aug 2,3
>
> Where is Broadhead? Wisconsin, approx 42 36 N 89 22 W, Chicago section north
side
>
> I am flying to Oshkosh, Can I fly my '56 172 to Broadhead? How is the runway?
Listed as 2300 sod...that would be your call!
>
> Where do you sleep at Broadhead? Under a wing usually, bring tent.
>
> What is the best day to attend Broadhead if one can only spend one day? Don't
know for sure, guessing Saturday...this will be my first trip to
Brodhead (correct spelling).
>
> Any other information I need to know? You have to love Piets :)
>
> Thanks
> Barry Davis
> bed(at)mindspring.com
Scott Aeronca 11CC N4181E (1947...yikes! It turns 50 in August! Older
than I am by 15 years!!)
--
Gotta Fly or
Gonna Die !
--Ask me about my
Aeronca Super Chief--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Stevee,
I'm just now where you were on Jun. 12/97. Just re-read your message to the
discussion group on the subject of laytex paint. I've just this week-end
finished spraying the clear nitrocelulose over Latex. When I first mixed it
with thinner 50/50 in an old latex can I got worried. The solution did
soften/disolve the cured latex on the upper side of the can. Without
disturbing the mixture I quickly poured it into a clean container. I then
spray tested a small removable access panel of my center section. There was
no problem at all with the dope over the latex, since it dries so fast. I
carried on and after two days of preperation and spraying the 1st nitro dope
layer is complete. This is the same paint system that Brian Kenney has
used. I looked at his paint at the Brussels, Ont. flyin and after 8-9 years
he has not developed any cracks. The only problem Brian pointed out was with
the registration markings which were painted in enamel in a darker color to
the surrounding area.
So? How did your paint turn out. What colors did you finally chose? Did you
include any kind of design/ paint scheme?
Regards, \
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
Did y'all see Chad Wille's Scout in the new Sport Aviation? Beautiful!
My
idea of what a Scout should look like! Makes me want to build one after
I
finish my Air Camper!
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Hi Tom,
How's your progress going on covering? You've seen the blurb of my progress
posted to the discustion group. With this cool weather the bottom of the
fuselage has become a problem to dope. Last night the bottom was re-sanded
and another coat of dope sprayed but the same problem re-occured (blushing)
so it must be cooling too fast. Another characteristic in some places is a
powdery effect. This usually happens when the gun is held too far away from
the surface. I held it closer but the same problem occured. At least this
is the (last) bottom surfaceof the fuselage. Tonight I'll sand it down
again the wait for a little warmer weather. I pulled out my propeller
carving machine , set it up to get ready for the next job, and in parallel
i'll be preparing the lift struts.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Wing Rib Material |
Hello all,
I would like to know what materials people have successfully used for
wing rib construction. I have been told that most folks use local
(lumberyard) available woods. I can't find anything at my local yard
that would be suitable, at least from my neophyte viewpoint.
Thanks,
Bob B. Missouri USA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Wing Rib Material |
writes:
Hello all,
I would like to know what materials people have successfully used for
wing rib construction. I have been told that most folks use local
(lumberyard) available woods. I can't find anything at my local yard
that would be suitable, at least from my neophyte viewpoint.
Thanks,
Bob B. Missouri USA
Clear white pine worked for me.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Your Progress |
(BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) writes:
Hi Tom,
How's your progress going on covering? You've seen the blurb of my
progress
posted to the discustion group. With this cool weather the bottom of
the
fuselage has become a problem to dope. Last night the bottom was
re-sanded
and another coat of dope sprayed but the same problem re-occured
(blushing)
so it must be cooling too fast. Another characteristic in some places
is a
powdery effect. This usually happens when the gun is held too far
away from
the surface. I held it closer but the same problem occured. At least
this
is the (last) bottom surfaceof the fuselage. Tonight I'll sand it
down
again the wait for a little warmer weather. I pulled out my propeller
carving machine , set it up to get ready for the next job, and in
parallel
i'll be preparing the lift struts.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
The blushing and other dampness problems are at a place where most people
don't know about. The problem lies in the air coming from the air
compressor. You need a big drier to remove the moisture from the air.
Them you will have no problems. You can spray when it is raining. You
will need a drier about 5 feet tall and 1 foot around and holding half a
barrel of dessicant. See Ted davis's at Brodhead.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Wing Rib Material |
>Hello all,
>I would like to know what materials people have successfully used for
>wing rib construction....
Bob- Being a home built you have great flexibility with material choices,
but given a vote I'd choose sitka spruce from Wicks. (since you are so
close it would arrive quickly too) Wing rib material is so cheap (even
spruce) per foot. Things like spars and longerons will eat up your money
though. I've had excellent service from Wicks and delivery has never
been a problem. AC Spruce sometimes forgets. Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wing Rib Material |
>Hello all,
>I would like to know what materials people have successfully used for
>wing rib construction....
I think Charlie Rubeck uses western red cedar sawn from carefully selecte=
d
cedar fence boards. It is in ac 43.13 as an 'approved' species, is light=
er
than spruce, and is bound to be dirt cheap.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Thanks Jimv,
Thanks for the information Jim, I think you're right. I did drain a
couple of ounces from the compressor before the blushing occured but it may
have acumulated again and in combination with the wind coming up the
blushing occured. I do have a small water trap at the gun but it may be too
small to perform it's job. I will buy or build a bigger water filter before
I apply the color dope. this week-end looks very promising for painting.
This is really getting exciting.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Subject: | wing rib materials |
Bob B. (Missouri),
Hi Bob, I believe Charlie aslo usued yellow cedar for rib construction,
although it is a little heavier. I personally purchased spar grade sitka
spuce( approx. 6 X 16' ) that had a longditudinal crack in one end. This was
purchased at a much reduced price but I was able to work around the crack,
cut all my material from the one piece and saved a lot of money, but I know
what I have is # 1 ribs.
You may also purchase 2nd grade sitka for rib construction as long as your
spars, Longerons and diagonals are #1 Grade sitka or other acceptible
alternates.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote
> So? How did your paint turn out. What colors did you finally chose?
> Did you
> include any kind of design/ paint scheme?
>
> Regards, \
>
> Domenico Bellissimo
I did spray the final color coats two weekends ago. I sprayed sherwin
williams super paint high gloss with a Wagner 505 airless sprayer. The
results were pleasing. I did learn some good lessons however. I will
not spray in direct sunlight on a hot day again. They drying time is
too fast for the paint to flow after it hits the surface. With the flat
primer coats there was not a problem however. I rolled the fuse after
it became aparrent that I had screwed up by applying to thick a coat. I
thought all was a loss, but after the night passed and I came back too
it I was happily surprised with the results. The fuse and vertical tail
surfaces are Ivy green and the wings and horiz parts are Everest white.
I am very pleased with how it is comming together. I looks great. I
hope to have the lettering applied soon. I will do 24" N-number on the
wings and the Pietenpol oval emblem on the sides. The emblem and small
n-numbers will all be vinyl. Hopefully when I get done it will look
like a brand new old airplane. Total cost in paint came to just over
$100.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Sitka Spruce - was wing rib material |
Thanks to all that responded regarding my question about wing rib
material. I have called Wicks and a catalog is on the way, and I'm
going to check on the availability of western red cedar, yellow cedar
and clear white pine.
Now I have two questions:
1. What is AC 43.13 and where can I get one?
2. This morning I found a reference in the "Hot Line" column of the June
issue of the EAA Experimenter regarding ac quality sika spuce. I
contacted the supplier and was told that they sell selected, material
cut to specifications any quanity up to 13 feet in length for a flat
$6.50 a board foot plus shipping with no minimum order.
Question, how does this compare with what others provide and charge?
Bob B. - Missouri USA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Bob B. asked:
For other price comparisons.?
I can tell you what I paid for Alaskan Sitka Approx. 6 years ago. 1X6" X 16'
(Qty one)=$265.00 Canadian or approx. $172.25 U.S. Hope this is of some
help, if not it will give you an indication of the price increase over 6
years.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Stevee,
>You mentioned you are applying small vinal numbers and a Pietenpol emblem.
Where would you purchase these?
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Sitka Spruce - was wing rib material |
This is a repeat transmission as I think the first one got lost. If
you have already seen this please delete...
Thanks to all that responded regarding my question about wing rib
material. I have called Wicks and a catalog is on the way, and I'm
going to check on the availability of western red cedar, yellow cedar
and clear white pine.
Now I have two questions:
1. What is AC 43.13 and where can I get one?
2. This morning I found a reference in the "Hot Line" column of the June
issue of the EAA Experimenter regarding ac quality sika spuce. I
contacted the supplier and was told that they sell selected, material
cut to specifications any quanity up to 13 feet in length for a flat
$6.50 a board foot plus shipping with no minimum order.
Question, how does this compare with what others provide and charge?
Bob B. - Missouri USA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John m. Greenlee" <104443.552(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Sitka Spruce - was wing rib material |
Sounds cheap.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
> Stevee,
>
> >You mentioned you are applying small vinal numbers and a Pietenpol
> emblem.
>
> Where would you purchase these?
>
> Regards,
>
> Domenico Bellissimo
There are many sign makers in the area who have a sign machine that
will cut them any size, any font up to 24". They will also do custom
graphics as well. I have seen some of these folks advertise in
kitplanes and sport aviation as well.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
I am thinking about cutting some Piet emblems. I own a company called N.
American Numbers. This company was set up to do custom aircraft and boats.
I had four new showplanes at Sun n Fun this year. (Not my planes, but my
graphics)
I am planning to go to Brodhead on Saturday this year and see what type of
stuff we need for our Piets. Maybe I will post them in the BPA newsletter.
I just bought a Piet project about 45% complete and this is my first time to
Brodhead. Can't hardly wait.
PS. If you use a local sign shop, make sure you get High- performance vinyl.
Most try to use the cheap stuff to save a buck. You can't tell by looking
at it, but you sure can about one year later when it starts to shrink and
fade and peel.
Barry Davis
bed(at)mindspring.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bellissimod(at)cs.lsl.litton.com |
Thanks for the information Steve E.
I bought a water separator for my compressor so I'm in business for the week-end.
Last night I sanded the fuse for the last time. It looks real good. I hope
the final finish comes out as good.
Regards, Domenico Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | peknow(at)midcoast.com.au (Peter Knowles) |
Subject: | Re: engine weights. |
Can any one advise me of the actual weight of the Model A complete with prop
and
radiator. As some of you know I am going to use the EA81 Subaru with a belt
reduction drive and this is going to come out at about 210 pounds. How does
this compare with ,say, the A65 or A90 and how much further forward is the
engine going to have to be in order to get the Cof G right?
I am aware that I can move the wing but I want to keep that in reserve for
possible fine"tuning" of the trim.
>
>Peter in Oz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com> |
Subject: | Re: Vinyl Letters |
Barry Davis wrote:
> I just bought a Piet project about 45% complete and this is my first
> time to
> Brodhead. Can't hardly wait.
Barry,
Last year was my first trip to Brodhead. Great place, great folks.
I crawled all over/under/around the Piets taking photos of details. The
photos havae paid off handsomely over the last year working on a
fuselage.
I suggest you consider doing the same.
Happy travels,
Dick Winkel
________________________________________________________________________________
Is Brodhead near the Cedar Grove just North of Chicago? I always thought
Brodhead was in the West part of the State. Go figure>
bed(at)mindspring.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Hi Tom,
The color doping is only so so. I'm not too happy with the finish although
I've not put the final coat on yet. There are some good areas where the
sheen in the dope stands out, but the overspray, or humidity is affecting
other areas. I'm sanding in between even though I hadn't planned on it.
Consequently the surface is getting smooth but posibly heavier. I don't know
how many coats of butyrate I should be applying. I've done two coats for
sure but I've been flipping the Fuselage over on all sides and think I've
lost count. I spent another 24 hrs. painting and sanding this past
week-end. Anyway the humidity is going to be high all week so there goes
another week. Saturday I tried an experiment after having installed a water
separator on my air tank. I took a tube (ABS) about two inch dia. and capped
both ends.drilled two holes close to each end. Inside I filled the container
desicant with some fibre-glass cloth at the outlet end to keep the desicant
from shooting up the air line. Pressurized the container and when it reached
approx. 40 lbs. it exploded from the inlet end. Ann was standing near by and
the noise made her jump at least 5 feet. Still think it will work. I've got
to try this with some thicker end caps or steel pipe that can be screwed
together. This should absorb any residual moisture downlie from the water
separator and catch any oil from the compressor. I found even with the
separator I was getting some black oilly stuff on the surface of the
fuselage. It's either coming from the compressor or the separator itself?
Next I'm going to try reducing the pressure at the gun an see if this
reduces the overspray which I suspect is ruining what was previously
applied.
I sent you 'E'mail on Friday but It returned undelivered. I'm told there
was a problem with 'Firewall' from my end. Firewall is an interesting term
don't you think. It's the server that fires out the mail in post office.
Regards,
Dom.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
writes:
Is Brodhead near the Cedar Grove just North of Chicago? I always
thought
Brodhead was in the West part of the State. Go figure>
bed(at)mindspring.com
Brodhead is about halfway between Beloit and Monroe
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
(BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) writes:
Thanks Jimv,
Thanks for the information Jim, I think you're right. I did
drain a
couple of ounces from the compressor before the blushing occured but
it may
have acumulated again and in combination with the wind coming up the
blushing occured. I do have a small water trap at the gun but it may
be too
small to perform it's job. I will buy or build a bigger water filter
before
I apply the color dope. this week-end looks very promising for
painting.
This is really getting exciting.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
Draining liquid water from the bottom won't help much. You have GOT to
remove the vapor water from the compressed air. This will require a large
dryer with a lot of desicant in it. At least a bushel. The more the
better. Take a look at Ted Davis's at Brodhead. WHOOPS, Ted has moved to
his own strip about 5 miles east of Brodhead.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Cont/Lyc users: eyebrows |
I have just finished the installation of the eyebrows on my A-65 and now
I wonder If they are really nessary.
I looked at some planes and some have em and some don't.
Kevin M.,- I noticed that you are running without them. Any temp
problems? Do you have a CGT or just OT.
Stevee.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Cont/Lyc users: eyebrows |
Put them on Steve.
They are necessary to force the air between the cylinders and down
the back. The cylinders need high velocity air forced through the fins
by tight baffling to cool properly in the areas that don't get a direct
blast of air from the front. Those areas will run hot if you
leave the eyebrows out. There are people doing it, but it's bad for the
cylinders in the long run. Sooner or later you will get cracks.
John K
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
> I have just finished the installation of the eyebrows on my A-65 and
> now
> I wonder If they are really nessary.
>
> I looked at some planes and some have em and some don't.
>
> Kevin M.,- I noticed that you are running without them. Any temp
> problems? Do you have a CGT or just OT.
Fried Cyinders:I do now!!! I retrofitted some J-3 eyebrows I got for
free.
They required some riveting etc. but the price was right.
The reason I put eyebrows on? The engine has 250 hours
since rebuild and has had 7 (yes seven) cylinders replaced.
Mostly rear cylinders about every 40 - 75 hours.
The Texas summer will eat up cylinders quickly if they
aren't cooled well!
I do plan on replacing the nonfunctional clock with a CHT for
one of the back jugs.
GPS:
I just got back from Alaska in the Tri-Pacer. 85 hours, 43 fuel stops
10,000 miles in 10 days! We borrowed a Garmin 195 moving map
GPS - very nice unit but at $1200 kinda pricey.
I especially liked the ability to skirt class B/C airspace by cruising
right outside the circle.
Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at about
300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
I'm flying in my well traveled area.
This is off topic for the list so probably reply to me if you have a
GPS pirep for me.
~ktm
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
Kevin McDonald wrote:
great 7 jug replaced story deleted.
> I do plan on replacing the nonfunctional clock with a CHT for
> one of the back jugs.
>
>
> Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
> range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
> need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at
> about
> 300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
> lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
> I'm flying in my well traveled area.
>
> This is off topic for the list so probably reply to me if you have a
> GPS pirep for me.
>
> ~ktm
May as well be here under the heading Pietenpol Navigation.
I won't be going to Alaska, but I plan on using a GPS. I have used a
couple lower ended models without the moving map. The one I will have
is the the Garmin 12XL. It has all the functionality I will ever need
and more. It will store about 250 waypoints and tracks 12 satilites
simultaniously (sp). AND it runs only $249! There is also a full line
of accessories too. ( not a such great pricing however.)
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
Subject: | RE: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
> Kevin McDonald asked - Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit
more
>in the $600
range?
I have a Garmin GPS 90. Currently use it in my Kitfox. It has moving
map and I use it for the same thing you mentioned...skirting Special Use
Airspace. I really like it and highly recommend it. You can also
interface it with map software for your home PC. See this URL for more
on that;
http://www.delorme.com/StreetAtlasUSA/
>Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: test of new lists |
>>> Sorry about the flood today. I have split the list to try and resolve
>>> the repeat problem. I also found a couple outdated email addresses.
>>> We are up to over 60 members. Please drop me a line if you would like
>>> to be removed from the list.
>
>By all means, keep me around if you'd be so kind. *Someday* I'll start,
>after the bajillion furniture projects get out of the garage.
>
>>BTW cowl templates are about half done, and I decided to build my own
>>carb heat box and save the $250.
>
>Cool! I trust this'll all find its way to your Web site? :-)
>
>BTW, does anyone have Domenic's new email address? I seem to have
>misplaced it ;-)
>
>
>Cheers,
>
> Steve Pugh
> Senior Systems Engineer
> Foundation Imaging
>
>
I have never gone so fast "checking" my mail than Doimenic's mails he so
kindly send me. Cant remember his address... :-0
No problem is part of the fun, keep the good work.
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: test of new lists |
>> Sorry about the flood today. I have split the list to try and resolve
>> the repeat problem. I also found a couple outdated email addresses.
>> We are up to over 60 members. Please drop me a line if you would like
>> to be removed from the list.
>
>steve(at)byu.edu
>
>BTW cowl templates are about half done, and I decided to build my own
>carb heat box and save the $250.
>
>Stevee
>
>
Steve:
If you have the chance to get your carg heat box welded wit TIG it will be
beautifull.
Larry, my brother, welded the one for his 1/2 VW and is "show quality".
Keep on building
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Cont/Lyc users: eyebrows |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> I have just finished the installation of the eyebrows on my A-65 and now
> I wonder If they are really nessary.
>
> I looked at some planes and some have em and some don't.
>
> Kevin M.,- I noticed that you are running without them. Any temp
> problems? Do you have a CGT or just OT.
>
> Stevee.
The eyebrows are a must on the 65 cont . In addition ,dont forget the
little baffles that go between the cylinders. Also, always put
neverseeze onyour plug threads. The bottom rear plugs are the first to
overheat and freeze in the cylinder. When this happens and you try to
remove the plug, the insert will break loose from the cylinder and then
it gets expensive. the cylinder then must be rebuilt. The continental
has a small pin seated alongside the plug insert and you can not just
replace the insert with an off the shelf helicoil. I know some fellows
that just screw the insert back in with the plug that it is frozen to
but I think this is only something that might be O K in an emergency
but should be done right as soon as possible.I just had the two rear
jugs rebuilt on my continental A80 as the fellow that owned the plane
before me failed to use baffles and heat nor any chemical would get the
plugs out .When I broke them loose the inserts came with the plugs and
it got real expensive after that .CHT s are OK if they are working and
put on correctly But proper baffls are the answer . Ernie Hagness
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
>
>
>GPS:
>
>Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
>range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
>need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at about
>300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
>lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
>I'm flying in my well traveled area.
>
I have used a Garmin 90. Have not compared it to the 195, but it was
sufficient to see the Class B and skirt it. Does not have the roads, etc.
I want to look at the Lorance (sp?) because it has the roads, etc. and is
supposed to have an OBSTRUCTIONS database. If that means radio and tv
towers I definitely want one while flying my piet...
Ted Brousseau / DOVE
Naples, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> writes:>Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
I have just finished the installation of the eyebrows on my A-65 and
now
I wonder If they are really nessary.
I looked at some planes and some have em and some don't.
Kevin M.,- I noticed that you are running without them. Any temp
problems? Do you have a CGT or just OT.
Fried Cyinders:I do now!!! I retrofitted some J-3 eyebrows I got for
free.
They required some riveting etc. but the price was right.
The reason I put eyebrows on? The engine has 250 hours
since rebuild and has had 7 (yes seven) cylinders replaced.
Mostly rear cylinders about every 40 - 75 hours.
The Texas summer will eat up cylinders quickly if they
aren't cooled well!
I do plan on replacing the nonfunctional clock with a CHT for
one of the back jugs.
GPS:
I just got back from Alaska in the Tri-Pacer. 85 hours, 43 fuel stops
10,000 miles in 10 days! We borrowed a Garmin 195 moving map
GPS - very nice unit but at $1200 kinda pricey.
I especially liked the ability to skirt class B/C airspace by cruising
right outside the circle.
Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at
about
300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
I'm flying in my well traveled area.
This is off topic for the list so probably reply to me if you have a
GPS pirep for me.
~ktm
By all means get a Garmin 90 for $525.00.
I got one the other day and am exstatic (sp).
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
Contact Art Penner at: "art Penner(at)sympatico.co" , for a gps report. He has
a panasonic hand held with no moving map, just co-ordinates. It was working
fine for him in his C-172 untill the owners of the plane splurged and bought
a moving map one.
His panasonic unit was less than $300.00.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Pietenpol Discussion |
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
> I have just finished the installation of the eyebrows on my A-65 and
> now
> I wonder If they are really nessary.
>
> I looked at some planes and some have em and some don't.
>
> Kevin M.,- I noticed that you are running without them. Any temp
> problems? Do you have a CGT or just OT.
Fried Cyinders:I do now!!! I retrofitted some J-3 eyebrows I got for
free.
They required some riveting etc. but the price was right.
The reason I put eyebrows on? The engine has 250 hours
since rebuild and has had 7 (yes seven) cylinders replaced.
Mostly rear cylinders about every 40 - 75 hours.
The Texas summer will eat up cylinders quickly if they
aren't cooled well!
I do plan on replacing the nonfunctional clock with a CHT for
one of the back jugs.
GPS:
I just got back from Alaska in the Tri-Pacer. 85 hours, 43 fuel stops
10,000 miles in 10 days! We borrowed a Garmin 195 moving map
GPS - very nice unit but at $1200 kinda pricey.
I especially liked the ability to skirt class B/C airspace by cruising
right outside the circle.
Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at about
300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
I'm flying in my well traveled area.
This is off topic for the list so probably reply to me if you have a
GPS pirep for me.
~ktm
------ Message Header Follows ------
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.8d for Windows NT(tm))
1997 20:10:45 UT
by yvax.byu.edu (PMDF V5.1-8 #23832)
with ESMTP id <01ILCFX89H6A0002ZC(at)yvax.byu.edu> for
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 13:41:32 -0500
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
Subject: | Re: eyebrows also GPS ?'s |
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Cont/Lyc users: eyebrows |
ernest l. hagness wrote:
> The eyebrows are a must on the 65 cont . In addition ,dont forget the
> little baffles that go between the cylinders. Also, always put
> neverseeze onyour plug threads.
Ernest,
Can I just find neverseize off the shelf somewhere or is it a AS&S
item. Also I am aware of a little quarter bend turn baffle inside the
eyebrow for the rear most cylinders directing air at the base of the
jug. Is this what you are referring to? Is there anymore that I need
to be aware of. What about around the bottom of the jugs, anything
here? (I seem to remember that there isn't, but hey...)
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
writes:
Peter Knowles wrote:
Wow,
Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to
read
reach Australia for about two months. I
normally pick it up and thumb through it but put it down again if
It's the August issue. Real good article... Just when I thought about
doing away with my Kitplane subscription, I get a surprise! Guess I'll
renew for another year now...
Gary...
I guess I really should, also. They do have me in there!
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mahal5(at)juno.com (Emily Williamson) |
subscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mahal5(at)juno.com (Emily Williamson) |
Subject: | Want wood sizes. |
We want the sizes of the wood for the wings ,Fusilage, tail,and
everything else. We also need the amount in lingth too. We are going to
cut out the lumber first.
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Cont/Lyc users: eyebrows |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> ernest l. hagness wrote:
>
> > The eyebrows are a must on the 65 cont . In addition ,dont forget the
> > little baffles that go between the cylinders. Also, always put
> > neverseeze onyour plug threads.
>
> Ernest,
>
> Can I just find neverseize off the shelf somewhere or is it a AS&S
> item. Also I am aware of a little quarter bend turn baffle inside the
> eyebrow for the rear most cylinders directing air at the base of the
> jug. Is this what you are referring to? Is there anymore that I need
> to be aware of. What about around the bottom of the jugs, anything
> here? (I seem to remember that there isn't, but hey...)
>
> Stevee
Stevee , Never seeze is available at most auto parts stores and the
small bottle of gray stuff goes a long way so dont buy the large economy
size. The small baffles that I am refering to go inbetween the cylinders
and run parralel to the case. They can be easily made from small flat
pieces of 24 Ga. 2024T3 aluminum . Go to the airport and ask one of the
bolt twisters if you can borrow one for a pattern and just make a paper
pattern and cut it out and transfer it to the aluminum. Real easy to
make and put in but well worth the effort. also see if you can find a
bird with a small continental engine and take a look under the eyebrows
and you will see how to put them in. One peek at the real thing is worth
a thousand words. Good luck. Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >GPS:
> >
> >Has anyone else used a handheld moving map unit more in the $600
> >range? With the difficulty of map reading in the Piet I think I will
> >need to invest in one. I also have noticed that I fly the Piet at about
> >300 - 500 feet instead of 1000-2000 feet in the Tri-Pacer. At the
> >lower altitude it only takes about 30 seconds to get lost - even when
> >I'm flying in my well traveled area.
> >
> I have used a Garmin 90. Have not compared it to the 195, but it was
> sufficient to see the Class B and skirt it. Does not have the roads, etc.
>
> I want to look at the Lorance (sp?) because it has the roads, etc. and is
> supposed to have an OBSTRUCTIONS database. If that means radio and tv
> towers I definitely want one while flying my piet...
>
> Ted Brousseau / DOVE
> Naples, FL
Ted, I shopped long and hard to get the best practicle gps on the
market that had all of the nice things in it and after trying several
including all of the garmens and apoloes I decided on the lowrance
airmap. It is very user fiendly and is loaded with many options. I used
it on a road trip to milwaukee and it works great on the interstates as
well as in the air. I loaned it to a friend that is a CFI and commercial
pilot and he has nothing but good things to say about it and he has used
several others but likes the air map over all of them. Another fellow
made me an offer to trade my airmap for his garmin 195 ,no deal.I hope
to get my bird back in the air in the next two weeks and hope I can get
my old friend to turn loose of my airmap.Ernie Hagness
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Check out Kitplanes! |
jimvan1(at)juno.com wrote:
>
> writes:
> Peter Knowles wrote:
>
> Wow,
>
> Did you see the eight page spread on Piets! Haven't had time to
> read
> reach Australia for about two months. I
> normally pick it up and thumb through it but put it down again if
>
> It's the August issue. Real good article... Just when I thought about
> doing away with my Kitplane subscription, I get a surprise! Guess I'll
> renew for another year now...
>
> Gary...
>
> I guess I really should, also. They do have me in there!
>
> JimV.
Guess I would have gone out and emptied the rack if my project had been
included. It always renews the juices when mention is made of my
favorite plane, let alone a great article like this. Congratulations to
all who were highlighted therein... :)
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
>Ted, I shopped long and hard to get the best practicle gps on the
>market that had all of the nice things in it and after trying several
>including all of the garmens and apoloes I decided on the lowrance
>airmap. It is very user fiendly and is loaded with many options. I used
>it on a road trip to milwaukee and it works great on the interstates as
>well as in the air.
Ernie,
Is yours one of the latest with an obstacle database? If so, how does it
work? Is it the same as class B and SUA, i.e., it will warn you when you
get close? I hope so, it would be nice to have those radio and tv towers
showing up automatically on the moving map.
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
>
> >Ted, I shopped long and hard to get the best practicle gps on the
> >market that had all of the nice things in it and after trying several
> >including all of the garmens and apoloes I decided on the lowrance
> >airmap. It is very user fiendly and is loaded with many options. I used
> >it on a road trip to milwaukee and it works great on the interstates as
> >well as in the air.
>
> Ernie,
>
> Is yours one of the latest with an obstacle database? If so, how does it
> work? Is it the same as class B and SUA, i.e., it will warn you when you
> get close? I hope so, it would be nice to have those radio and tv towers
> showing up automatically on the moving map.
>
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
Ted, Yes It does have all of the above. My friend who presently has it
on loan from me is flying airial photography for the ASCS, (US Dpt. of
Ag) with a 182 RG says he dont know how he was able to do this without
the GPS. In the areas of flight he has to get in and out of many
military zones and lots of towers so he is in no rush to give it back ,
but since we do our fun flying togather I guess thats ok. Since the piet
is without an electric system, I purchased a neat rechargeable battery
pack from Damark that has outlets for 6-9- and 12 volt use and by
removing the battery pack from the GPS and placeing the rechareable
under the back seat next to the ELT I dont have to replace all of those
batteries very often and the are always available for emergencie use. It
also serves as the power supply for the intercom and ICOM A22 with VOR.
The cost of the pack was only 17.00 so I purchased two so I always have
one in the hangar fully charged and ready to go. These packs are also
fused with an auto type fuse that you can easily replace on the exterior
of the unit. Walmart sold these units for a while but the local store
said they were discontinued. May also be available at acadamy or other
sporting goods stores. Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: gap seals on air campers |
Craig R. Lawler wrote:
>
> Ernie,
>
> I used RC monocoat for my gap seals. Found a color that matched real
> close and glued it on with fabric cement. I think this is better
> than the recomented scotch tape.
>
> Craig
Craig, A couple of questions on the monocote, How does it hold up to
flexing and UV. I have had no luck in finding any long enough to span
the total length of the ailerons. Is a splice OK. Ernie Hagness
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: gap seals on air campers |
ernest l. hagness wrote:
> Craig R. Lawler wrote:
> >
> > Ernie,
> >
> > I used RC monocoat for my gap seals. Found a color that matched real
>
> > close and glued it on with fabric cement. I think this is better
> > than the recomented scotch tape.
> >
> > Craig
> Craig, A couple of questions on the monocote, How does it hold up to
> flexing and UV. I have had no luck in finding any long enough to span
> the total length of the ailerons. Is a splice OK. Ernie Hagness
No problem on any count. I built rc for 15 years before starting on my
piet. I used monokote for nearly every model. Most hobby stores will
sell it by the linear foot. Buy a couple of feet and cut strips to the
correct width and iron them together with about a 1/2" overlap. The
adhesive is very tenacious. I have never seen it fade and I have some
of my original models still and the colors are still bright. Flexing
will not be a problem on ailerons. I have used it at the hinges
themselves on many models without a problem. It does become more
brittle in the cold, but not enought to be a factor in this
application. Splice and play... as they say.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mahal5(at)juno.com (Emily Williamson) |
Subject: | Sizes of wood parts for. |
I need the sizes of the wood parts for all the Piets fusilage wings
tailfeathers and everything else. Also the amount of wood I will need
such as how much wood and sizes are in the fusilage and everything else.
Emelita W
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: Sizes of wood parts for. |
Emily Williamson wrote:
>
> I need the sizes of the wood parts for all the Piets fusilage wings
> tailfeathers and everything else. Also the amount of wood I will need
> such as how much wood and sizes are in the fusilage and everything else.
>
I'm currently going through the process of figuring this out for the
wings. Since I don't have the best place to store lumber it will kind
of be on an "as needed" basis instead of all at once. In any case I'll
be glad to share whatever information I come up with. It will probably
be after Brodhead before I start ordering wood.
Bob Bailey
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Doug Hunt <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Doug Hunt wrote:
> Hope i'am sending this to the correct address.I'am wondering if anyone
> has
> a part# for the john deere sring used for the tailwheel,that i have
> heard /
> read of ???
> I am building a corvair powered piet with 60" warp drive prop.
> Thanks for now Doug Hunt...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
>>
> Since the piet
>is without an electric system, I purchased a neat rechargeable battery
>pack from Damark that has outlets for 6-9- and 12 volt use and by
>removing the battery pack from the GPS and placeing the rechareable
>under the back seat next to the ELT I dont have to replace all of those
>batteries very often and the are always available for emergencie use.
Wow, Ernie, you don't have concerns about throwing off the weight &
balance...
Thanks for the info.
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | classair(at)ny.frontiercomm.net |
Subject: | Re: RE: Re: Sizes of wood parts for. |
Keep in mind that weight is important. If you look at any of the planes that Bernie
built all the wood is undersized. He measured to the center of the kerf of
the blade on the table saw so all dimensions are about 1/16" less than what
is called for on the plans.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: gap seals on air campers |
Ernie,
The monocote gap seals on my alerons is holding up fine. On the
elavators it is starting to crack though. I ended each piece at the
hinges.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hixon, Carl" <chixon(at)durapharm.com> |
I asked Steve to put me on the list about a week ago and I've been
lurking ever since. It looks like a great group and I want to introduce
myself.
I am a private pilot, about 250 hours, who doesn't get to fly much
anymore. I have a six month old son and a wife who is now staying home
to care of him. My wife is (was) an accountant and flying was the first
thing to get cut from the budget when she started staying home.
Needless to say, I have been one S.O.B. to live with for the last six
months. I still manage to sneak out once in a while. Husband veto, I
just go out and spend the money on flying and let her figure out how to
cover it.
Stick and rudder flying is the only way to go. I did all of my training
in Citabrias and Decathalons and spend as much time as I can flying low
and slow. I got introduced to open cockpit flying in a friends
PT-23...HEAVEN!!! An open cockpit taildragger is the only way to fly!
You can see how I'm getting interested in the Piet. Other than photos,
I have never seen a Piet much less fly one. Is anybody working on one
in SoCal? (I am an expert at oohing and awing over other peoples
airplanes.)
Being an engineer (chemical) I am VERY interested in building my own
plane (more Piet). Flying is a dream come true but, to build the
machine that takes you into the air...well that's a whole new level of
satisfaction.
Before this turns into a full length bio, I'll wrap it up for now. Hi
everyone, glad to be here.
Carl "Slip'r" Hixon
FYI--Slip'r comes from my flight instructor. The Citabria I trained in
didn't have flaps and I could never land without Slipping it in. I got
to be quite the expert!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Hi Everyone! |
Welcome, Carl!
>I asked Steve to put me on the list about a week ago and I've been
>lurking ever since. It looks like a great group and I want to introduce
>myself.
Yeah, these folks are a nice bunch, even to a
non-currently-building-head-in-the-clouds-dreamer like me.
>Stick and rudder flying is the only way to go. I did all of my training
>in Citabrias and Decathalons and spend as much time as I can flying low
>and slow. I got introduced to open cockpit flying in a friends
>PT-23...HEAVEN!!! An open cockpit taildragger is the only way to fly!
>You can see how I'm getting interested in the Piet. Other than photos,
>I have never seen a Piet much less fly one. Is anybody working on one
>in SoCal? (I am an expert at oohing and awing over other peoples
>airplanes.)
Motion seconded! I too am in SoCal (Canyon Country) and have yet to see a
Piet up close and personal (although that should change in T-minus 8 days,
OSH and Brodhead, here I come!). Wouldn't mind tracking down a builder
nearby, the better to pester them when I *DO* start building ;-)
>FYI--Slip'r comes from my flight instructor. The Citabria I trained in
>didn't have flaps and I could never land without Slipping it in. I got
>to be quite the expert!
Still gotta get the hang of those guys. My whopping *TWO* hours Citabria
time has me hooked (I learned in a 150, but if I had only known...), and
aside from that one awkward incident involving landing on the mains
(ahem...), it's a hoot! Welcome to the list!
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Subject: | RE: Hi Everyone! |
Welcome to our discusion group. I'm just about finished building so if
you're ever in Toronto look me up. I will definitely be at brodhead in '98.
Regards,
Domenico Bellissimo
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Pietenpol Discussion |
I asked Steve to put me on the list about a week ago and I've been
lurking ever since. It looks like a great group and I want to introduce
myself.
I am a private pilot, about 250 hours, who doesn't get to fly much
anymore. I have a six month old son and a wife who is now staying home
to care of him. My wife is (was) an accountant and flying was the first
thing to get cut from the budget when she started staying home.
Needless to say, I have been one S.O.B. to live with for the last six
months. I still manage to sneak out once in a while. Husband veto, I
just go out and spend the money on flying and let her figure out how to
cover it.
Stick and rudder flying is the only way to go. I did all of my training
in Citabrias and Decathalons and spend as much time as I can flying low
and slow. I got introduced to open cockpit flying in a friends
PT-23...HEAVEN!!! An open cockpit taildragger is the only way to fly!
You can see how I'm getting interested in the Piet. Other than photos,
I have never seen a Piet much less fly one. Is anybody working on one
in SoCal? (I am an expert at oohing and awing over other peoples
airplanes.)
Being an engineer (chemical) I am VERY interested in building my own
plane (more Piet). Flying is a dream come true but, to build the
machine that takes you into the air...well that's a whole new level of
satisfaction.
Before this turns into a full length bio, I'll wrap it up for now. Hi
everyone, glad to be here.
Carl "Slip'r" Hixon
FYI--Slip'r comes from my flight instructor. The Citabria I trained in
didn't have flaps and I could never land without Slipping it in. I got
to be quite the expert!
------ Message Header Follows ------
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.8d for Windows NT(tm))
1997 19:59:03 UT
by yvax.byu.edu (PMDF V5.1-8 #23832)
with ESMTP id <01ILJFDP3EV0000H6Q(at)yvax.byu.edu> for
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 12:39:54 -0700
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> >>
> > Since the piet
> >is without an electric system, I purchased a neat rechargeable battery
> >pack from Damark that has outlets for 6-9- and 12 volt use and by
> >removing the battery pack from the GPS and placeing the rechareable
> >under the back seat next to the ELT I dont have to replace all of those
> >batteries very often and the are always available for emergencie use.
>
> Wow, Ernie, you don't have concerns about throwing off the weight &
> balance...
>
> Thanks for the info.
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
Ted , I am kind of a skinny liteweight and I can add a bit of weight
with out a problom and I have seen the piets carry some portly lads OK
and since I have an A 80 c0nt up front power is not a problem. But I
probably should run a new W&B on the little bugger just to make sure.
Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: gap seals on air campers |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> ernest l. hagness wrote:
>
> > Craig R. Lawler wrote:
> > >
> > > Ernie,
> > >
> > > I used RC monocoat for my gap seals. Found a color that matched real
> >
> > > close and glued it on with fabric cement. I think this is better
> > > than the recomented scotch tape.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > Craig, A couple of questions on the monocote, How does it hold up to
> > flexing and UV. I have had no luck in finding any long enough to span
> > the total length of the ailerons. Is a splice OK. Ernie Hagness
>
> No problem on any count. I built rc for 15 years before starting on my
> piet. I used monokote for nearly every model. Most hobby stores will
> sell it by the linear foot. Buy a couple of feet and cut strips to the
> correct width and iron them together with about a 1/2" overlap. The
> adhesive is very tenacious. I have never seen it fade and I have some
> of my original models still and the colors are still bright. Flexing
> will not be a problem on ailerons. I have used it at the hinges
> themselves on many models without a problem. It does become more
> brittle in the cold, but not enought to be a factor in this
> application. Splice and play... as they say.
>
> Stevee
Stevee. Thanks , I will Now forge ahead with the gap seal project.Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: Hi Everyone! |
Hixon, Carl wrote:
>
> I asked Steve to put me on the list about a week ago and I've been
> lurking ever since.
>
Welcome Carl,
I have always liked the Pietenpol, but really got bit last year. So far
I have studied the plans, joined the BPA, read all the material I can
get my hands on, asked a bunch of dumb questions, went to Brodhead and
bought a model A engine(although not in that exact order). I plan to
start building as soon as I return from Brodhead this year. Anyway, it
has been a real pleasure to particapate, it is a good group.
Bob Bailey - Missouri
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Woodbridge, Gary" <gwoodbridge(at)datatimes.com> |
Subject: | RE: Hi Everyone! |
Like Carl, I am new to the list and have not seen a Piet up close. Is
there anybody building/flying one in Oklahoma. I live in Guthrie,
Oklahoma which is just North of Oklahoma City. If nobody is close to
me, I can jump in my Maule and hope over to take a look.
Thanks,
Gary Woodbridge
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | RE: Hi Everyone! |
>Like Carl, I am new to the list and have not seen a Piet up close. Is
>there anybody building/flying one in Oklahoma.
Gary, Carl, ....... It sure is nice to see interest in the Pietenpol
growing. It it such a fun airplane in all respects. It is a magnet
which peaks people's interest again in affordable, safe, pleasure
flying. It's great to have a plane where children can see into the
cockpit from the ground. The smell of wood, varnish, oil, and
leather. (ahh, synthetic vinyl). You get the idea.
I get visits from guys who fly jets, airline pilots, etc to watch my
building progress and they get more excited about this project than over
anything they fly. It's a good bunch. Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hixon, Carl" <chixon(at)durapharm.com> |
I have looked around Steve's web page and found some resources for
obtaining drawings but, I thought that I would ask the group specificly:
* What is the best source(s) for obtaining a "complete" set of drawings
and builders manual (if there is one) for the "improved" Air Camper with
3 section wing and jury struts?
* Are the drawings available on disk in AutoCAD format?
Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Anybody know long it takes to drive from Oshkosh to Brodhead?
John K
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>obtaining drawings but, I thought that I would ask the group specificly:
> What is the best source(s) for obtaining a "complete" set of drawings
and
builders manual (if there is one) for the "improved" Air Camper with>3
section wing and jury struts?
Carl- I obtained my plans from the son of Bernard Pietenpol,
Donald Pietenpol
1604 Meadow Circle SE
Rochester, MN 55904-5251
(507)-289-2436
He has plans for the 65 Cont. motor mount, wood gear,
full scale wing rib drawing, general plans, and a builders
manual which covers alot of model A ground and lots of
Q and A about Piets in general. They are reasonably priced
drawings. I believe Vitalis Kapler has the 3 pce wing drawings
but I don't have his address at the moment.
You may already have been there, but just in case the Pietenpol
homepage address edited by the talented Grant MacLaren is
at http://users.aol.com/bpanews/www.html
Also as a side note, two designs are nicknamed Air Campers:
There is a Pietenpol Air Camper and a Grega Air Camper.
The Grega looks very much like a Piet, but the plans come
from another gentleman here in Ohio. It was designed to use
some Cub parts I understand. MC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>Anybody know long it takes to drive from Oshkosh to Brodhead?
John- I want to say about 3.5 hours or so. MC
>John K
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
>
> Also as a side note, two designs are nicknamed Air Campers:
> There is a Pietenpol Air Camper and a Grega Air Camper.
> The Grega looks very much like a Piet, but the plans come
> from another gentleman here in Ohio. It was designed to use
> some Cub parts I understand. MC
>
I have the Grega 3 view and and from what I can tell the
differences are mainly:
3 piece wing. Same airfoil as the Peit.
Cubish wing cabane and spar fittings, somewhat heavier than the Piet. The
top cabane bolts are fore and aft, which would seem to preclude moving the
wing fore and aft to compensate for CG.
Generally beefier wing strut, gear, and engine mount
fittings.
Plywood skin all the way to the tail post.
The rudder horn is near the bottom. It's the easiest way to
tell a Grega from a Piet.
J3 gear and engine mount.
J3 control stick assembly and torque tube. The aileron cables
are forward, going up the forward cabanes.
J3 nose gas tank.
The gross is 1150 lbs.
The control surface hinges are eyebolts. Rather clever.
Designed for continentals up to C-90.
I would expect a Grega to come out about 30-50 lbs
heavier for a given engine installation, judging by the extra
structure. Most people seem to think the extra heft is
unnecessary.
John K
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Sizes of wood parts for. |
writes:
Keep in mind that weight is important. If you look at any of the
planes that Bernie built all the wood is undersized. He measured to
the center of the kerf of the blade on the table saw so all dimensions
are about 1/16" less than what is called for on the plans.
Amen, brother. If anybody wants to change Mr. Pietenpol's plans, make the
change toward the lighter side. Everyone wants to make everything
stronger and "better", and oh, by the way, heavier. NOT!!!! Mine came
in at 610 pounds the second time around.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Yes, with my trailer it took 3.0hours
Dom.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Pietenpol Discussion |
Anybody know long it takes to drive from Oshkosh to Brodhead?
John K
------ Message Header Follows ------
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.8d for Windows NT(tm))
1997 17:45:59 UT
by yvax.byu.edu (PMDF V5.1-8 #23832)
with ESMTP id <01ILKP2C283M000KD9(at)yvax.byu.edu> for
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 13:30:47 -0400
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Hi Everyone! |
Anyone from San Diego?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
John K. wrote: it's easiest to tell a Grega from" the rudder horn is near
the bottom"
Not necessirily. I know of at least 3 pietenpol aircampers with the horn
near the bottom. if you have hydrollic brakes (toe) then you must move the
rudder in-line with the cable to keep the stress off the horn. It will bend.
Also by butting a pully and cable under the seat connected to the rudder
pedals it will equilize the pressure and save the horn.
regards,
Domenico B.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Pietenpol Discussion |
>
> Also as a side note, two designs are nicknamed Air Campers:
> There is a Pietenpol Air Camper and a Grega Air Camper.
> The Grega looks very much like a Piet, but the plans come
> from another gentleman here in Ohio. It was designed to use
> some Cub parts I understand. MC
>
I have the Grega 3 view and and from what I can tell the
differences are mainly:
3 piece wing. Same airfoil as the Peit.
Cubish wing cabane and spar fittings, somewhat heavier than the Piet. The
top cabane bolts are fore and aft, which would seem to preclude moving the
wing fore and aft to compensate for CG.
Generally beefier wing strut, gear, and engine mount
fittings.
Plywood skin all the way to the tail post.
The rudder horn is near the bottom. It's the easiest way to
tell a Grega from a Piet.
J3 gear and engine mount.
J3 control stick assembly and torque tube. The aileron cables
are forward, going up the forward cabanes.
J3 nose gas tank.
The gross is 1150 lbs.
The control surface hinges are eyebolts. Rather clever.
Designed for continentals up to C-90.
I would expect a Grega to come out about 30-50 lbs
heavier for a given engine installation, judging by the extra
structure. Most people seem to think the extra heft is
unnecessary.
John K
------ Message Header Follows ------
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.8d for Windows NT(tm))
1997 18:37:48 UT
by yvax.byu.edu (PMDF V5.1-8 #23832)
with ESMTP id <01ILKQVLA63O000JK2(at)yvax.byu.edu> for
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 14:22:13 -0400
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil |
What are the differences between the plans offered by Don Pietenpol and
those offered by Orrin Hoopman?
-------------
Original Text
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn), on 7/23/97 2:22 PM: |
> Also as a side note, two designs are nicknamed Air Campers:
> There is a Pietenpol Air Camper and a Grega Air Camper.
> The Grega looks very much like a Piet, but the plans come
> from another gentleman here in Ohio. It was designed to use
> some Cub parts I understand. MC
>
I have the Grega 3 view and and from what I can tell the
differences are mainly:
3 piece wing. Same airfoil as the Peit.
Cubish wing cabane and spar fittings, somewhat heavier than the Piet. The
top cabane bolts are fore and aft, which would seem to preclude moving the
wing fore and aft to compensate for CG.
Generally beefier wing strut, gear, and engine mount
fittings.
Plywood skin all the way to the tail post.
The rudder horn is near the bottom. It's the easiest way to
tell a Grega from a Piet.
J3 gear and engine mount.
J3 control stick assembly and torque tube. The aileron cables
are forward, going up the forward cabanes.
J3 nose gas tank.
The gross is 1150 lbs.
The control surface hinges are eyebolts. Rather clever.
Designed for continentals up to C-90.
I would expect a Grega to come out about 30-50 lbs
heavier for a given engine installation, judging by the extra
structure. Most people seem to think the extra heft is
unnecessary.
John K
-
________________________________________________________________________________
John Kahn wrote:
>
> Anybody know long it takes to drive from Oshkosh to Brodhead?
>
> John K
More than 2 hours and less than a day and a half (don't ask, long
story!)...seriously, depending on traffic, about 2 hours each way. Hope
this helps you out.
Scott, N4181E (Aeronca 11CC)
--
Gotta Fly or
Gonna Die !
--Ask me about my
Aeronca Super Chief--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bill Talbert <wtalbert(at)flash.net> |
dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil wrote:
>
> What are the differences between the plans offered by Don Pietenpol and
> those offered by Orrin Hoopman?
I bought a set from both. The main difference is Mr. Hoopman charges
$40.00 and Mr. Pietenpol about $65.00. The main drawings are the same
size and quality. Seems like Mr. Pietenpol may have additional utility
(optional) drawings
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
>> >>
>> > Since the piet
>> >is without an electric system, I purchased a neat rechargeable battery
>> >pack from Damark that has outlets for 6-9- and 12 volt use
Ernie,
I looked in my last Damark catalog and couldn't find that battery pack. Did
you purchase it recently? Do you have a catalog number? It sounds like
something I could use.
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
John K's notes on |Grega's was right on.......
Another way to distinguish Grega and a Piet is how their
lift struts attach to the fuselage. The Piets struts join at the
top of each landing gear fitting, the Grega has a third fitting
which isn't in line with the gear fittings. (to use the Cub gear)
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mark Morgan <75573.23(at)CompuServe.COM> |
Also, I have an engine 0-290D2 for sale or trade. Will trade for project or a
A65.
Mark Morgan
.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D.BELLISSIMO(at)littonlsl.com (BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC) |
Unsubscribe, Just got layed off.
Will subscribe as soon as I get another hookup.
regards, Domenic Bellissimo
________________________________________________________________________________
If you want to go with a one peace weing the weight will be very close. I
know the one peace is not an option with the GN1 but I have been told it will
work.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dick Dery <dickdery(at)teleport.com> |
>>obtaining drawings but, I thought that I would ask the group specificly:
>> What is the best source(s) for obtaining a "complete" set of drawings
and
>builders manual (if there is one) for the "improved" Air Camper with>3
>section wing and jury struts?
>
>Carl- I obtained my plans from the son of Bernard Pietenpol,
>
>Donald Pietenpol
>1604 Meadow Circle SE
>Rochester, MN 55904-5251
>(507)-289-2436
>
>He has plans for the 65 Cont. motor mount, wood gear,
>full scale wing rib drawing, general plans, and a builders
>manual which covers alot of model A ground and lots of
>Q and A about Piets in general. They are reasonably priced
>drawings. I believe Vitalis Kapler has the 3 pce wing drawings
>but I don't have his address at the moment.
>
Vitalis Kapler
1033 Forest Hills Dr. SW
Rochester, MN 55902
507-288-3322
I got my 3-pc wing plans for $10.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> >> >>
> >> > Since the piet
> >> >is without an electric system, I purchased a neat rechargeable battery
> >> >pack from Damark that has outlets for 6-9- and 12 volt use
>
> Ernie,
>
> I looked in my last Damark catalog and couldn't find that battery pack. Did
> you purchase it recently? Do you have a catalog number? It sounds like
> something I could use.
>
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
Ted I will try to find the catalog number , If that fails I can give you
all of the data from my receipt ect . that you can call damark on their
800 and see if they still have any . The data off the box is #30199
electrical v MVP 12 volt dc rechargeable handy power system multi-volt
with diagnostic LED display I-6001 multi portable power source has
multi-DC. voltage 3v-6v-9v-12v featured with a 12volt DC or 110voltAC
recharging capability . The 110 charge adapter is not included but
available at K Mart for about $7.00 The unit is also fused with an
automotive type flat two prong fuse easy to get at on the outside of the
unit. It is put out by the Shin Fu Co of America inc. 10939 N Pomona
ave. Kansas City, MO. 64153. The bar code number is 0 47077 19294 8
Shin Fu phone number is 816-891-6390 and Fax is 816-891-6599 Damarks
number is 1-800-827-6767 any day any time. If you are unable to do any
good with this info I will try to find me receipt and get the catalog
number. I think it is at the air port in my four foot high airplane
expense folder that is to large to transport so i just leave it in the
hangar and watch it grow.Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
bargain. Good luck . Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: Hi Everyone! |
Carl:
Welcome to the list, you have to do "magic" with your budget and manage to=
fly,
That is why some airplanes are nicknamed "mistress", because you have them
without your wife knowing... sometimes they kinda suspect it.
One Mexican advice about this:
..... My wife is (was) an accountant and flying was the first
>thing to get cut from the budget when she started staying home.
>Needless to say, I have been one S.O.B. to live with for the last six
>months. I still manage to sneak out once in a while. Husband veto, I
>just go out and spend the money on flying and let her figure out how to
>cover it.
>
Dont give to your wife All your money nether all your love! She will have
it all and loose interest (?)
Allways "hide" some budget from your income, they (wifes) normaly do and it
helps in difficult times of marriage,
You have another option, search for a better paid job.....
Well back to theme Welcome and fly before is to late, time wont wait for
nobody!
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
> Ernie wrote:
>> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
>club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
>bargain. Good luck . Ernie
>
Ernie,
Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the list
doesn't call and cause a run on them...
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
>>Anybody know long it takes to drive from Oshkosh to Brodhead?
>
>John- I want to say about 3.5 hours or so. MC
>
>>John K
>>
>>
With or witout "radar Detector" ? ..... :-)
This year we ( 4 friends and me) went by Bus from here (Guadalajara, Mexico)
to Laredo and San Antonio TX.
Then we droved from San Antonio TX to Lakeland FLA (sun & Fun) stoping
only for fuel food and 3 hours of sleep... we got there tired but happy. in
a truck stop in LA we bought a "radar detector" the best investment in the
hole trip, we were making 80 - 90 mph "cops and weather permited".
So from Osh driving to Brodhead will be worth it.. Hope I will make it some
time.
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Osh to Brod and question about Model A |
If I can expect to get a Piet ride, a 3 hour side trip to Brodhead on Saturday
would certainly be worth it.
And now a Model A question:
Has anybody ever tried to modify the aluminum Model A head for
a second spark plug? Possibly by boring a hole through a water
jacket and tig welding a sleeve in the hole which could be threaded
and helicoiled for one of those small (7mm I think) spark plugs like
they use on dual ignition VWs?
Too off-the-wall?
JohnK
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Me again...
What's the nearest medium to large town by Brodhead? I have
a relatively sketchy map of Wisconsin right now. If it's in
SE Wisconsin it's right on the way home.
JohnK
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: Osh to Brod -Reply |
Brodhead is 30 miles due south of Madison and 20 miles West of
Janesville.
Greg
>>> John Kahn 07/25/97 09:21am >>>
Me again...
What's the nearest medium to large town by Brodhead? I have
a relatively sketchy map of Wisconsin right now. If it's in
SE Wisconsin it's right on the way home.
JohnK
________________________________________________________________________________
John Kahn wrote:
>
> Me again...
>
> What's the nearest medium to large town by Brodhead? I have
> a relatively sketchy map of Wisconsin right now. If it's in
> SE Wisconsin it's right on the way home.
>
> JohnK
John, Brodhead is 25 miles west of Janesville, WI on Hy 11
Arden A.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Schober <classair(at)frontiernet.net> |
Weight is the biggest problem with the Pietenpol Aircamper. The 3 piece
wing adds about 6 pounds. I would suggest that you make a 2 piece wing.
Make one side so it includes the center section and make the other so it
is only the outer panel. This saves 3 pounds of fittings and the time req=
uired to produce them. The rigging may be a little harder but the perform=
ance difference with a lighter airframe will be well worth it. Of course
the best solution is to make the one piece wing if you have the room to
store it.
> >>obtaining drawings but, I thought that I would ask the group specific=
ly:
> >> What is the best source(s) for obtaining a "complete" set of drawing=
s
> and
> >builders manual (if there is one) for the "improved" Air Camper with>3
> >section wing and jury struts?
> >
> >Carl- I obtained my plans from the son of Bernard Pietenpol,
> >
> >Donald Pietenpol
> >1604 Meadow Circle SE
> >Rochester, MN 55904-5251
> >(507)-289-2436
> >
> >He has plans for the 65 Cont. motor mount, wood gear,
> >full scale wing rib drawing, general plans, and a builders
> >manual which covers alot of model A ground and lots of
> >Q and A about Piets in general. They are reasonably priced
> >drawings. I believe Vitalis Kapler has the 3 pce wing drawings
> >but I don't have his address at the moment.
> >
> Vitalis Kapler
> 1033 Forest Hills Dr. SW
> Rochester, MN 55902
> 507-288-3322
>
> I got my 3-pc wing plans for $10.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: Osh to Brod and question about Model A |
>If I can expect to get a Piet ride, a 3 hour side trip to Brodhead on=
Saturday
>would certainly be worth it.
>
>And now a Model A question:
>
>Has anybody ever tried to modify the aluminum Model A head for
>a second spark plug? Possibly by boring a hole through a water
>jacket and tig welding a sleeve in the hole which could be threaded
>and helicoiled for one of those small (7mm I think) spark plugs like
>they use on dual ignition VWs?
>
>Too off-the-wall?
>
>JohnK
>
Some years ago (with a the old 2 cycle 25:1 oil mixture used at that time) I
made a long trip in my motorcycle, to prevent cleaning and changing plugs in
the middle of nowhere in the sun, I made (with my welder an late) a part
that maybe you can use (or try), when one spark plug beguined to foul I just
change the cable to the other one.
This way I could make some distance and find a shade to clean the spark
plugs, and drink a coke.... This was a good motorcycle with all that smoke
trail the cars could see you at safe distance :-)
I will try to explain (no drawing in e-mail yet): with an old spark plug
metal part, leave enough height to hold it in place, then using two little
pieces of tube (is difficult to find the words in english), with the
diameter enough for the little new spark plugs (GM ?) make tread inside for
the spark plugs,
then weld them to the piece of spark plug in "Y" position, screw it to the
spark plug hole and put one little spark plug in each tube.... Then conect
the cable from each magneto to the spark plugs. I think this is better than
the risk of a water leak....
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
John Kahn wrote:
>
> Me again...
>
> What's the nearest medium to large town by Brodhead? I have
> a relatively sketchy map of Wisconsin right now. If it's in
> SE Wisconsin it's right on the way home.
>
> JohnKBrodhead is fairly close to either Janesville or Beloit...if I had my
choice, I'd stay in Janesville. It's about 200 degrees from Oshkosh
(about 105 S.M.) and about 280 degrees from the Janesville VOR (about 14
S.M.) all as the crow (or Piet) flies...
Scott, Aeronca N4181E
--
Gotta Fly or
Gonna Die !
--Ask me about my
Aeronca Super Chief--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> > Ernie wrote:
> >> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
> >club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
> >bargain. Good luck . Ernie
> >
> Ernie,
>
> Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the list
> doesn't call and cause a run on them...
>
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
Ted, Thats what happened here when I showed mine to the eaa group ,and a
bunch of local areial ag applicators . If you dont connect with the info
you have ,push my button again and I will try to dig up the catalog
number.Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Vinyl Letters |
Barry Davis wrote:
>
> I am thinking about cutting some Piet emblems. I own a company called N.
> American Numbers. This company was set up to do custom aircraft and boats.
> I had four new showplanes at Sun n Fun this year. (Not my planes, but my
> graphics)
>
> I am planning to go to Brodhead on Saturday this year and see what type of
> stuff we need for our Piets. Maybe I will post them in the BPA newsletter.
>
> I just bought a Piet project about 45% complete and this is my first time to
> Brodhead. Can't hardly wait.
>
> PS. If you use a local sign shop, make sure you get High- performance vinyl.
> Most try to use the cheap stuff to save a buck. You can't tell by looking
> at it, but you sure can about one year later when it starts to shrink and
> fade and peel.
>
> Barry Davis
> bed(at)mindspring.com
Barry , could you give us more info on the piet emblems IE: size, colors
graphics, PRICE. and will they pe on peel and stick vinyl Ernie . I have
a Grega aircamper so I guess it would not do to put pietenpol on mine ,
however it really stated as a pietenpol and still is except for the
engine and gear. I still give pietenpol full credit for it. Ernie
Hagness ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Vinyl Letters |
>Barry Davis wrote:
>>
>> I am thinking about cutting some Piet emblems. I own a company called N.
>> American Numbers. This company was set up to do custom aircraft and boats.
>> I had four new showplanes at Sun n Fun this year. (Not my planes, but my
>> graphics)
>>
>> I am planning to go to Brodhead on Saturday this year and see what type of
>> stuff we need for our Piets. Maybe I will post them in the BPA newsletter.
>>
>> I just bought a Piet project about 45% complete and this is my first time to
>> Brodhead. Can't hardly wait.
>>
>> PS. If you use a local sign shop, make sure you get High- performance vinyl.
>> Most try to use the cheap stuff to save a buck. You can't tell by looking
>> at it, but you sure can about one year later when it starts to shrink and
>> fade and peel.
>>
>> Barry Davis
>> bed(at)mindspring.com
>Barry , could you give us more info on the piet emblems IE: size, colors
>graphics, PRICE. and will they pe on peel and stick vinyl Ernie . I have
>a Grega aircamper so I guess it would not do to put pietenpol on mine ,
>however it really stated as a pietenpol and still is except for the
>engine and gear. I still give pietenpol full credit for it. Ernie
>Hagness ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net
Good to hear from you. I'm leaving for Oshkosh shortly, also Brodhead on
Sat. I'll email you when I get back. I have a lot of questions since the
project I bought is also a GN-1.
Barry Davis>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | laur-mac(at)ArkansasUSA.com (LAUR-MAC, INC.) |
Subject: | Re: Vinyl Letters |
How about an emblem for GN-1'S?
Ken Goff
> From: Barry Davis
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Vinyl Letters
> Date: Saturday, July 26, 1997 9:30 PM
>
> >Barry Davis wrote:
> >>
> >> I am thinking about cutting some Piet emblems. I own a company called
N.
> >> American Numbers. This company was set up to do custom aircraft and
boats.
> >> I had four new showplanes at Sun n Fun this year. (Not my planes, but
my
> >> graphics)
> >>
> >> I am planning to go to Brodhead on Saturday this year and see what
type of
> >> stuff we need for our Piets. Maybe I will post them in the BPA
newsletter.
> >>
> >> I just bought a Piet project about 45% complete and this is my first
time to
> >> Brodhead. Can't hardly wait.
> >>
> >> PS. If you use a local sign shop, make sure you get High- performance
vinyl.
> >> Most try to use the cheap stuff to save a buck. You can't tell by
looking
> >> at it, but you sure can about one year later when it starts to shrink
and
> >> fade and peel.
> >>
> >> Barry Davis
> >> bed(at)mindspring.com
> >Barry , could you give us more info on the piet emblems IE: size, colors
> >graphics, PRICE. and will they pe on peel and stick vinyl Ernie . I have
> >a Grega aircamper so I guess it would not do to put pietenpol on mine ,
> >however it really stated as a pietenpol and still is except for the
> >engine and gear. I still give pietenpol full credit for it. Ernie
> >Hagness ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net
>
>
> Good to hear from you. I'm leaving for Oshkosh shortly, also Brodhead on
> Sat. I'll email you when I get back. I have a lot of questions since
the
> project I bought is also a GN-1.
>
> Barry Davis>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Offa da list for a spell |
Greetings!
I'm getting ready to head to Oshkosh on Wednesday, and as a result I'll not
be checking my email starting tomorrow for a week. Do you need to remove
me from the Piet list or anything like that? I don't want to be the cause
of any problems.
If you need to take me off, feel free to do so and I'll let you know when
I'm back. If there's anything I need to do, I'll try to hop in tomorrow
and check my email.
Maybe see you at Brodhead?
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> > Ernie wrote:
> >> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
> >club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
> >bargain. Good luck . Ernie
> >
> Ernie,
>
> Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the list
> doesn't call and cause a run on them...
>
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
Ted, as promised I did go through my paper mountain in search of data I
need to enter in my log book as I get ready to certify after a bunch of
repairs and I was able to locate the catalog number for the powerpack I
will give you the string as not to miss anything you may need.
Start--Item #508952 description--handy power system-- catalog#
30020--Item price $19.99 Discount for member$5.00 --total item
price$14.99 --Free shipping . Good luck. This is all of the data I have.
Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Offa da list for a spell |
Steve Pugh wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> I'm getting ready to head to Oshkosh on Wednesday, and as a result
> I'll not
> be checking my email starting tomorrow for a week. Do you need to
> remove
> me from the Piet list or anything like that? I don't want to be the
> cause
> of any problems.
>
> If you need to take me off, feel free to do so and I'll let you know
> when
> I'm back. If there's anything I need to do, I'll try to hop in
> tomorrow
> and check my email.
>
> Maybe see you at Brodhead?
>
I wish! I am almost finished with my plane, but not yet. I will make
it one of these years though.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | MOre updates to my page |
Take a look.
http://steve.byu.edu
If you have questions on the laytex paint, vinyl lettering etc, let me
know.
stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Farthest flight to Brodhead? |
Those of you flying to Brodhead in their piet, let us know how far
you are going so we can cheer the intreped soul who flies the farthest.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jerry & Sandy Walker <jswalker(at)tsixroads.com> |
Hello,
My name is Jerry Walker. Married to wife Sandy. Two children; Danielle and
Ian. 48 Years old. Presently 3rd year pharmacy student (six year program).
Previously a purchasing agent and later a contractor (primarily
residential). Got the children out of the house and can now do what I want.
One of those things is perhaps build a Pietenpol. Working on a Doctor of
Pharmacy degree is not difficult enough at my age, I needed an additional
challenge. (grin)
Are there any builder/owners of Pietenpols in my area (Corinth, MS is in
the very Northeast corner of the state)? I would like to make their
acquaintance, see their planes, and perhaps solicit their help.
Kept this brief as I'm sure you'd rather discuss Pietenpols, as would I.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dswagler(at)cobkf.ang.af.mil |
Subject: | What is a babbit/babbiting? |
Or is it "babbet/babbeting"? In any case, I know bupkis about the Model A
and have seen that term many times. Any clarification would be greatly
appreciated.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> writes:
Ted Brousseau wrote:
Ernie wrote:
Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
bargain. Good luck . Ernie
Ernie,
Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the
list
doesn't call and cause a run on them...
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
Ted, as promised I did go through my paper mountain in search of data
I
need to enter in my log book as I get ready to certify after a bunch
of
repairs and I was able to locate the catalog number for the powerpack
I
will give you the string as not to miss anything you may need.
Start--Item #508952 description--handy power system-- catalog#
30020--Item price $19.99 Discount for member$5.00 --total item
price$14.99 --Free shipping . Good luck. This is all of the data I
have.
Ernie.
C'mon, guys, if you wanna nav, get a Garmin 90. Use AA's.
I've got a Corvair with a battery, and I don't use it 'cept for ignition.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
any GPS should only be used as a last resort. Fly like the 1928 pilot
did.....
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Niwlyf(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> any GPS should only be used as a last resort. Fly like the 1928 pilot
> did.....
I did with My dad and wound up in a lot of strange places and hayfields.
It WAS FUN AND EXCITING BUT , todays landscape with all of the
obstructions,traffic and restricted air space that some of us have to
weave our way through i will take the GPS. An old geezer thats been
there and done that.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
jimvan1(at)juno.com wrote:
>
> ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> writes:
> Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> Ernie wrote:
> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
> club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
> bargain. Good luck . Ernie
>
> Ernie,
>
> Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the
> list
> doesn't call and cause a run on them...
>
> Ted Brousseau/APF
> nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
> Sunny SW Florida
> Ted, as promised I did go through my paper mountain in search of data
> I
> need to enter in my log book as I get ready to certify after a bunch
> of
> repairs and I was able to locate the catalog number for the powerpack
> I
> will give you the string as not to miss anything you may need.
> Start--Item #508952 description--handy power system-- catalog#
> 30020--Item price $19.99 Discount for member$5.00 --total item
> price$14.99 --Free shipping . Good luck. This is all of the data I
> have.
> Ernie.
>
> C'mon, guys, if you wanna nav, get a Garmin 90. Use AA's.
> I've got a Corvair with a battery, and I don't use it 'cept for ignition.
>
> JimV.
The Lowrance also hums along on aa power but I like the backup system
and being able to recharge keeps me out of K Mart buying all of those
AAs
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
I fly out of San Diego and the air is quite cluttered but it still fun
without a GPS. Where I would use it the most is in the desert where every
thing looks like the last thing you saw.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | RE: Hi Everyone! |
Hello Niwlyf!
I am Alan Laudani, acer(at)connectnet.com, in Ramona. I'm about to start a
Piet of my own.
The most famous Piet (GN-1) in the area is Manual Sparks, flying from
Gilespi.
What's your progress building? I have just made a jig for an Continental
Engine Mount and am studying plans to decide which fuselage to build.
GN-1 or Lengthened Hoopman's plans.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hixon, Carl" <chixon(at)durapharm.com> |
Subject: | RE: Hi Everyone! |
I have not started building. I probably won't start for quite some
time. I am just trying to collect information. Perhaps aquire some
plans to study but, that is it for now. If you ever need a pair of
hands, I'd love to come around when I can.
On Tuesday, July 29, 1997 10:10 PM, Alan Laudani
[SMTP:acer(at)connectnet.com] wrote:
> Hello Niwlyf!
> I am Alan Laudani, acer(at)connectnet.com, in Ramona. I'm about to start a Piet
of my own.
> The most famous Piet (GN-1) in the area is Manual Sparks, flying from
Gilespi.
> What's your progress building? I have just made a jig for an Continental
Engine Mount and am studying plans to decide which fuselage to build.
GN-1 or Lengthened Hoopman's plans.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Niwlyf(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I fly out of San Diego and the air is quite cluttered but it still fun
> without a GPS. Where I would use it the most is in the desert where every
> thing looks like the last thing you saw.
Roger to that We have a lot of that in texas also.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Earnie,
My worse fear came true. After all your help Damark came up dry-sold out.
Looks like I'll just have to stick with dead reckoning and my astro sextant
in the piet.
Thanks, Ted
>> >> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
>> >club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
>> >bargain. Good luck . Ernie
>> >
>> Ernie,
>>
>> Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the list
>> doesn't call and cause a run on them...
>>
>> Ted Brousseau/APF
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: What is a babbit/babbiting? |
>Or is it "babbet/babbeting"? In any case, I know bupkis about the Model A=
>and have seen that term many times. Any clarification would be greatly
>appreciated.
>
>
Well, with my poor english I will try to explain my experience in this area:
About 30 years ago I tried to rebuild a Model A Ford, as a teenager never
got enough money to finish it and finily changed it for a new VW!
When I rebuilded the engine I got the conecting rod "rebabited" by an old
mechanic...
The new cars hace the conecting rod bearings as two shells that are
oversized as the amount of grinding the cranksahft needs (.010, .020,
etc.)....
In the old times there was no "spare" bearings, you had to send your
crankshaft to a grinder and also send the conecting rods to "melt the
babbit" (in M=E9xico EMBABBITAR) in the conecting rod with enough material=
to,
proceed to close the conecting rod "circle". each conecting rod was then
"honned" or "calibrated" exactly to the especificactions (tolerances) then
it was tested (each one in his position in the crankshaft) with a litlle
blue string like "clay" that was messured the amount it expanded when
"torqued" with a special gauge.... it it was to "wide" it needed more amount
of grinding.... If the operator was not good enough and got more grinding,
then he needed to "remelt" it again and beguin once more.... lots of work.
Hope a got explained good enough to get understud.
Saludos
(no more) :-(=09
EAA Chapter 1039 President
ggower(at)informador.com.mx ~1,800 VW 2 place "Gtub"(50%)(own design)FAI=
legal
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO
Chapala Aerodrome Alt 4,997 asl N 20=BA19.506' W 103=BA08.203' (Got the=
GPS!)
"Cuando inducimos a alguien a nuestro deporte debemos ser firmes tambien en
que mantenga optimo su estado fisico, entrenamiento y aeronave" - Julian=
Taber
(When we involve anyone else in flying we should be held to a high standard
in term of medical, trainnig and plane upkeeping - Julian Taber)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | grhans(at)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Attention: Ted Brousseau
Hello Ted,
How in the heck can you use an astro sextant and fly a Pietenpol
at the same time????
I have a friend here who has a Pietenpol and he uses a pretty
ordinary (if there is such a thing) GPS that was not specifically
designed for aeronautical navigation. He is a trained avionics
technician and says it is easy to program for aviation use. It
cost him only about $250 Canadian currency (approximately $180
in U.S. dollars). I may see him this evening because it looks like
fine Pietenpol weather, and will get some details.
Me? I use the time-tested dead reckoning/ greasy finger-on-a-pen-
cil-line-across-the-map method. But I understand that some of you
don't have our generally-clear skies and wide open spaces, and it
is nice to know one's exact location in haze while threading one's
way through a mess of towers and restricted airspace.
Cheers,
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
>
>
>Hello Ted,
>
>How in the heck can you use an astro sextant and fly a Pietenpol
>at the same time????
Darn if I know. I have the astro sextant and don't have anyone to show me
how to use it. I just figured that with the open cockpit the Piet might be
a perfect platform to try...
>
>I have a friend here who has a Pietenpol and he uses a pretty
>ordinary (if there is such a thing) GPS that was not specifically
>designed for aeronautical navigation.
That is exactly what I use. It is for boating and shuts down at 99kts.
Don't have to worry about that in the Piet. I just program in my waypoints
and it gets me there. I don't use it except to find strange airports that
try to hide in the haze. Otherwise, I just follow the roads or high tension
wires.
Glad to see you still lurk on this list.
Ted Brousseau/APF
nfn00979(at)gator.naples.net
Sunny SW Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ted Brousseau wrote:
>
> Earnie,
>
> My worse fear came true. After all your help Damark came up dry-sold out.
> Looks like I'll just have to stick with dead reckoning and my astro sextant
> in the piet.
>
> Thanks, Ted
>
> >> >> Also I belong the the Damark preferred buyers
> >> >club and got these for 15 or 17 $ with free shipping . A heck of a
> >> >bargain. Good luck . Ernie
> >> >
> >> Ernie,
> >>
> >> Thanks for all the great info. I just hope everyone else on the list
> >> doesn't call and cause a run on them...
> >>
> >> Ted Brousseau/APF
Ted, sorry bout that. Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <ken.beanlands(at)aurean.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Hi,
> >I have a friend here who has a Pietenpol and he uses a pretty
> >ordinary (if there is such a thing) GPS that was not specifically
> >designed for aeronautical navigation.
>
> That is exactly what I use. It is for boating and shuts down at 99kts.
> Don't have to worry about that in the Piet. I just program in my waypoints
> and it gets me there. I don't use it except to find strange airports that
> try to hide in the haze. Otherwise, I just follow the roads or high tension
> wires.
> Ted Brousseau/APF
One navigational device that seems to be overlooked these days is the Loran C.
True, the GPS has dominated the new market and I don't believe anyone is still
selling new Lorans. However, there are tonnes of them on the used market. I
bought a 5 year old Apollo 618 with database, tray, antenna, and all the
goodies for $100. Just try and find a panel mount GPS for less than $1000.
Even $2000 is a challenge. Loran C still works and will continue to work for
at least 8 more years, possibly longer. By then, there should be some cheaper,
used, panel mount GPS's on the market.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
I have looked at some non Aviation GPS's. The Megellen (spelling?) is the
only one that will go above 99kts. Know you do not need that in a Piet, but
if you happen to be in something else it is nice. In a Piet if you get to
lost just land in a field and ask someone where you are.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <ken.beanlands(at)aurean.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Hi,
> I have looked at some non Aviation GPS's. The Megellen (spelling?) is the
> only one that will go above 99kts. Know you do not need that in a Piet, but
> if you happen to be in something else it is nice. In a Piet if you get to
> lost just land in a field and ask someone where you are.
Check out the new Garmin 12XL. According to the Garmin web page, it's not
speed limited. ( http://www.garmin.com )
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Navigation. |
Ken Beanlands wrote: One navigational device that seems to be overlooked
these days is the Loran C.
> True, the GPS has dominated the new market and I don't believe anyone
> is still
> selling new Lorans. However, there are tonnes of them on the used
> market. I
> bought a 5 year old Apollo 618 with database, tray, antenna, and all
> the
> goodies for $100. Just try and find a panel mount GPS for less than
> $1000.
> Even $2000 is a challenge. Loran C still works and will continue to
> work for
> at least 8 more years, possibly longer. By then, there should be some
> cheaper,
> used, panel mount GPS's on the market.
>
> Ken
All true, but who has panel mounted any radio in a piet/nav piece in a
piet. I have yet to see a piet with even so much as a transponder or
DME. Not many piets have any (intentional) ifr time on them. :)
As for the 99KT limitation. I have tested a couple newer non-aviation
models including the Magellen 12XL (very nice) and both function at over
200mph. --gotta find a faster airplane to test my GPS.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mahal5(at)juno.com (Emily Williamson) |
Subject: | I needed the dimentions of the wooden parts of the piet. |
I didnt make it clear what I needed but I need the size demintions on all
the wood parts in the piet so we can start cutting them out . As of now
we are having to save money to buy the plans you see.
Thank you
Emelita W
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Schober <classair(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: I needed the dimentions of the wooden parts of the |
piet.
Before you even think of cutting wood GET THE PLANS!!!! The few dollars
that you spend on the plans will help you organize the project and save
$ in the long run. Cutting the wood is about the easiest part of the proj=
ect but could be the most expensive. Decide on where you are going to bui=
ld the airplane. Most of the parts can be done in a small area. for the
fuselage I would suggest building a table 16 feet by four feet. Lay out
the fuselage sides on the table with the upper longerons in the center
and make the table into a jig.
Make the small parts first. if you make a mistake, it costs less to rebui=
ld it and takes less time. I'd start with the wing ribs. They are relativ=
ly easy and small enough that storage isn't a problem and all the wood
is rectangular. After the ribs I'd build the tail components. A little
bigger and a little more complex. The leading edges and trailing edges
require milling them to shape. Once thats done then it's time for the fus=
elage then the wing.
On the wing, use the strut attach fittings that are shown on the 3 piece
wing supplament and use jury struts.
Keep in mind that weight is a very important issue. There can be a 100
pound variation in the empty weight of these airplanes. The more it weigh=
s, the less performance that can be expected.
As for specific sizes of wood required, each airplane is different. I don=
't think there are 2 airplanes alike. Even those that follow the plans
to the letter will be different due to the jigs that the builder used to
build them. I don't know of anyone that has a specific bill of material
for the aircamper since there are several variations (long fuselage/ shor=
t fuselage). The dimensions of the wood will also vary from plane to plan=
e. An example is the longerons are 1" X 1" on the plans. These pieces are=
actualy 15/16" X 15/16" on airplanes that were build by Mr. Pietenpol.
As I mentioned in my previous E-Mail all sizes on the plans are nominal
and they are actualy to the center of the kerf of the blade.
If you want a good flying airplane, follow the plans and keep it light.
Use the one piece wing and use a Model A engine. Buy the plans now so you=
can make the necessary decisions ahead of time as to which fuselage, if
you want the extended strut length (front cockpit acessability), landing
gear design and several other variables. Live with the plans for a while
before you start making parts. Once you start cutting parts out it's hard=
to change.
I hope this helps you. I know i didn't answer your question but if you
cut wood before you have the plans you will wish you did it the other way=
around.
One more comment, use Sitka Spruce rather than Douglas Fir. It's lighter.=
It may cost more but you will have a better airplane.
>
> I didnt make it clear what I needed but I need the size demintions on
all
> the wood parts in the piet so we can start cutting them out . As of now
> we are having to save money to buy the plans you see.
>
> Thank you
> Emelita W
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Doug Hunt <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Doug Hunt wrote:
> Hope i'am sending this to the correct address.I'am wondering if anyone
> has
> a part# for the john deere sring used for the tailwheel,that i have
> heard /
> read of ???
> I am building a corvair powered piet with 60" warp drive prop.
> Thanks for now Doug Hunt...
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: I needed the dimentions of the wooden parts of the |
piet.
<< Subj: Re: I needed the dimentions of the wooden parts of the piet.
Date: 97-08-03 09:09:39 EDT
From: classair(at)frontiernet.net (David Schober)
Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
Reply-to: piet(at)byu.edu (Pietenpol Discussion)
To: piet(at)byu.edu (Pietenpol Discussion)
Before you even think of cutting wood GET THE PLANS!!!! The few dollars that
you spend on the plans will help you organize the project and save $ in the
long run. Cutting the wood is about the easiest part of the project but could
be the most expensive. Decide on where you are going to build the airplane.
Most of the parts can be done in a small area. for the fuselage I would
suggest building a table 16 feet by four feet. Lay out the fuselage sides on
the table with the upper longerons in the center and make the table into a
jig.
Make the small parts first. if you make a mistake, it costs less to rebuild
it and takes less time. I'd start with the wing ribs. They are relativly easy
and small enough that storage isn't a problem and all the wood is
rectangular. After the ribs I'd build the tail components. A little bigger
and a little more complex. The leading edges and trailing edges require
milling them to shape. Once thats done then it's time for the fuselage then
the wing.
On the wing, use the strut attach fittings that are shown on the 3 piece
wing supplament and use jury struts.
Keep in mind that weight is a very important issue. There can be a 100 pound
variation in the empty weight of these airplanes. The more it weighs, the
less performance that can be expected.
As for specific sizes of wood required, each airplane is different. I don't
think there are 2 airplanes alike. Even those that follow the plans to the
letter will be different due to the jigs that the builder used to build them.
I don't know of anyone that has a specific bill of material for the aircamper
since there are several variations (long fuselage/ short fuselage). The
dimensions of the wood will also vary from plane to plane. An example is the
longerons are 1" X 1" on the plans. These pieces are actualy 15/16" X 15/16"
on airplanes that were build by Mr. Pietenpol. As I mentioned in my previous
E-Mail all sizes on the plans are nominal and they are actualy to the center
of the kerf of the blade.
If you want a good flying airplane, follow the plans and keep it light. Use
the one piece wing and use a Model A engine. Buy the plans now so you can
make the necessary decisions ahead of time as to which fuselage, if you want
the extended strut length (front cockpit acessability), landing gear design
and several other variables. Live with the plans for a while before you start
making parts. Once you start cutting parts out it's hard to change.
I hope this helps you. I know i didn't answer your question but if you cut
wood before you have the plans you will wish you did it the other way around.
One more comment, use Sitka Spruce rather than Douglas Fir. It's lighter. It
may cost more but you will have a better airplane.
>>
Thank you for the answer. Not my question but has given me a plan of attack.
Started wing rib jig last night. I'm on my way.....
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Here's my report: One Piet at Oshkosh, Six at Brodhead.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Mike,
So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
didn't get there.
Anyone else care to report?
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Skinner <jskinner(at)hurstmfg.com> |
Subject: | RE: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
I don't think that 6 really gives the total picture of the activity at
Brodhead. I am guessing that 6 was the number of FLYING Pietenpols.
(Even then it seems a bit low, but I didn't count) There were nearly
that many in various stages of construction as well, which gave a great
opportunity to look at the parts that can't be seen on the completed
airplane. There were a couple of Pietenpol Scouts under construction as
well as the Aircampers. Add the Pietenpol forum (moved from Oshkosh
because of problems getting a time slot), a forum on Model A engines,
and the many knowlegable and FRIENDLY people and I say it was well worth
the trip!
BTW, there were several antique cars and antique airplanes around as
well as a bunch of other homebuilts and factory planes.
Jim Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Steve Eldredge[SMTP:steve(at)byu.edu] |
Sent: Monday, August 04, 1997 3:53 PM
Subject: | Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Mike,
So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
didn't get there.
Anyone else care to report?
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
> didn't get there.
>
> Anyone else care to report?
>
> Steve E.
Actually at the Saturday evening affair 15 or 16 were report as being
there, counting those based at Brodhead. For my part, the three
seminars on Saturday were worth the price of admission.
Bob Bailey
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
> didn't get there.
>
> Anyone else care to report?
>
> Steve E.
Actually, I would like to amend my earlier report. As I sit here on
Tuesday morning wearing my new Pietenpol hat, my new Pietenpol shirt,
drinking from my new Pietenpol coffee cup remembering the sights and
sounds of the past weekend, it was great. :) :)
TTYL Bob B.
of the past weekend
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
I made it by briefly on the way back from the convention
on Sunday. Not many Piets by then, seemed like most
had left the previous day. Got to watch a young fella
fire up his Model A mounted on an uncovered fuselage
for the first time. That is one funky motor!! Starts
and runs like an A 65. That was worth the detour. I
want one. A couple of fellas were planning on converting
to dual ignition. With dual mags you've got a real -if
heavy- aircraft engine there.
The countryside between Madison and Brodhead is absolutely
gorgeous as well.
The only Piet at Osh was the same guy from last year with
the 30s Navy paint scheme. Had an almost identical
conversation with him, a real life deja vu. There was
also a Grega that was also there last year. That was
it as far as I could tell.
Many homebuilts that used to go to Oshkosh in large
numbers no longer seem to go (excepts RVs). I miss
the conventions of the 70s.
John Kahn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: What is a babbit/babbiting? |
writes:
Or is it "babbet/babbeting"? In any case, I know bupkis about the
Model A
and have seen that term many times. Any clarification would be
greatly
appreciated.
Rebabbitting is the act of pouring melted metal (babbit) into the engine
block where the crankshaft runs. Modern engines have replaceable bearing
shells.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hixon, Carl" <chixon(at)durapharm.com> |
Subject: | August Kitplanes, Jim Wier rips on Piets |
Once again Piets make it into Kitplanes, August 1997. Check out page
85, "We gotta have more bandwith Scotty, or the things gonna blow!" In
the article, Jim Wier says "...if folks never wanted to do 'better,'
we'd still be building Pietenpols with Model A engines instead of
plastic pocket rockets." Fortunately Kitplanes came to our defense and
told Jim to check out Brodhead.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
Subject: | RE: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Remember.....it isn't quantity, it's quality!!!
Bill S.
>----------
>From: Steve Eldredge[SMTP:steve(at)byu.edu]
>Sent: Monday, August 04, 1997 1:53 PM
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!?
>
>Mike,
>
>So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
>didn't get there.
>
>Anyone else care to report?
>
>Steve E.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
A (Robert M. Bailey) wrote:
>
>Actually, I would like to amend my earlier report. As I sit here on
>Tuesday morning wearing my new Pietenpol hat, my new Pietenpol shirt,
>drinking from my new Pietenpol coffee cup remembering the sights and
>sounds of the past weekend, it was great. :) :)
>TTYL Bob B.
>of the past weekend
>
Bob is exactly correct. It is a real shot in the arm to see
real live Piets and Piet people, forums, etc. I guess I was
spoiled a few years back when they had about 15 or so in
the pattern buzzing the daylights out of the e-w runway.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Oh boy. Six piets at brodhead!? |
Mike,
So what is up with that. Sounds like I shouldn't be too bummed that I
didn't get there.
Anyone else care to report?
Steve E.
The usual good time was had at Brodhead. There were 18 white caps given
out. Everyone with a Pietenpol there gets a white cap. Bill Knight was
left out, but I made enough noise and personally gave him his. I don't
know exactly how many Piets
FLEW there, but there were 18 that were on the field.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | fuselage long or short |
Hello all,
What is the so-called long fuselage? I have the improved plans and on
drawing no. 1 dated 1 -19 -33 the side view of the fuselage frame gives
the total length of 13 feet 7 inches. Is the the long or short
fuselage? Which is the preferred setup?
Thanks Bob B.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Brodhead 'n stuff |
Greetings all! (Especially those who were at Brodhead and who I didn't
meet...)
A red-letter week for me, never been to Oshkosh before, let alone Brodhead
(didn't know what a Piet was this time last year ;-) Both shows were a
gas, though I was disappointed by the low Piet turnout at the big show.
Bill Rawley's Piet was there, and the afore-mentioned GN-1. Talked to Bill
for a bit about his project, and it was great to finally see a Piet up close.
At Brodhead, I was amazed at the beautiful cream and red jobbie, with
laminated wood struts and straight-axle gear, resplendent with wire wheels
- talk about inspiring! Mind you, the rest of the flock looked as pretty
as punch, and especially at home on the grass field. The funky German
camo-schemed number was a hoot, with a couple fake (I hope?!?) machine guns
where the front cockpit might be.
Finally got up the gall to ask Bernie (who's last name I didn't get, more
evidence of my glowing people skills ;-) for a ride in his little red 75-hp
number (I hope I'm getting all these factoids right). The front cockpit
was a little tricky to negotiate for this 6'2" klutz, but once inside, it
was much roomier than I had imagined it would be. Turning crosswind, I did
for a fleeting moment suffer a bit of
"Ohmygodsomeguybuiltthisinhisgarage-itis", but it was quickly (*very*
quickly) replaced by sheer, utter flying joy. I'd never been in an open
cockpit before, and the wind and noise were comfortable, even without
goggles or headset.
Suffice to say, I knew that I'd have to start dusting off those plans and
get going. After landing (and twisting myself out of the 'pit), I wandered
over to where some guys were watching an 'A' run on the uncovered fuselage.
Aside from drooling over the woodwork (very tasty, as far as my untrained
eye could see) and the nice woven-cane seats, I got to see and hear an 'A'
running. Let me just say that it gave me pause to reconsider my desire to
put a radial on my project. Them Fords sure do sound nice, and a good dose
of 'funky' can make all the difference in a design.
All in all, most enjoyable. Got to fly back to Los Angeles in a Yak-52,
which didn't hurt my outlook, either. My butt, on the other hand, hurt
like hell ;-)
Happy flying to all, and happy building!
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Schober <classair(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: fuselage long or short |
The drawing you have is for the short fuselage. The long fuselage drawing=
is on the supplementary plans with no date or title block. The drawing
shows a fuselage length of 172 3/8". It also shows a better strut attach
fitting for the wing. The original strut attach fitting comes down from
the spar and forms an angle where it attaches to the strut. This puts a
twisting moment on the bolts going through the spar. The supplementary
plans show a strut attach fitting that when installed, will be directly
in line with the strut so all attach bolts are in the same plane as the
strut. Much better arrangement. If you use the modified strut attach, don=
't forget that you have to adjust the routing on the spar to accomidate
the wider area occupied by the fitting.
As to which fuselage is best, how tall are you? If you feel comfortable
in a short fuselage, thats what I would build. The longer fuselage was
designed primarily to give a longer tail moment to make up for the longer=
nose needed for an A-65 or Corvair installation. The main advantage is
a larger cockpit. Either one works fine with any of the engines.
> Hello all,
> What is the so-called long fuselage? I have the improved plans and on
> drawing no. 1 dated 1 -19 -33 the side view of the fuselage frame gives
> the total length of 13 feet 7 inches. Is the the long or short
> fuselage? Which is the preferred setup?
> Thanks Bob B.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hixon, Carl" <chixon(at)durapharm.com> |
Subject: | RE: Brodhead 'n stuff |
Steve, what radial are you considering for your project? I am not
building yet but, I was thinking a small radial would be nice --haven't
heard an "A" yet though.
Carl J. Hixon
Project Engineer_______________________
Dura Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA 92121
Phone: (619) 784-6747 Fax: (619) 453-2544
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | RE: Brodhead 'n stuff |
>Steve, what radial are you considering for your project? I am not
>building yet but, I was thinking a small radial would be nice --haven't
>heard an "A" yet though.
Well, even though I've heard from quite a few people that the HCI radial
(the one made from VW cylinders) is too light, I like the looks of it (who
am I to let a little thing like weight and balance to interfere with
coolness? :-)
I guess I'll take a closer look when they're further along with its
development. Maybe putting a little bit of electrical in would bring the
weight up. Maybe not.
Then again, at Oshkosh they were showing a 3-cylinder radial from the
makers of the M14 Russian 9-cyl. That one might be a bit too heavy,
though. And Zoche is making a 4-cyl. 150HP radial that might be a bit much
power, but the weight might work. And I understand that there's a LeBlonde
(sp?) that some people have put on.
As you can tell, I haven't gotten too far past the "Gee, a radial would be
cool!" phase...
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com |
Subject: | Re: Brodhead 'n stuff |
writes:
Steve, what radial are you considering for your project? I am not
building yet but, I was thinking a small radial would be nice
-haven't
heard an "A" yet though.
Well, even though I've heard from quite a few people that the HCI
radial
(the one made from VW cylinders) is too light, I like the looks of it
(who
am I to let a little thing like weight and balance to interfere with
coolness? :-)
I guess I'll take a closer look when they're further along with its
development. Maybe putting a little bit of electrical in would bring
the
weight up. Maybe not.
Then again, at Oshkosh they were showing a 3-cylinder radial from the
makers of the M14 Russian 9-cyl. That one might be a bit too heavy,
though. And Zoche is making a 4-cyl. 150HP radial that might be a bit
much
power, but the weight might work. And I understand that there's a
LeBlonde
(sp?) that some people have put on.
As you can tell, I haven't gotten too far past the "Gee, a radial
would be
cool!" phase...
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
Steve:
I'm surprised, even shocked that you did not find the three (yes,
3) HCI
radials being built on the field - at Brodhead. He is coming right along
with them.
Dick Weeden is his name, and he has the hangar closest to the road. I
believe he was there on saturday, but he had the engines sort of hidden
in the north west
corner of the building. Also, Frank Pavliga has, and almost has on his
Piet, a Russian 3 cylinder radial. I'll report on it when I know
anything. He has it running on a stand. His Piet was flying at the
T'craft fly-in on 7/4/97
TTYL JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Brodhead 'n stuff |
>Steve:
> I'm surprised, even shocked that you did not find the three (yes,
>3) HCI
>radials being built on the field - at Brodhead. He is coming right along
>with them.
>Dick Weeden is his name, and he has the hangar closest to the road. I
>believe he was there on saturday, but he had the engines sort of hidden
>in the north west
>corner of the building. Also, Frank Pavliga has, and almost has on his
>Piet, a Russian 3 cylinder radial. I'll report on it when I know
>anything. He has it running on a stand. His Piet was flying at the
>T'craft fly-in on 7/4/97
Well, I just kinda floundered around Brodhead...I never made it over to the
far hangars where the two-tone blue Piet was (along with the other planes
over there), and missed most of the forum activity. I hope to get there
earlier and stay longer next time.
Please do let me know more when you hear from Frank about his radial. I'm
encouraged!
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mahal5(at)juno.com (Emily Williamson) |
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com> |
Subject: | Re: Brodhead 'n stuff |
Steve Pugh wrote:
>
> As you can tell, I haven't gotten too far past the "Gee, a radial would be
> cool!" phase...
>
A year back was wondering what engine to put in my "abaout to happen"
Piet.
Finally came to the conclusion that I didn't need to know in order to
start building the rest!
The front end of the fuselage is either of two configurations; one is a
simple firewall with four hardpoints to hook a mount to. The other is
pretty much the same, but leaves an opening into the upper forward
fuselage area to let parts of the Ford-A hang back into.
My decision was to start building a non-A configuration, and sort out
the engine details later. I'm confident that the ability to shift the
wing back and forth will let me get weight/balance right. And if things
get really bad and I use one of those really light powerful engines,
I'll just hang a little lead on the engine mount and have a package that
still weighs less than the "A" engine (but more horses).
I realize today that if I would have begun building the smallest bits
and pieces of a Piet thirty years ago I'd have it flying today.
Too soon too olt, und too late too schmart.
If any of you think I'm doing something wrong don't tell me. I'm having
too much fun building this thing to let reality get in the way. :)
Go get 'em,
Dick Winkel
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Waiting to build |
>A year back was wondering what engine to put in my "abaout to happen"
>Piet.
>Finally came to the conclusion that I didn't need to know in order to
>start building the rest!
Exactly. I figure that the wing ribs don't know any better, so why should
I wait to build them? All I hafta do now is finish up the myriad other
projects (or, rather, at least pretend to get closer to finishing
them)...but soon, soooooooooon...
>I realize today that if I would have begun building the smallest bits
>and pieces of a Piet thirty years ago I'd have it flying today.
>Too soon too olt, und too late too schmart.
Well, if I'd started building 30 years ago, my mom woulda had some
difficulties ;-)
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Skinner <jskinner(at)hurstmfg.com> |
Subject: | Radials (Was: Brodhead 'n stuff) |
Gentlemen,
The Piet with the LeBlonde radial was at Brodhead however it did not have
that engine on it any longer. It was in the back of a hanger with a Ford A
engine being installed on it. It is dark green with a red (?) stripe down
the sides.
I have seen it flying in previous years. The LeBlonde sure made a neat
looking plane and flew well too. Several years ago they had some problems
with the engine (cracked crank). I asked around this year and got the
story: After more trouble with the engine they decided they needed a more
reliable power plant.
Jim
>
>>Steve, what radial are you considering for your project? I am not
>>building yet but, I was thinking a small radial would be nice --haven't
>>heard an "A" yet though.
>
>Well, even though I've heard from quite a few people that the HCI radial
>(the one made from VW cylinders) is too light, I like the looks of it (who
>am I to let a little thing like weight and balance to interfere with
>coolness? :-)
>
>I guess I'll take a closer look when they're further along with its
>development. Maybe putting a little bit of electrical in would bring the
>weight up. Maybe not.
>
>Then again, at Oshkosh they were showing a 3-cylinder radial from the
>makers of the M14 Russian 9-cyl. That one might be a bit too heavy,
>though. And Zoche is making a 4-cyl. 150HP radial that might be a bit much
>power, but the weight might work. And I understand that there's a LeBlonde
>(sp?) that some people have put on.
>
>As you can tell, I haven't gotten too far past the "Gee, a radial would be
>cool!" phase...
>
>
>Cheers,
>
> Steve Pugh
> Senior Systems Engineer
> Foundation Imaging
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Varnish or epoxy? |
I am seeing some discussion on using the two part very expensive epoxy for
varnishing the fuselage and wing ribs/spars. I am sure that the two part
epoxy was not invented back in the twenties and thirties.
Any comments out there in the real world about why one would do a $150.00
vs a $20.00 varithane or even good old spar varnish. Are there any
limitations down the road which you shpould use regarding ceconite or other
covering.
I have been doing lots of reading, but am not getting any clearer.
Your comments would sure be appreciated!
I hope to have the fuselage epoxied/varnished before winter so that it can
go in cold storage until spring without worrying about condensation etc.
Best regards,
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com (James T. VanDervort) |
Subject: | Re: Radials (Was: Brodhead 'n stuff) |
Yes, but my gosh, they had over 400 hours on the Leblond. In it's prime,
it was considered a 500 hour engine.
The crank broke over the Mississippi, and he (Davis), landed at Pararie
du Chein.
(or however!).
I flew to Brodhead once to get Davis's Stinson, because the cam drive
broke at
Cresco, IA.
It has spit pushrods out all over WI.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Spend the extra 130 clams on epoxy, Ian!!!
Epoxy varnish has brought the wooden boat business back from
total oblivion. The reason being that epoxy varnish makes a
wooden structure completely immune to moisture. The wood is
literally "encapsulated" and there is no significant water
propagation through an epoxy coating, unlike polyurethane.
The Gougon brothers were wooden yacht makers and developed
the "West System" epoxy system for their boats. Their
wood/epoxy yachts will last as long as a glass one. They produced
a hard cover book on their system you might be able to find at
the library.
There is a thriving wooden boat industry today, and you'll have a
hard time finding anybody building wooden boats without epoxy.
The long term benefits are too great to skimp on price in
this case. I would have no problem keeping an epoxy finished
wooden airplane outside insofar as the wooden structure is
concerned. Read "Wooden Boat" magazine and you'll get the idea.
John Kahn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Ian-
Superflite said whatever you use to seal your wood, make sure
you can rub a rag wet with MEK solvent on it and not disturb the
finish. I tried this on polyurethaned wood and is
failed the MEK
test.
I opted for coating all my wood-to-fabric glue locations
with a thin brush coat of DuPont 222S sealer. This stuff is about
45 $ a gallon but will do the entire airplane. It goes on like water
and seals the varnish/polyurethane against the effects of MEK.
Likewise the 222S will seal zinc chromated parts you may have
spray painted on like most of us. (or whatever primer used)
The 222S can also be easily sprayed on anything. A thin coat
is all you want.....any more can loosen the varnish before it
dries (and it dries right quick) You can attach fabric after only
about 1/2 hour after that. Not real easy to find. Not all auto/
paint stores carry it. Call ahead to save some driving around.
(go flying with the spare time)
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
I 'd like to add my 2-bits. I'm currently building a wooden kayak
utilizing epoxy in a "stitch and glue" process and John is right in that
epoxy has revitalized the boating industry - however - in reading the
instructions and books as John recommends I've learned that epoxy does
get soft with heat. The reason I mention this is the recent concerns
about glues like Weldwood deteriorating with heat. I forget the figures
but a plane sitting on the ramp can develop some pretty high
temperatures in closed areas like the wings.
Also, I know that in the old Stitts process, it is important to use
their primer and varnish because they're formulated to chemically bond
with the next layer in the process and other brands made not adhere
properly. One last consideration is weight. I believe varnish would be
lighter. Once again, if it was good enough for Bernie, it's good enough
for me! Besides, some of those varnished ships are still flying after
50+ years.
For those that remember, I think it was 90 when there was a fun
discussion around the campfire at Brodhead about the Speed Queen water
pump being better than the Maytag or Whirlpool, but it took me quite a
while to locate a metal housed Speed Queen. Sometimes I think the
scavenger hunt to Model A meets and lumber yards is half the fun of
building these ships.
Bill Sayre
Computer Support
The NEW Boeing Company
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Ian Holland wrote:
>
> I am seeing some discussion on using the two part very expensive epoxy for
> varnishing the fuselage and wing ribs/spars. I am sure that the two part
> epoxy was not invented back in the twenties and thirties.
>
> Any comments out there in the real world about why one would do a $150.00
> vs a $20.00 varithane or even good old spar varnish. Are there any
> limitations down the road which you shpould use regarding ceconite or other
> covering.
About the only thing wrong with "varnish" is it might not react too
well with your covering system/solvents. The Stits process will cause
the varnish to "lift off" over varnish unless a 2-part system is used to
seal off the varnish. I am "varnishing my project and using the
2-part/sealer where wood would be in contact with the Stits products
along glue joints (where fabric is glued to frame, ribs etc) and points
where fabric contacts the frame/s.
Others?....
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Schober <classair(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
The only reason for a 2 part epoxy varnish would be if the cover process
(finish materials) would lift standard varnish. If you are using dope,
spar varnish or verathane would be OK.
> I am seeing some discussion on using the two part very expensive epoxy
for
> varnishing the fuselage and wing ribs/spars. I am sure that the two par=
t
> epoxy was not invented back in the twenties and thirties.
>
> Any comments out there in the real world about why one would do a $150.=
00
> vs a $20.00 varithane or even good old spar varnish. Are there any
> limitations down the road which you shpould use regarding ceconite or
other
> covering.
>
> I have been doing lots of reading, but am not getting any clearer.
>
> Your comments would sure be appreciated!
>
> I hope to have the fuselage epoxied/varnished before winter so that it
can
> go in cold storage until spring without worrying about condensation etc=
.
>
> Best regards,
> -Ian-
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com (James T. VanDervort) |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Mr. Pietenpol doped his wood. He said it was out of the weather, anyhow.
JimV.,
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Pietenpol Questions |
I've just finished my wing jig and done one test rib. I've got a couple
of questions.
When I mill the wood for the ribs do I want the growth rings to be parallel
with the surface of the wing or do I want them to be perpendicular. If
perpendicular is OK I can cut my wood more efficiently.
I have heard about laminated wing spars. What are they?
Also, what is the 3 piece wing? How is is constructed? How much weight does
the 3 piece add to the airplane? How long does it take to rig it?
Thanks
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
P.S. With just one Wing Rib built, you can sit in a chair, hold the rib out
to the side at arm's length and make airplane noises. I can tell already
that the Pietenpol is an excellent flier with balanced, responsive controls,
good visibility and excellent manuverability. :-)
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Schober <classair(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
The grain should run parallel to the surface of the wing. For info on woo=
d structures read AC43.13-1a The chapters on wood repairs are well worth
the investment. It is also a good guide for welding and fabric work.
Laminated spars are built up from several smaller pieces of wood, usually=
1X1 or 3/4X1, put together, glued and clamped. The advantage is that you=
can use smaller pieces of wood to build up the spar. If you don't have
stock long enough, you can scarf pieces together to make the length. A
word of caution, if you scarf them don't have any scarf joints ovelap and=
don't have any of them in the area where fittings will be. Some people
don't like to route the built up spars but I don't see any problem with
that.
The 3 piece wing weighes about 6 lbs. more. You can also build a 2 piece
wing by only having one removable wing panel and the other "1/2" includes=
the center section. It's not symetrical but it saves about 3 lbs.
Remember weight is the downfall of these airplanes. Build them as light
as you can and you will have a good performing airplane. Check out the
discussion on wood sizes. all the dimensions are nominal and the original=
airplanes were built with undersized components. All the dimensions were=
to the center of the kerf of the blade.
David Schober
> I've just finished my wing jig and done one test rib. I've got a coupl=
e
> of questions.
>
> When I mill the wood for the ribs do I want the growth rings to be para=
llel
> with the surface of the wing or do I want them to be perpendicular. If
> perpendicular is OK I can cut my wood more efficiently.
>
> I have heard about laminated wing spars. What are they?
>
> Also, what is the 3 piece wing? How is is constructed? How much weight
does
> the 3 piece add to the airplane? How long does it take to rig it?
>
> Thanks
>
> Randy Stockberger
> stockberger(at)proaxis.com
>
> P.S. With just one Wing Rib built, you can sit in a chair, hold the rib=
out
> to the side at arm's length and make airplane noises. I can tell alread=
y
> that the Pietenpol is an excellent flier with balanced, responsive cont=
rols,
> good visibility and excellent manuverability. :-)
> Randy Stockberger
> stockberger(at)proaxis.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com (James T. VanDervort) |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
Mr. Pietenpol said the three piece wing was 17 pounds heavier. I heard
him say it.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | laur-mac(at)ArkansasUSA.com (LAUR-MAC, INC.) |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
The one piece wing sounds better to me, but wouldn't it be difficult to
find such a long piece of perfectly straight spruce?
Ken Goff
laur-mac(at)arkansasusa.com
> From: James T. VanDervort <jimvan1(at)juno.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol Questions
> Date: Thursday, August 14, 1997 8:36 PM
>
> Mr. Pietenpol said the three piece wing was 17 pounds heavier. I heard
> him say it.
>
> JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
LAUR-MAC, INC. wrote:
>
> The one piece wing sounds better to me, but wouldn't it be difficult to
> find such a long piece of perfectly straight spruce?
>
> Ken Goff
> laur-mac(at)arkansasusa.com
>
> ----------
Nah... just takes a few $$$$$$$$$ and a splice to make one very long
stick to play with ;) I have had my spruce for several years and am at
last beginning to assemble my one piece wing. I am following the plans
as indicated for a one piece wing, too my garage is a little larger than
most (catch that again Mike C. - hate to brag ;)
Gary...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
>last beginning to assemble my one piece wing. I am following the plans
>as indicated for a one piece wing, too my garage is a little larger than
>most (catch that again Mike C. - hate to brag ;)
>
>Gary...
Gary- Yes, I admitt I am somewhat envious of you guys with
MULTI-car garages.....and maybe having a pitty-party for
myself while building in my living room and single car garage,
but Steve E. and I are going to make up tee-shirts someday...
:) MC
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Many thanks for all the responses! I will be looking at the covering
process to be used, then making the decision. I have to look ahead and
guess that sometime in the career, it may have to be stored outside rather
than hangered. Such is reality!
The epoxy sure sounds like a place for a value added investment.
> From: Ian Holland
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Varnish or epoxy?
> Date: Tuesday, August 12, 1997 21:43 PM
>
> I am seeing some discussion on using the two part very expensive epoxy
for
> varnishing the fuselage and wing ribs/spars. I am sure that the two part
> epoxy was not invented back in the twenties and thirties.
>
> Any comments out there in the real world about why one would do a $150.00
> vs a $20.00 varithane or even good old spar varnish. Are there any
> limitations down the road which you shpould use regarding ceconite or
other
> covering.
>
> I have been doing lots of reading, but am not getting any clearer.
>
> Your comments would sure be appreciated!
>
> I hope to have the fuselage epoxied/varnished before winter so that it
can
> go in cold storage until spring without worrying about condensation etc.
>
> Best regards,
> -=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions |
If I had it to do over I would have built a one piece wing.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
I have some friends that are getting ready to paint a Horizon. do any of
you know where they can get info on using latex house paint. They got a
price at OSH from stits or someone for $1,200.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Craig R. Lawler wrote:
> I have some friends that are getting ready to paint a Horizon. do any
> of
> you know where they can get info on using latex house paint. They got
> a
> price at OSH from stits or someone for $1,200.
>
> Craig
I did it on my piet. Learned a lot. Would do a few things
differently next time, but I am satisfied (mostly) with my finish.
Pick-up the article on alternative paint systems in the kitplanes issue
of this month or last. Good article suggesting the use of floor paints.
Stevee
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
The latest Kitplane of Plane and Pilot had an artical about using non
certified paints. The artical was exclent. I will look it up and send you
what it was in. It went through stap by step how to do the painting.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Questions -Reply |
Craig,
Could you expand on this a little bit? My partner and I are gettiing close to
having to commit on the wing arrangement. I say one piece, he thinks
three piece.
I know the majority of people say they would do a one piece if they could
do it over and I would like to know why.
Thanks, Greg Cardinal
>>> "Craig R. Lawler" 08/15/97 05:27am >>>
If I had it to do over I would have built a one piece wing.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
>
> I 'd like to add my 2-bits. I'm currently building a wooden kayak
> utilizing epoxy in a "stitch and glue" process and John is right in that
> epoxy has revitalized the boating industry - however - in reading the
> instructions and books as John recommends I've learned that epoxy does
> get soft with heat. The reason I mention this is the recent concerns
> about glues like Weldwood deteriorating with heat. I forget the figures
> but a plane sitting on the ramp can develop some pretty high
> temperatures in closed areas like the wings.
>
> Also, I know that in the old Stitts process, it is important to use
> their primer and varnish because they're formulated to chemically bond
> with the next layer in the process and other brands made not adhere
> properly. One last consideration is weight. I believe varnish would be
> lighter. Once again, if it was good enough for Bernie, it's good enough
> for me! Besides, some of those varnished ships are still flying after
> 50+ years.
> Bill Sayre
> Computer Support
> The NEW Boeing Company
You got a point Bill, and I probably would not use West System on an
airframe because the Gougon Brothers process relied on fairly heavy
coats of resin, partly because they used it as stuctural component
of the hull. However the Polyfibre folks (nee Stits) just happen to
have an epoxy varnish that is used with their covering process. The
guy at brodhead that I watched running his Model A for the first time
told me he had varnished his airframe with the Polyfibre epoxy varnish.
The heat is not a concern as far as a varnish coating is concerned, and
I understand that the epoxy glues like FPL 16A are quite a bit more heat
tolerant than the laminating resin used on composite airplanes so I don't
think that is too much of a concern (Weldwood is a urea formaldehyde).
If I was building a wooden airplane that I knew would always spend its life
indoors, I would probably just go with marine spar varnish myself. Epoxy
lets you keep it outside without the rot worries.
I wanna build a stitch and glue kayak one of these days.
Cheers
John Kahn
Bombardier Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com (James T. VanDervort) |
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Kahn) writes:
>>
>> I 'd like to add my 2-bits. I'm currently building a wooden kayak
>> utilizing epoxy in a "stitch and glue" process and John is right in
>that
>> epoxy has revitalized the boating industry - however - in reading
>the
>> instructions and books as John recommends I've learned that epoxy
>does
>> get soft with heat. The reason I mention this is the recent
>concerns
>> about glues like Weldwood deteriorating with heat. I forget the
>figures
>> but a plane sitting on the ramp can develop some pretty high
>> temperatures in closed areas like the wings.
>>
>> Also, I know that in the old Stitts process, it is important to use
>> their primer and varnish because they're formulated to chemically
>bond
>> with the next layer in the process and other brands made not adhere
>> properly. One last consideration is weight. I believe varnish
>would be
>> lighter. Once again, if it was good enough for Bernie, it's good
>enough
>> for me! Besides, some of those varnished ships are still flying
>after
>> 50+ years.
>
>> Bill Sayre
>> Computer Support
>> The NEW Boeing Company
>
>
>You got a point Bill, and I probably would not use West System on an
>airframe because the Gougon Brothers process relied on fairly heavy
>coats of resin, partly because they used it as stuctural component
>of the hull. However the Polyfibre folks (nee Stits) just happen to
>have an epoxy varnish that is used with their covering process. The
>guy at brodhead that I watched running his Model A for the first time
>told me he had varnished his airframe with the Polyfibre epoxy
>varnish.
>
>The heat is not a concern as far as a varnish coating is concerned,
>and
>I understand that the epoxy glues like FPL 16A are quite a bit more
>heat
>tolerant than the laminating resin used on composite airplanes so I
>don't
>think that is too much of a concern (Weldwood is a urea formaldehyde).
>
>If I was building a wooden airplane that I knew would always spend its
>life
>indoors, I would probably just go with marine spar varnish myself.
>Epoxy
>lets you keep it outside without the rot worries.
>
>I wanna build a stitch and glue kayak one of these days.
>
>Cheers
>
>John Kahn
>Bombardier Inc.
Hey, you guys, Mr. Pietenpol (aka Bernie) finished his wood with nitrate
dope.
He told me so.
JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Varnish or epoxy? |
Of all the issues so far, therehave been only two that made me really think
hard. the answer to the first has lead to the answer for the second. The
amount of WORK that has gone into the beast so far also has helped.
Currently I am of the mind that once built, I NEVER want to go back into
the critter for repairs and replacement. The Chat group has been very
helpful in this reasoning also, and I want to thank every body again for
their input.
At this point I would not consider casein glue (even if the inspectors
would let me). I also want to minimize any chance of water damage in
possible outside storage. This dictates the use of epoxy. Following the
reasoning, I have now removed ALL metal fittings, am stripping the zinc
chromate and patio rust proofing, and am redoing the metal in epoxy primer.
By using modern technology, it will still be a Piet.
Thanks again for the input!
> From: James T. VanDervort <jimvan1(at)juno.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Varnish or epoxy?
> Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 21:56 PM
>
>
> Kahn) writes:
> >>
> >> I 'd like to add my 2-bits. I'm currently building a wooden kayak
> >> utilizing epoxy in a "stitch and glue" process and John is right in
> >that
> >> epoxy has revitalized the boating industry - however - in reading
> >the
> >> instructions and books as John recommends I've learned that epoxy
> >does
> >> get soft with heat. The reason I mention this is the recent
> >concerns
> >> about glues like Weldwood deteriorating with heat. I forget the
> >figures
> >> but a plane sitting on the ramp can develop some pretty high
> >> temperatures in closed areas like the wings.
> >>
> >> Also, I know that in the old Stitts process, it is important to use
> >> their primer and varnish because they're formulated to chemically
> >bond
> >> with the next layer in the process and other brands made not adhere
> >> properly. One last consideration is weight. I believe varnish
> >would be
> >> lighter. Once again, if it was good enough for Bernie, it's good
> >enough
> >> for me! Besides, some of those varnished ships are still flying
> >after
> >> 50+ years.
> >
> >> Bill Sayre
> >> Computer Support
> >> The NEW Boeing Company
> >
> >
> >You got a point Bill, and I probably would not use West System on an
> >airframe because the Gougon Brothers process relied on fairly heavy
> >coats of resin, partly because they used it as stuctural component
> >of the hull. However the Polyfibre folks (nee Stits) just happen to
> >have an epoxy varnish that is used with their covering process. The
> >guy at brodhead that I watched running his Model A for the first time
> >told me he had varnished his airframe with the Polyfibre epoxy
> >varnish.
> >
> >The heat is not a concern as far as a varnish coating is concerned,
> >and
> >I understand that the epoxy glues like FPL 16A are quite a bit more
> >heat
> >tolerant than the laminating resin used on composite airplanes so I
> >don't
> >think that is too much of a concern (Weldwood is a urea formaldehyde).
> >
> >If I was building a wooden airplane that I knew would always spend its
> >life
> >indoors, I would probably just go with marine spar varnish myself.
> >Epoxy
> >lets you keep it outside without the rot worries.
> >
> >I wanna build a stitch and glue kayak one of these days.
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >John Kahn
> >Bombardier Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey, you guys, Mr. Pietenpol (aka Bernie) finished his wood with nitrate
> dope.
> He told me so.
>
> JimV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | William Conway <ConwayW(at)ricks.edu> |
Mark, what is the condition of the engine you have for sale--hours, logs,
etc? What is the price?
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Do I taper the tail? |
I'm in the process of milling the lumber for the tail surfaces. I have
noticed that the
leading edge and the main beam are different thicknesses. Does this mean
that the end
caps for the horizontal stabilizer and the elevators have to be tapered to
match the
leading and trailing edges?
If I have to taper the end caps it will be a complicated operation since
the rabbet will
need a different taper than the outer dimensions. (The thickness goes from
3/4" at the
leading edge to 1" at the main beam. The rabbet goes from 1/2" at the LE
to 5/8" at
the main beam.)
An alternate method would be to go in with a chisel and match all the
rabbets so the
gusset plates would match up, then use a plane and sandpaper to fair all
the mis-aligned
outer surfaces. This would be easier, since there is only an 1/8" to 1/16"
difference
in these dimensions throughout the tail.
How have other folks done this?
Thanks in advance.
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
Corvallis, OR
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <Cardigj(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Do I taper the tail? -Reply |
Randy,
We just completed our tail surfaces. I found many different ways to
make the pieces fit. All of them work and after your done you will
wonder why you fretted so much over it. At least I did.
We cut the end caps the same dimension as the main beam. It was then
tapered just under the gusset plate connecting the end cap with the
leading and trailing edges. The gussets are sanded fair to the leading and
trailing edges after gluing.
The center beam is tapered under the gusset where it meets the end
cap. Taper it equally on both sides.
The leading and trailing edges are notched to accept the cap strips.
One other thing that worked well was to miter the joint where the main
beam meets the end caps. You'll get a nice corner without having to glue
in any extra pieces to fill in the rabbit.
Greg Cardinal
>>> Stockberger 08/23/97 01:49pm >>>
I'm in the process of milling the lumber for the tail surfaces. I have
noticed that the
leading edge and the main beam are different thicknesses. Does this
mean
that the end
caps for the horizontal stabilizer and the elevators have to be tapered to
match the
leading and trailing edges?
If I have to taper the end caps it will be a complicated operation since
the rabbet will
need a different taper than the outer dimensions. (The thickness goes
from
3/4" at the
leading edge to 1" at the main beam. The rabbet goes from 1/2" at the LE
to 5/8" at
the main beam.)
An alternate method would be to go in with a chisel and match all the
rabbets so the
gusset plates would match up, then use a plane and sandpaper to fair all
the mis-aligned
outer surfaces. This would be easier, since there is only an 1/8" to 1/16"
difference
in these dimensions throughout the tail.
How have other folks done this?
Thanks in advance.
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
Corvallis, OR
Randy Stockberger
stockberger(at)proaxis.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: propeller thrust line |
Working away at my terminal here, the mind wanders from work and...
A question pops up...
Does anybody on the list know if the Model A's vertical location is
dictated by the thrust line or propeller length requirements, or is
it that high simply to get the mag mount above the top longeron level.
If you used a side mount mag a'la Funk, could you move the engine down
a couple inches and still have propeller clearance and reasonable
flight characteristics? The idea being to get the top of the engine
out of the way as much as possible, and in conjunction with a chin
mount rad, get the same forward visibility as with an aircraft engine.
Comments??
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimvan1(at)juno.com (James T. VanDervort) |
Subject: | Re: propeller thrust line |
My only comment would be is if you start changing things like that, you
will no longer
have a Pietenpol. You can make a good airplane if you change the plans,
but you will make a better one if you don't change the plans. I guess the
point I am trying to make is "don't change the plans".
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: propeller thrust line |
John Kahn wrote:
>
> Working away at my terminal here, the mind wanders from work and...
>
> A question pops up...
>
> Does anybody on the list know if the Model A's vertical location is
> dictated by the thrust line or propeller length requirements, or is
> it that high simply to get the mag mount above the top longeron level.
>
> If you used a side mount mag a'la Funk, could you move the engine down
> a couple inches and still have propeller clearance and reasonable
> flight characteristics? The idea being to get the top of the engine
> out of the way as much as possible, and in conjunction with a chin
> mount rad, get the same forward visibility as with an aircraft engine.
>
> Comments??
A the seminar on the Model A held at Brodhead this year Lowell Frank
said the the Piet didn't seem to be sensitive to changes in the line of
thrust. If you convert to a full pressure lube system it is possible to
invert the Model A a'la Funk. :) Also in a recent issue of the BPA
Newsletter there was a V-8 powered Piet, I believe it had a lower thrust
line.
Bob B.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hello I'm new to your group and not to sure what to do... I guess I'll find
out soon enough!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: piet chat group |
SRXJimL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Hello I'm new to your group and not to sure what to do... I guess I'll find
> out soon enough!
Hello and welcome Jim,
Why don't you tell the group a little about yourself. For my part I'm a
two year member of BPA, have been to Brodhead twice. I'm just about
ready to retire and am planning real serious construction activity
to began on a Piet soon.
Regards, Bob B. Missouri USA
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Polyfibre epoxy primer for metal |
Any one had any experience on brushing this stuff on to metal? Reading the
label shows it is rather nasty to spray.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Polyfibre epoxy primer for metal |
You might get good results if you use an artist's sable-hair brush.
Fine art quality brushes are the key to a really smooth brush-on finish.
Certainly worth trying.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: piet chat group |
Hello everyone my name is Jim Lingenfelter. I live in Tidewater Virginia. I
have been an A&P for 7 years, at first working on Navy A-6's, now working on
a P-40E-1 for a place called the Fighter Factory. After we finish building
the P-40, we have a Corsair to build. Boy do I love this job! My wife and I
have wanted to build a Pietenpol for about 4 years now but kids, school,
etc., etc. have kept us from starting. I bought the plans about 2 years ago,
along with the plans for the aerial (biplane). Have any of you built the
Aerial biplane?
Please feel free to write me I love to talk airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Polyfibre epoxy primer for metal |
If you brush this stuff, remember to use a little more retardent so the brush
strokes can flow out. Also, brush length wise along the part, parallel to the
ground again so gravity can help the brush strokes flow out. Good luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Polyfibre epoxy primer for metal |
If you brush this stuff, remember to use a little more retardent so the brush
strokes can flow out. Also, brush length wise along the part, parallel to the
ground again so gravity can help the brush strokes flow out. Good luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: piet chat group |
SRXJimL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Hello everyone my name is Jim Lingenfelter. I live in Tidewater Virginia. I
> have been an A&P for 7 years, at first working on Navy A-6's, now working on
> a P-40E-1 for a place called the Fighter Factory. After we finish building
> the P-40, we have a Corsair to build. Boy do I love this job! My wife and I
> have wanted to build a Pietenpol for about 4 years now but kids, school,
> etc., etc. have kept us from starting. I bought the plans about 2 years ago,
> along with the plans for the aerial (biplane). Have any of you built the
> Aerial biplane?
> Please feel free to write me I love to talk airplanes!
>
Welcome Jim:
Guess I couldn't talk you into trading jobs with me for awhile huh? My
favoritis ever fighter is the P-40. I have a room full of pictures,
photos etc of the P-40, especially like the Flying Tiger era. Have some
signed stuff by R.T. Smith, (had to pick someone to shine after). (My
other favorite is the WWI Nieuport).
Guess you came to the right place to contact Piet builders, plenty of
construction, advice and kibitzing here ;) You'll probably hear for
yourself, but my vote is against the bi-wing, however you are the one
deciding on what your project is to be, good luck...
Gary...
(South Texas)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Forward CG limit?\ |
Well I have to say that I'm a little stoked today. Yesterday I put the
wings on and fired up the engine, took lots of pictures and did my
weight and balance.
All up empty weight: 588.5 lbs!
I am just a little aft (.5 inches) of the 20 inch cg limit. I will fix
that with a wing move and hopefully loosing a little weight. (my wife is
excited that there is added incentive for me---)
Next task is filling out all the paperwork to get the FAA to make the
trip.
More photo's soon.
BTW What is the story with the up ended piet on grants page?
another BTW Mike C's got some good picts too!
Keep building!
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Dear all,
I was wondering when this might come up, and because of its seeming
sensitive nature I chosen not to say anything up to this point. But
since some recent posts have indicated a Pietenpol Purist air (pun
intended) --And since I run this list--I submit the following as the
"official" statement on the subject. (despite the seeming opposing view
of wonderful newsletter editors.)
While I certainly respect the
"Don't-change-anything-thing-the-Piet-is-perfect-as-it-is" point of
view, imposing it on other homebuilders of the fine design is a little
irritating. Pietenpol himself was an innovator and I feel would be among
the first
to encourage a certain amount of innovation by builders. A buddy of
mine is about to fly the first Subaru powered Piet I have seen, and when
the old timers come around the hanger and ask where the model A is, his
response is that "Bernie would be flying behind a subaru if he would
have had one" I think that there is more than a degree of likelihood in
this statement. With regard to airframe modifications: There is no
commandment that you have to follow them. Not even Howard Henderson has
a perfect "to-the-plans-piet" anyone who uses braided cable for
drag/anti-drag wires or aluminum instead of "tern plate" has made
modifications to the plans. Others have added a wing or used cub parts,
or changed the airfoil--and still call it a Pietenpol. Granted it
really isn't an Air Camper anymore, but it is still someone's vision of
what they want in airplane. Changes to the plans are ok so long as you
know what you are doing, which brings me to the point of this post.
I believe that a zealous rush to defend the design as it sits on paper
is the type of response that has a tendency to stifle open discussion
and acts to discourage people from asking questions. I suggest that
folks not rush so quickly to the "don't change
anything response" when others ask sincere honest questions.
After all if we really wanted to pick a nit, none of us have a true
Pietenpol unless we bought one built by Bernard himself.
Respectfully
Steve e.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Regarding Steve E's pure Piet comments:
None of Bernard's Piets were exactly like the other because he
was a continual innovator and experimenter. That's the beauty
of home building. You build it the way you want it. I personally
think they are ALL neat. Model A, Corvair, Subaru, Cont. /Lyc
Fiesta, 3 piece or one piece, Scout or Air Camper. There is
no such thing as a pure Piet (except for those Bernie built) and
each one of those had its own unique characteristics.
I'm happy to see new members on the list and hope to encourage
them as a whole in all areas. I'm also thankful to the very
experienced members who share their years of tinkering and
wisdom with us so we don't stumble off into a dangerous area.
I'm not for radical changes to the plans by any stretch- Bernie
definitely knew what he was doing.
for what it was intended to do and its limitations you will be a
happy (Air) Camper.
MC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Purist Pietenpol RFPRM -Reply |
At Brodhead this year I had a brief discussion with Orrin Hoopman. We
talked about some of the differences between his plans, Don Pietenpols
plans and the FGM plans. Mr Hoopmans statement to me was "Well, you
go ahead and try different things, whatever works for you go ahead and
do"
After hearing that I felt a lot better about making MINOR deviations from
the plans.
Greg Cardinal
>>> Steve Eldredge 09/03/97 12:58am >>>
Dear all,
I was wondering when this might come up, and because of its seeming
sensitive nature I chosen not to say anything up to this point. But
since some recent posts have indicated a Pietenpol Purist air (pun
intended) --And since I run this list--I submit the following as the
"official" statement on the subject. (despite the seeming opposing view
of wonderful newsletter editors.)
While I certainly respect the
"Don't-change-anything-thing-the-Piet-is-perfect-as-it-is" point of
view, imposing it on other homebuilders of the fine design is a little
irritating. Pietenpol himself was an innovator and I feel would be among
the first
to encourage a certain amount of innovation by builders. A buddy of
mine is about to fly the first Subaru powered Piet I have seen, and when
the old timers come around the hanger and ask where the model A is, his
response is that "Bernie would be flying behind a subaru if he would
have had one" I think that there is more than a degree of likelihood in
this statement. With regard to airframe modifications: There is no
commandment that you have to follow them. Not even Howard
Henderson has
a perfect "to-the-plans-piet" anyone who uses braided cable for
drag/anti-drag wires or aluminum instead of "tern plate" has made
modifications to the plans. Others have added a wing or used cub parts,
or changed the airfoil--and still call it a Pietenpol. Granted it
really isn't an Air Camper anymore, but it is still someone's vision of
what they want in airplane. Changes to the plans are ok so long as you
know what you are doing, which brings me to the point of this post.
I believe that a zealous rush to defend the design as it sits on paper
is the type of response that has a tendency to stifle open discussion
and acts to discourage people from asking questions. I suggest that
folks not rush so quickly to the "don't change
anything response" when others ask sincere honest questions.
After all if we really wanted to pick a nit, none of us have a true
Pietenpol unless we bought one built by Bernard himself.
Respectfully
Steve e.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Forward CG limit?\ |
Steve,
That's a great weight. Mine is 635. I was to a fly-in at Jersey Shore Pa
last weekend there was a C-65 Piet there that weighed 740.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Right on, and well said!
> From: Steve Eldredge
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM
> Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 2:58 AM
>
> Dear all,
>
> I was wondering when this might come up, and because of its seeming
> sensitive nature I chosen not to say anything up to this point. But
> since some recent posts have indicated a Pietenpol Purist air (pun
> intended) --And since I run this list--I submit the following as the
> "official" statement on the subject. (despite the seeming opposing view
> of wonderful newsletter editors.)
>
>
> While I certainly respect the
> "Don't-change-anything-thing-the-Piet-is-perfect-as-it-is" point of
> view, imposing it on other homebuilders of the fine design is a little
> irritating. Pietenpol himself was an innovator and I feel would be among
> the first
> to encourage a certain amount of innovation by builders. A buddy of
> mine is about to fly the first Subaru powered Piet I have seen, and when
> the old timers come around the hanger and ask where the model A is, his
> response is that "Bernie would be flying behind a subaru if he would
> have had one" I think that there is more than a degree of likelihood in
> this statement. With regard to airframe modifications: There is no
> commandment that you have to follow them. Not even Howard Henderson has
> a perfect "to-the-plans-piet" anyone who uses braided cable for
> drag/anti-drag wires or aluminum instead of "tern plate" has made
> modifications to the plans. Others have added a wing or used cub parts,
> or changed the airfoil--and still call it a Pietenpol. Granted it
> really isn't an Air Camper anymore, but it is still someone's vision of
> what they want in airplane. Changes to the plans are ok so long as you
> know what you are doing, which brings me to the point of this post.
>
> I believe that a zealous rush to defend the design as it sits on paper
> is the type of response that has a tendency to stifle open discussion
> and acts to discourage people from asking questions. I suggest that
> folks not rush so quickly to the "don't change
> anything response" when others ask sincere honest questions.
>
> After all if we really wanted to pick a nit, none of us have a true
> Pietenpol unless we bought one built by Bernard himself.
>
> Respectfully
> Steve e.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Forward CG limit?\ |
Steve, can you keep me posted as to how you go about adjusting the wing,
and by how much? I sure envy you being that close to completion!
> From: Steve Eldredge
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Forward CG limit?\
> Date: Tuesday, September 02, 1997 19:04 PM
>
> Well I have to say that I'm a little stoked today. Yesterday I put the
> wings on and fired up the engine, took lots of pictures and did my
> weight and balance.
>
> All up empty weight: 588.5 lbs!
>
> I am just a little aft (.5 inches) of the 20 inch cg limit. I will fix
> that with a wing move and hopefully loosing a little weight. (my wife is
> excited that there is added incentive for me---)
>
> Next task is filling out all the paperwork to get the FAA to make the
> trip.
>
> More photo's soon.
>
> BTW What is the story with the up ended piet on grants page?
>
> another BTW Mike C's got some good picts too!
>
> Keep building!
>
> Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I was wondering when this might come up, and because of its seeming
> sensitive nature I chosen not to say anything up to this point. But
> since some recent posts have indicated a Pietenpol Purist air (pun
> intended) --And since I run this list--I submit the following as the
> "official" statement on the subject. (despite the seeming opposing view
> of wonderful newsletter editors.)
>
> While I certainly respect the
> "Don't-change-anything-thing-the-Piet-is-perfect-as-it-is" point of
> view, imposing it on other homebuilders of the fine design is a little
> irritating. Pietenpol himself was an innovator and I feel would be among
> the first
> to encourage a certain amount of innovation by builders. A buddy of
> mine is about to fly the first Subaru powered Piet I have seen, and when
> the old timers come around the hanger and ask where the model A is, his
> response is that "Bernie would be flying behind a subaru if he would
> have had one" I think that there is more than a degree of likelihood in
> this statement. With regard to airframe modifications: There is no
> commandment that you have to follow them. Not even Howard Henderson has
> a perfect "to-the-plans-piet" anyone who uses braided cable for
> drag/anti-drag wires or aluminum instead of "tern plate" has made
> modifications to the plans. Others have added a wing or used cub parts,
> or changed the airfoil--and still call it a Pietenpol. Granted it
> really isn't an Air Camper anymore, but it is still someone's vision of
> what they want in airplane. Changes to the plans are ok so long as you
> know what you are doing, which brings me to the point of this post.
>
> I believe that a zealous rush to defend the design as it sits on paper
> is the type of response that has a tendency to stifle open discussion
> and acts to discourage people from asking questions. I suggest that
> folks not rush so quickly to the "don't change
> anything response" when others ask sincere honest questions.
>
> After all if we really wanted to pick a nit, none of us have a true
> Pietenpol unless we bought one built by Bernard himself.
>
> Respectfully
> Steve e.
Steve E. Very well said. Some folks are leaders and inovators, others
are followers for lack of skills, knowledge, abilities, or the desire or
moxey to step out of the crowd. B . Pietenpol was a leader and inovator
as is folks like Jim Bede, Burt Rutan and many others, being a leader or
follower are both commendable as both are producers of things we have
loved from the past and things that propel us into the future and that
brings me to a question?? Did you see the Wainfans Facitmobile at
Oshkosh? I did not make it this year but seen an article in the October
issue of kit planes on it but no real information on performance ect
and too many bodies around the bird to see much of it in the photos but
it certainly looked interesting and as I understand it , it is an
ultralight . Did any one see this ship fly? Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Every single Pietenpol I have ever looked at is different in some way.
I think the key is that we respect each others opinions. It is
interesting to speculate about what changes Bernard might make if he
were building today?
Bob Bailey
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I was wondering when this might come up, and because of its seeming
> sensitive nature I chosen not to say anything up to this point. But
> since some recent posts have indicated a Pietenpol Purist air (pun
> intended) --And since I run this list--I submit the following as the
> "official" statement on the subject. (despite the seeming opposing view
> of wonderful newsletter editors.)
>
> While I certainly respect the
> "Don't-change-anything-thing-the-Piet-is-perfect-as-it-is" point of
> view, imposing it on other homebuilders of the fine design is a little
> irritating. Pietenpol himself was an innovator and I feel would be among
> the first
> to encourage a certain amount of innovation by builders. A buddy of
> mine is about to fly the first Subaru powered Piet I have seen, and when
> the old timers come around the hanger and ask where the model A is, his
> response is that "Bernie would be flying behind a subaru if he would
> have had one" I think that there is more than a degree of likelihood in
> this statement. With regard to airframe modifications: There is no
> commandment that you have to follow them. Not even Howard Henderson has
> a perfect "to-the-plans-piet" anyone who uses braided cable for
> drag/anti-drag wires or aluminum instead of "tern plate" has made
> modifications to the plans. Others have added a wing or used cub parts,
> or changed the airfoil--and still call it a Pietenpol. Granted it
> really isn't an Air Camper anymore, but it is still someone's vision of
> what they want in airplane. Changes to the plans are ok so long as you
> know what you are doing, which brings me to the point of this post.
>
> I believe that a zealous rush to defend the design as it sits on paper
> is the type of response that has a tendency to stifle open discussion
> and acts to discourage people from asking questions. I suggest that
> folks not rush so quickly to the "don't change
> anything response" when others ask sincere honest questions.
>
> After all if we really wanted to pick a nit, none of us have a true
> Pietenpol unless we bought one built by Bernard himself.
>
> Respectfully
> Steve e.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | William Conway <ConwayW(at)ricks.edu> |
Subject: | Forward CG limit?\ -Reply |
Hi Group,
I've been a member for some time but usually spend my time reading the
comments of others. I particularly enjoyed Steve's comments about
design changes. I'm rebuilding a wrecked Piet--new landing gear, fabric
repair, resplicing wing spars/covering the wing, remounting a Ford
Escort engine, getting the engine to run well, designing a cowl, etc.
The orginal builder used piano hinges on the ailerons which provide a
gap seal at the same time. At Broadhead I didn't see anyone using this
arrangement. Does anyone have a comment about any particular
hazards???
I looked in vain for someone else who might be using an Escort engine.
Yes, I'm aware of Ed's conversion in Canada and have his manual but I'd
like to talk to someone who is flying one or currently working on the
conversion.
I live in Rexburg, Idaho, and would like to visit some other Piet builders.
I'd also be glad to share my plane with anyone who 'd like to stop by.
I'm approaching retirement--2 more years--and earned an A&P two years
ago for use in a future hobby business. I fly a C-120 at the present time.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gerard \"Larry\" Huber" <glhuber(at)mail.wiscnet.net> |
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
ernest l. hagness wrote:
>Did you see the Wainfans Facitmobile at
> Oshkosh? I did not make it this year but seen an article in the October
> issue of kit planes on it but no real information on performance ect
> and too many bodies around the bird to see much of it in the photos but it certainly
looked interesting and as I understand it , it is an
> ultralight . Did any one see this ship fly? Ernie.
The Facetmobile was at Oshkosh 1 or 2 years ago and flew before the
afternoon airshows several times (very high angle of attack - which
prompted the installation of a plexi panel in the floor for forward
visibility). Rotax powered and probably close to the ultralight
category, it was displayed in the homebuilt area and never was in the
ultralight area so probably was an experimental registartion. Seems I
read somewhere that the plane subsequently crashed on takeoff a year ago
or so, by hitting a fence (minor personal damage - major structural
damage), and will not be rebuilt. Other design innovations are being
explored.
Hope this helps.
Larry
* E-Mail glhuber(at)mail.wiscnet.net Procurement Services Div. *
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Forward CG limit?\ |
>
> Steve,
>
> That's a great weight. Mine is 635. I was to a fly-in at Jersey Shore Pa
> last weekend there was a C-65 Piet there that weighed 740.
>
> Craig
>
I just had a ride in Brian Kenny's Piet on Saturday and it was about
580lbs with an A65. And that's with the wooden gear with big motorcycle
wheels. He said he saved a lot of weight using round tube for the lift
struts (minimal difference in cruise speed). The airplane had little
trouble lifting the two of us at close to 400lbs. I was really impressed
that such a low powered airplane with not particularly large wings (a Cub has
6 ft more span) can pretty well haul its own weight. Must be something to
that cambered airfoil. I'm a believer now.
A delight to fly, and it thermals quite nicely (I instruct in gliders).
No need to wind up the engine to climb; just find some lift and start
circling at 55 mph.
John Kahn
Bombardier Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Forward CG limit?\ |
Ian,
I tipped my wing back 3 1/2" and ended up with 17" back from the leading
edge CG.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
Craig, (and others)
In addition to moving the wing back did you have to add any weight in
the nose of the A/C. Moving my wing back to 3.75 inches from
perpendicualar puts my cg right at 20 inches from the le of the wing. I
weigh 210lbs. Putting full fuel in brings it to 18 inches. According
to the buckeye page cg article loaded cg's extend back as far as 22
inches. Think I should move the wing back further? Or add some weight
in the engine compartment.
thoughts?
Stevee.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Craig, (and others)
>
> In addition to moving the wing back did you have to add any weight in
> the nose of the A/C. Moving my wing back to 3.75 inches from
> perpendicualar puts my cg right at 20 inches from the le of the wing. I
> weigh 210lbs. Putting full fuel in brings it to 18 inches. According
> to the buckeye page cg article loaded cg's extend back as far as 22
> inches. Think I should move the wing back further? Or add some weight
> in the engine compartment.
>
> thoughts?
>
> Stevee.
Steve:
What does the c.g. look like at half empty tank weight and 3/4 empty?
It has always been preferable when possible not to add weight to bring
things into "square"...
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Purist Pietenpol RFPRM |
Gerard "Larry" Huber wrote:
>
> ernest l. hagness wrote:
> >Did you see the Wainfans Facitmobile at
> > Oshkosh? I did not make it this year but seen an article in the October
> > issue of kit planes on it but no real information on performance ect
> > and too many bodies around the bird to see much of it in the photos but it
certainly looked interesting and as I understand it , it is an
> > ultralight . Did any one see this ship fly? Ernie.
>
> The Facetmobile was at Oshkosh 1 or 2 years ago and flew before the
> afternoon airshows several times (very high angle of attack - which
> prompted the installation of a plexi panel in the floor for forward
> visibility). Rotax powered and probably close to the ultralight
> category, it was displayed in the homebuilt area and never was in the
> ultralight area so probably was an experimental registartion. Seems I
> read somewhere that the plane subsequently crashed on takeoff a year ago
> or so, by hitting a fence (minor personal damage - major structural
> damage), and will not be rebuilt. Other design innovations are being
> explored.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Larry
> * E-Mail glhuber(at)mail.wiscnet.net Procurement Services Div. *
Thanks for your input.The facitmobile may be a little too experimental
for an old gaffer like me, but am always interested in research. Will be
ni milwaukee and greenbay on 9-18 for 2 weeks visiting old friends and
relatives. Am looking forward to some weather that is under 100 dfh as
has been the case in south texas this summer. Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | POWRACER(at)aol.com |
My name is Mike List and I am a new member of the Buckeye Pietenpol
Association. Steve kindly added me to the chat group and showed me his
project last month on a trip to Salt Lake City. Just starting on our
Pietenpol and waiting on the first batch of spruce to arrive. Our ship is to
be Corvair powered with wire-spoke wheels. This will be a family project
with the wife and two young daughters eager to help.
A bit of background: private pilot with time in Aeronca L-3, Cessna's,
Piper's, ultralight and experimentals, design engineer for Lockheed Skunk
Works, kayak builder, EAA Chapter 49 member, WWI aviation enthusiast and open
cockpit lover.
Agree with Steve that the Pietenpol is a wonderful ship that lends itself to
customizing provided the basic structure is not compromised. Stay away from
wood lift struts and do add the jury struts. Lots of fun and the wife (or
husband) knows where you are.
Saw Ernie is interested in the Facetmobile by Barnaby Wanifan. The October
1984 issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine has an excellent article on it,
provide me your snail mail address and I'll be glad to send you a copy.
Also, there is a Facetmobile homepage at
http://users.aol.com/slicklynne/wanifan.htm (or just search "Facetmobile" or
"Wanifan").
Regarding the biplane Aerial version of the Piet someone inquired about: I
was also interested in the biplane and got the conversion plans. Have heard
different versions of how it flew, with the original builder admitting that
it tended to hunt nose up and down in flight. A bit of a stability problem
created by the additional wing with no stagger that would require a bit of
modification to the design, but not as much as one source has indicated such
as negative stagger and lots of nose ballast. If the ship had been that far
out of the stability envelope it should have been unable to recover the first
time it was stalled. I didn't want to get into that much development effort
so stayed with the original Piet configuration.
Look forward to high-tech chatting on a 1929 design. The Piet does, after
all, have a fly-by-wire control system!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
To the group:
Just some ramblings. Feel free to comment/critisize. Some of you may have
pondered the Grega vs Piet debate and may get an insight or see something I
missed.
I'm starting to understand how needlessly overdone the Grega modifications
are after comparing the Piet and Grega cabane fittings and having a chat
with one of the aero engineers here. Most people, that see the Piet's tiny
little strap cabane fittings, make remarks about how weak it looks. If you do
some crude math, the picture is different. If for argument's sake you consider
the loads to be shared equally between all eight cabane/lift strut fittings,
and assuming a fuselage that weighs 900 lbs, the load on each cabane would
be just over 100 lbs at 1'G'. There are two straps at each cabane, so reduce
that to just over 50 lbs on each strap.
Actually, with the lift struts at about mid span on the wing panel, almost all
the lifting loads are transmitted through the lift struts, not the cabanes. (In
fact, if there is more wing outboard of the lift strut than inboard, the load
on the cabanes is actually in *compression*. We had a Twin Otter that had a
wing root fitting fail completely and the airplane continued to fly with
the wing held to the fuselage by the fairings!).
So the Piet cabanes are loaded to far less than 50lbs, probably less than
20 lbs that could be tension or compression depending on the flight
condition. Pull 5 gs and the load goes to 100 lbs. What's the limit tensile
strength of a half inch strap of 4130 at the bolt holes? About 1000
lbs?
The wing fittings would share most of the 900 lb load between them or about
200 lbs per fitting, which would be 1000 lbs at 5 Gs. What's the tensile
strength of the 4130 strut fitting? 3 or 4 thousand lbs maybe?
Same with the top fittings. The lift load on the wing root fittings is mostly a
compression load trying to push the wing inboard against the center section,
which is cancelled at the front fitting by the drag load trying to bend the
wing aft. So the most highly stressed component at the center section is
the inboard compression load on the _rear_ wingroot fitting. The top cabane
fittings are doing as little work as the bottom ones. The drag struts
would probably be loaded the most.
Look at the engine mount also. If the Model A is roughly 250 lbs, there
is half that or 125 lbs on the front end of the mount (since the other end
is on the firewall) or 62lbs on each side. This load is split between the
top and bottom mount fittings at the firewall. Even at 5Gs there is not
much stress on the engine mount fittings; even allowing for moment arms and
whatnot there would be no more than a few hundred pounds of shear load
on each bottom mount bolt.
This little excercise helped convince me what the oldtimers all say, that
the stucture is adequate with mild steel and is actually much overdone
when built using 4130. If you modify the fittings you are adding strength
that you will never be able to use.
So while there *are* some design features of the Grega that may be nice to
have, (like the bigger ailerons), structurally speaking the extra beef in
the Grega is just ballast.
I'm sure all this is just preaching to the converted.
Regards
John Kahn
Tech Pubs
Canadair Regional Jet
Bomabardier Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
John Kahn wrote:
>
> To the group:
>
> Just some ramblings. Feel free to comment/critisize. Some of you may have
> pondered the Grega vs Piet debate and may get an insight or see something I
> missed.
>
> I'm starting to understand how needlessly overdone the Grega modifications
> are after comparing the Piet and Grega cabane fittings and having a chat
> with one of the aero engineers here. Most people, that see the Piet's tiny
> little strap cabane fittings, make remarks about how weak it looks. If you do
> some crude math, the picture is different. If for argument's sake you consider
> the loads to be shared equally between all eight cabane/lift strut fittings,
> and assuming a fuselage that weighs 900 lbs, the load on each cabane would
> be just over 100 lbs at 1'G'. There are two straps at each cabane, so reduce
> that to just over 50 lbs on each strap.
>
> Actually, with the lift struts at about mid span on the wing panel, almost all
> the lifting loads are transmitted through the lift struts, not the cabanes. (In
> fact, if there is more wing outboard of the lift strut than inboard, the load
> on the cabanes is actually in *compression*. We had a Twin Otter that had a
> wing root fitting fail completely and the airplane continued to fly with
> the wing held to the fuselage by the fairings!).
>
> So the Piet cabanes are loaded to far less than 50lbs, probably less than
> 20 lbs that could be tension or compression depending on the flight
> condition. Pull 5 gs and the load goes to 100 lbs. What's the limit tensile
> strength of a half inch strap of 4130 at the bolt holes? About 1000
> lbs?
>
> The wing fittings would share most of the 900 lb load between them or about
> 200 lbs per fitting, which would be 1000 lbs at 5 Gs. What's the tensile
> strength of the 4130 strut fitting? 3 or 4 thousand lbs maybe?
>
> Same with the top fittings. The lift load on the wing root fittings is mostly
a
> compression load trying to push the wing inboard against the center section,
> which is cancelled at the front fitting by the drag load trying to bend the
> wing aft. So the most highly stressed component at the center section is
> the inboard compression load on the _rear_ wingroot fitting. The top cabane
> fittings are doing as little work as the bottom ones. The drag struts
> would probably be loaded the most.
>
> Look at the engine mount also. If the Model A is roughly 250 lbs, there
> is half that or 125 lbs on the front end of the mount (since the other end
> is on the firewall) or 62lbs on each side. This load is split between the
> top and bottom mount fittings at the firewall. Even at 5Gs there is not
> much stress on the engine mount fittings; even allowing for moment arms and
> whatnot there would be no more than a few hundred pounds of shear load
> on each bottom mount bolt.
>
> This little excercise helped convince me what the oldtimers all say, that
> the stucture is adequate with mild steel and is actually much overdone
> when built using 4130. If you modify the fittings you are adding strength
> that you will never be able to use.
>
> So while there *are* some design features of the Grega that may be nice to
> have, (like the bigger ailerons), structurally speaking the extra beef in
> the Grega is just ballast.
>
> I'm sure all this is just preaching to the converted.
>
> Regards
>
> John Kahn
>
> Tech Pubs
> Canadair Regional Jet
> Bomabardier Inc.
John, Thanks for sharing this good data with us . It gives me much peace
of mind knowing that my Grega is not going to break on me. I have never
seen any solid engineering data on this so I am making a copy to include
in my airframe log book. Thanks. Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Subject: | Re: Introduction |
POWRACER(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> My name is Mike List and I am a new member of the Buckeye Pietenpol
> Association. Steve kindly added me to the chat group and showed me his
> project last month on a trip to Salt Lake City. Just starting on our
> Pietenpol and waiting on the first batch of spruce to arrive. Our ship is to
> be Corvair powered with wire-spoke wheels. This will be a family project
> with the wife and two young daughters eager to help.
> A bit of background: private pilot with time in Aeronca L-3, Cessna's,
> Piper's, ultralight and experimentals, design engineer for Lockheed Skunk
> Works, kayak builder, EAA Chapter 49 member, WWI aviation enthusiast and open
> cockpit lover.
> Agree with Steve that the Pietenpol is a wonderful ship that lends itself to
> customizing provided the basic structure is not compromised. Stay away from
> wood lift struts and do add the jury struts. Lots of fun and the wife (or
> husband) knows where you are.
> Saw Ernie is interested in the Facetmobile by Barnaby Wanifan. The October
> 1984 issue of EAA's Sport Aviation magazine has an excellent article on it,
> provide me your snail mail address and I'll be glad to send you a copy.
> Also, there is a Facetmobile homepage at
> http://users.aol.com/slicklynne/wanifan.htm (or just search "Facetmobile" or
> "Wanifan").
> Regarding the biplane Aerial version of the Piet someone inquired about: I
> was also interested in the biplane and got the conversion plans. Have heard
> different versions of how it flew, with the original builder admitting that
> it tended to hunt nose up and down in flight. A bit of a stability problem
> created by the additional wing with no stagger that would require a bit of
> modification to the design, but not as much as one source has indicated such
> as negative stagger and lots of nose ballast. If the ship had been that far
> out of the stability envelope it should have been unable to recover the first
> time it was stalled. I didn't want to get into that much development effort
> so stayed with the original Piet configuration.
> Look forward to high-tech chatting on a 1929 design. The Piet does, after
> all, have a fly-by-wire control system!
Mike thanks for the info on the facitmobile. Will follow up on it Did
not know it had been around that long. Ernie Hagness 2337 Willow Dr.
Portland, Texas 78374 EAA23375
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Hello all,
Discussion of the Piet/Grega prompts a further question? I have never
seen or heard anything mentioned about control surface flutter for
either a/c. Is it because of the slow speed that this is just not a
problem?
Bob Bailey - Missouri
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | POWRACER(at)aol.com |
You are right, Ernie. My fingers fumbled and the article is in the October
1994 issue, not 1984 as mentioned. Will get you a copy in the mail.
Regarding flutter. It can happen even at the slow speeds flown by
ultralights. I'll take a look at them from a flutter point of view one day,
but they must be right as is as I have never heard of a Piet with flutter
problems. Any comments?
Steve, good to hear that you had the wings on and the engine running again.
Ought to make a great leaf blower this fall! The neighbors will be envious!
Mike List
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Doug Hunt <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Hello everyone,have enjoying al the discussion coming through daily.
I'am still trying to locate a source for a tailwheel spring ,would like to
hear of anyone that could point me in the right direction in this regard.
Tnx Doug ....ve6zh(at)cnnet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | grhans(at)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca |
On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Doug Hunt wrote:
> Hello everyone,have enjoying al the discussion coming through daily.
> I'am still trying to locate a source for a tailwheel spring ,would like to
> hear of anyone that could point me in the right direction in this regard.
> Tnx Doug ....ve6zh(at)cnnet.com
>
Hi Doug,
I'm still hoping to find that John Deere part number for the tail spring.
There is still a lot of stuff I have to go through within the next few
weeks, and I know it has to be in there somewhere amongst my collection
of junk.
Will be moving to Camrose October 31st. and staying at a motel until our
new place is ready (it is about three months behind schedule now). Will
be off-line from late October until perhaps December, but will advise when
this happens.
If all else fails, I'll measure my spring and go to Martin Farm Equipment
to find the part for you. I'm sure there others in the discussion group
who would like to have a J.D. part number, also.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Aron(at)hrn.bradley.edu |
PI>On Sat, 6 Sep 1997, Doug Hunt wrote:
PI>> Hello everyone,have enjoying al the discussion coming through daily.
PI>> I'am still trying to locate a source for a tailwheel spring ,would like t
PI>> hear of anyone that could point me in the right direction .
....ve6zh(at)cnnet.com
Hi, Doug:
I went looking through my old BPANews letters and found two good entries
about springs for the tail wheel/skid. Issue #50, 1995, p. 5 and
w/pic on p. 11:
"Don Hicks (p.o.BOX 127, Hartford ,AL 36344) built this
tailwheel assembly
with plans from Yesterday's Wings. Coil spring is cut to
The 7 " spring section measures 170-190lbs.
fully compressed. Tubing from strut housing was used to
provide upper
and lower spring retainer sockets."
Issue #53, 1996, p.13 has a letter from Bruce Heinninger, 10613 W.
98th Ter.,
Overland Park , KS. 66214:
"John Deere sells a spring that's a perfect match for the specs;
its part number is
T 143444, and it costs about $9.00. Its outer dia. is 1.5
in.; full length
( no load ) is 6.73" ; the coil itself is .191" thick. I've
tested its compresed
load, and it almost gets totally compressed under my weight (c.
210 lbs.). I
don't know what the spring is used for in a John Deere, but
Ken Perkins tells
me that the spring for a 1929 JD rake is a perfect match.
Maybe "that's what
it's for."
Hope these pieces help you out. I've been in this chat group for
about two weeks
now and have enjoyed reading the stuff. I'm very new to computers and
have never
successfully sent an email by myself. Hope this works and this all
wasn't a waste of
time!
John Fay
memorized and can't
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Doug Hunt <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Thanks very much John,for the good info on the spring.I will check with the
local J.D. dealer and see if the part number is still good.If not i will
try and track down a bike spring .Thanks again
..Doug Ve6zh(at)cnnet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Doug Hunt <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Just checked with J.D. parts as they are open late for harvest time and the
T143444 is still a good number and is $14.50 can.
Thanks John.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | [Fwd: :-) (Funny) Forwarded: Computer Acronyms] |
thought all you piet/computer types might get a chuckle out of this one.
stevee
by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-9 #23832)
id <01ING3MF8O68000QV8(at)yvax.byu.edu> for byucsr-expand(at)reprocess.yvax.byu.edu;
by yvax.byu.edu (PMDF V5.1-8 #23832)
by ACS2.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-9 #23834)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 17:29:02 -0600
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Kim R. Sullivan" <kim_sullivan(at)byu.edu> (by way of Angela Rogers) |
Subject: | :-) (Funny) Forwarded: Computer Acronyms |
Approved: akrogers(at)ymail.byu.edu
[Moderator's Note: I thought you all might like a good chuckle. Thanks to
Kim for sending this to me. :-) --AR]
Subject: | Computer Acronyms |
Understanding acronyms at a glance is a crucial skill in today's
fast-paced, high-tech world!
Thus this list:
APPLE Arrogance Produces Profit-Losing Entity
BASIC Bill's Attempt to Seize Industry Control
CD-ROM Consumer Device, Rendered Obsolete Monthly
WWW World Wide Wait
MACINTOSH Most Applications Crash; If Not, The Operating System
Hangs
PENTIUM Produces Erroneous Numbers Through Incorrect
Understanding of Math
COBOL Completely Obsolete Business Oriented Language
AMIGA A Merely Insignificant Game Addiction
WINDOWS Will Install Needless Data On Whole System
MICROSOFT Most Intelligent Customers Realize Our Software Only
________________________________________________________________________________
John, thank you very much for the fitting (no pun intended) information. I
was just going through the thought process, as I assemble the centre wing
section, that the cabane fittings look very flimsy and should probably be
reinforced. Your expanation puts some sense into the fact that these planes
have been flying for so long without problems. When the centre section is
hanging in place the first thought is WOW, those are really tiny fittings.
It comes back to a repeated theme, build it as designed, its worked a long
time.
Thanks again,
-=Ian=-
> From: John Kahn <jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Piet/Grega
> Date: Friday, September 05, 1997 16:15 PM
>
> To the group:
>
> Just some ramblings. Feel free to comment/critisize. Some of you may
have
> pondered the Grega vs Piet debate and may get an insight or see something
I
> missed.
>
> I'm starting to understand how needlessly overdone the Grega
modifications
> are after comparing the Piet and Grega cabane fittings and having a chat
> with one of the aero engineers here. Most people, that see the Piet's
tiny
> little strap cabane fittings, make remarks about how weak it looks. If
you do
> some crude math, the picture is different. If for argument's sake you
consider
> the loads to be shared equally between all eight cabane/lift strut
fittings,
> and assuming a fuselage that weighs 900 lbs, the load on each cabane
would
> be just over 100 lbs at 1'G'. There are two straps at each cabane, so
reduce
> that to just over 50 lbs on each strap.
>
> Actually, with the lift struts at about mid span on the wing panel,
almost all
> the lifting loads are transmitted through the lift struts, not the
cabanes. (In
> fact, if there is more wing outboard of the lift strut than inboard, the
load
> on the cabanes is actually in *compression*. We had a Twin Otter that
had a
> wing root fitting fail completely and the airplane continued to fly with
> the wing held to the fuselage by the fairings!).
>
> So the Piet cabanes are loaded to far less than 50lbs, probably less than
> 20 lbs that could be tension or compression depending on the flight
> condition. Pull 5 gs and the load goes to 100 lbs. What's the limit
tensile
> strength of a half inch strap of 4130 at the bolt holes? About 1000
> lbs?
>
> The wing fittings would share most of the 900 lb load between them or
about
> 200 lbs per fitting, which would be 1000 lbs at 5 Gs. What's the tensile
> strength of the 4130 strut fitting? 3 or 4 thousand lbs maybe?
>
> Same with the top fittings. The lift load on the wing root fittings is
mostly a
> compression load trying to push the wing inboard against the center
section,
> which is cancelled at the front fitting by the drag load trying to bend
the
> wing aft. So the most highly stressed component at the center section is
> the inboard compression load on the _rear_ wingroot fitting. The top
cabane
> fittings are doing as little work as the bottom ones. The drag struts
> would probably be loaded the most.
>
> Look at the engine mount also. If the Model A is roughly 250 lbs, there
> is half that or 125 lbs on the front end of the mount (since the other
end
> is on the firewall) or 62lbs on each side. This load is split between
the
> top and bottom mount fittings at the firewall. Even at 5Gs there is not
> much stress on the engine mount fittings; even allowing for moment arms
and
> whatnot there would be no more than a few hundred pounds of shear load
> on each bottom mount bolt.
>
> This little excercise helped convince me what the oldtimers all say, that
> the stucture is adequate with mild steel and is actually much overdone
> when built using 4130. If you modify the fittings you are adding
strength
> that you will never be able to use.
>
> So while there *are* some design features of the Grega that may be nice
to
> have, (like the bigger ailerons), structurally speaking the extra beef in
> the Grega is just ballast.
>
> I'm sure all this is just preaching to the converted.
>
> Regards
>
> John Kahn
> Tech Pubs
> Canadair Regional Jet
> Bomabardier Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Stevee,
I did add an inch to my engine mount and I weigh about 160. I think the
info from Grant's notebook disk says max 20 inches back.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | ANOTHER PIET FLIES!!!! |
Rock Solid First Flight!
Congratulations to Duane Woolsey of Provo UT. on his successful first
flight of his Subaru Powered Pietenpol Air Camper.
The deed was done last night at Spanish Fork airport with Gordon Nichol
at the controls. The flight lasted about 20 minutes. Control feel was
solid and comfortable. During a fast taxi Gordon lifted the tail, the
piet tracked straight. As speed built the controls felt good and before
he knew it the aircraft was airborn, just lifting off the runway.
Ground effect flight was good and with a little back pressure the piet
was headed skyward. Full power was not used and rpms were limited to
4200rpm. Even so the little craft was doing and estimated 700fpm. This
thing is reall going to be a climber! Stall came at about an estimated
35mph. Approach to landing was fast. The airplane was flown into
ground effect to find the correct touchdown speed and attitude. Twice
during flare attempts at what was thought to be a slow enough speed the
plane still wanted to fly, finally agian at about 35mph the wing gave in
and a nice gentle three point landing was made. Again during roll out
the Piet exhibited no wandering tendencies and foot work was minimal.
Gordon says that he has never flown a taildragger easier to handle. His
last comment was "I'm evious already"
Man do I ever want to finish! I have to final rig the wing and just a
few other small details. I put up some pictures as soon as I can get
the digital camera out to capture some images.
Get/Keep Building guys, it's going to be worth it!
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: ANOTHER PIET FLIES!!!! |
Congratulations to Duane !!!! It gives us all a shot in the arm to
keep at it. Like Frank Pavliga told me 4 years ago...'the sooner
you start building the sooner you get to fly it.'
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey) |
Subject: | Re: ANOTHER PIET FLIES!!!! |
Steve Eldredge wrote:
>
> Rock Solid First Flight!
>
> Congratulations to Duane Woolsey of Provo UT. on his successful first
> flight of his Subaru Powered Pietenpol Air Camper.
>
Congratulations Duane! Maybe we will see the new plane at Brodhead next
year?? :)
Bob B.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | djscott(at)heartland.bradley.edu (David Scott) |
Being a mechanical engineer myself, and I am very new at looking
into the piet, I find your note on the cabane fittings rather
heartwarming. I have been helping some with the building starts
efforts of John Fay, who has had his plans for eons, and am looking
at starting one myself. Two built together may take longer with
all the side conversations, but enjoyable build is enjoyable building time anyway.
The plans have no mention of a particular strength or type of
steel for any of the fittings, which I also have done quick, not
as in depth as your discussion, head calculations and concluded
then the same resulting answer -- mild A36 steel will suffice and
not have all the hum-drum expense of 4130.
I wonder if anyone has done the next discussion. If the fittings
are at this strength, is the real weak leak not in the fitting at all?
The mounting at the fusulage (wood) may be such the place. Do
you know if anyone has made such analysis efforts? I believe
some discussion on this might prove useful.
David Scott
102 Avalon Dr
Washington,IL 61571-2902
djscott(at)heartland.bradley.edu
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | POWRACER(at)aol.com |
Congratulations to Duane! They will be having fun in Provo now! Steve, I
will be back in Salt Lake City all next week, so I'll make myself available
evenings if you want some more help finishing yours. Mike List
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
We just received our spars this week from Beartooth Lumber in
Washington.
Price was good and we got them a couple of weeks after ordering them.
They wouldn't sell a 1x4 3/4 plank so we ordered 1x6 thinking we could
use the extra inch for the longerons. What we didn't know and Beartooth
didn't tell us was the material is milled to "finished" dimensions. When the
planks arrived they were only 13/16" thick! We decided to keep them and
use the excess from the 6 inch dimension to build up the caps to a full
inch. Longerons will have to be scarfed together from some shorter
material we have.
As for the quality, on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd give them about a 7. A couple
of minor surface blemishes but overall pretty good. At least one plank has
absolutely 0 grain runout for the entire 16 foot length.
Cost was $ 7.50 per linear foot and shipping, by air, from Washington to
Minneapolis was $ 100.00
Greg Cardinal
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Have you inspected the boards for compression failures, Greg? I'm
assuming it's uncertified wood.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
> Being a mechanical engineer myself, and I am very new at looking
> into the piet, I find your note on the cabane fittings rather
> heartwarming. I have been helping some with the building starts
> efforts of John Fay, who has had his plans for eons, and am looking
> at starting one myself. Two built together may take longer with
> all the side conversations, but enjoyable build is enjoyable building time anyway.
>
> The plans have no mention of a particular strength or type of
> steel for any of the fittings, which I also have done quick, not
> as in depth as your discussion, head calculations and concluded
> then the same resulting answer -- mild A36 steel will suffice and
> not have all the hum-drum expense of 4130.
>
> I wonder if anyone has done the next discussion. If the fittings
> are at this strength, is the real weak leak not in the fitting at all?
> The mounting at the fusulage (wood) may be such the place. Do
> you know if anyone has made such analysis efforts? I believe
> some discussion on this might prove useful.
>
> David Scott
> 102 Avalon Dr
> Washington,IL 61571-2902
I would use 4130 anyway since there just isn't that much steel and the
50% additional tensile strength is there with no weight penalty. I think
there is only a couple hundred dollars of steel in the fittings if that. By the
way, there is a huge cost saving by using round lift struts instead of
streamline tube, about 1/3 of the cost. There is minimal effect on cruise
speed, only a couple of knots, and you can fair them anyway.
I would make the nonstructural brackets like pulley fittings from aluminum.
The plans show a steel strap that connects the strut fittings together
along the bottom of the fuselage, which is supplemented by the hardwood
crossmember. I guess one could almost think of the fuselage as resting in a
pair of steel slings formed by the lift struts and carrythrough straps. Possibly
the only really highly stessed bolt-to-wood joints are the lift strut to
spar fittings and maybe the engine mounts when you add thrust and gyro
loads to the loads from weight. And the landing gear depending on how smooth
the pilot is!
There is mention in the mailbag articles on the website of a fellow
that did a stress analysis on the airframe and concluded the only critical
item that must be added is jury struts to raise the negative G limit above
the 1.5g compression strength calculated for no-jury-strut lift struts.
It would be nice to have a summary from the stress analysis that gives the
calculated maximum load on a given fitting and the tensile strength of the
fitting as made from the plans. That would probably stop most people from
adding meat to the fittings.
I like the way the design, in its old fashionedness, distributes loads
through mulitple paths. eg. I think a lot of people are concerned by having
only two drag bays in the wing, until it's pointed out that the drift wires
for the lift struts share those loads and also relieve the cabanes of much
of the job of keeping the fuselage perpendicular to the wing. You
cetainly wouldn't want to use a vee strut arrangment without redesigning
the whole wing and cabane arrangement.
The one item I think needs to be modified came from the Piet forum at Oshkosh
a couple of years ago, where there was discussion of a crash where the
cabane drag struts collapsed and let the wing come down on the pax's
head. I think the drag struts should be quite beefy to resist collapsing in
compression in a crash. I see a lot of Piets with really skinny drag struts.
I will make them from the same tube as the cabane lift struts.
jk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: Spars -Reply |
It is uncertified. We looked it over closely and didn't find any defects that
would make it unusable for spars.
On an unrelated topic, last Friday we went searching for motorcycle rims
at the local boneyard. Our hubs are built to Howard Henderson's plans
with 40 spoke holes. At the junkyard, 40 hole rims were very rare. After
searching for two hours in a mosquito infested back lot we finally found a
pair of matching 19", 40 hole, alloy rims.
My advice to anyone building their own hubs would be to drill them for 36
spokes. That is a MUCH more common rim.
Greg Cardinal
>>> John Kahn 09/12/97 12:18pm >>>
Have you inspected the boards for compression failures, Greg? I'm
assuming it's uncertified wood.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Greg Cardinal <CARDIGJ(at)mail.startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: Spars -Reply |
It is uncertified. We looked it over closely and didn't find any defects that
would make it unusable for spars.
On an unrelated topic, last Friday we went searching for motorcycle rims
at the local boneyard. Our hubs are built to Howard Henderson's plans
with 40 spoke holes. At the junkyard, 40 hole rims were very rare. After
searching for two hours in a mosquito infested back lot we finally found a
pair of matching 19", 40 hole, alloy rims.
My advice to anyone building their own hubs would be to drill them for 36
spokes. That is a MUCH more common rim.
Greg Cardinal
>>> John Kahn 09/12/97 12:18pm >>>
Have you inspected the boards for compression failures, Greg? I'm
assuming it's uncertified wood.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | grhans(at)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca |
Subject: | Re: Winter Flying |
Hi Richard,
I have been flying my Pietenpol since November 15, 1970. The first flights
were on skis from a snow-covered field and the temperature was about 25 to
30 degrees F. Cool, but tolerable.
Since then I have flown it nearly 700 hours and have, on several occas-
ions, flown it in each of the twelve months of the year. It is a great
little skiplane, but the "heater" leaves a lot to be desired! Nowadays,
I only fly it when the temperature gets above freezing--but when I was a
bit younger (dumber, also), I flew it at much lower temperatures. Since
few people want a ride at these temperatures, I cover the front cockpit
which really helps eliminate the drafts around one's feet.
I'm sure that it doesn't get any colder in Maine than it does here in
the Edmonton, Alberta, Canada area--so if you are younger than I am it
shouldn't be too bad. Do try it as a skiplane; the light weight and good
lift at low speeds is a real advantage over heavier, faster types. (And
I understand you get lots of snow, too.)
While I never did anything about it, a neat side-hinged bubble canopy
for the rear cockpit together with the covered front pit would make it
comfortable--particularly if a cabin heater were installed. Has anyone
out there tried this? Perhaps I'll get around to doing something one of
these days--but then I've been saying this for years....
Cheers to all from the frozen north (I hope El Nino moderates the on-
coming winter more than somewhat so that I can do more winter flying).
Graham Hansen
On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, Richard DeCosta wrote:
> Anyone on the list fly their Piets on winter? I am contemplating
> building one, but I live in Maine, where the winters are
> looooooooooooong and cold. Even though its a beautiful plane, I may
> be forced to build one with an enclosed cockpit, unless enough people
> rave about their Piets telling me it'd be worth the "hangared"
> months. :)
>
> Richard
>
> Web Developer, www.autoeurope.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | HPVSUPPLY(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Flybaby/Piet stuff |
Hi!
What sort of stuff are you looking for? I might have some stuff that will
help you out.
Mike Conkling
Pretty Prairie, KS
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | laur-mac(at)ArkansasUSA.com (LAUR-MAC, INC.) |
Leave
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Begging your further indulgence... |
Richard,
There is a Ford powered Piet flying at Reinbeck Aerodrome. At least
there used to be. The owner's name was Carl. I'd give them a call if
your interested in traveling there.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Begging your further indulgence... |
Craig Lawler is correct. Karl Erikson has a Piet at Old Rhinebeck
Aerodrome. He deemed it un-airworthy a few years back and now
has placed it in the museum on the field. The BPAN had an article
on this plane flying on ski's a few years ago also. Grant MacLaren
could copy you or send you a back issue for the correct money.
Karl is a great guy. He gets to fly the 1909 Bleriot monoplane up
there on weekends for the airshows. They only fly it about 5-10 ft.
off the ground up and down the runway. He's the only guy on the
field light enough for the plane to lift him. It uses a 3 cyl. Anzani
radial engine which usually is only firing on about one or two
cyls at any time !!!! Rhinebeck is a great trip. They have their
info on a page on the Internet. I think mid-Oct. is their last show.
MC
>Richard,
>
>There is a Ford powered Piet flying at Reinbeck Aerodrome. At least
>there used to be. The owner's name was Carl. I'd give them a call if
>your interested in traveling there.
>
>Craig
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Why have I read that you are better off not changing the plane and
sticking with the plans with regard to the wing? Someone wrote that if
they were going to do it over they would have built a one piece instead
of the three piece. Why might that be? Is the one piece wing
permanently fixed when installed or can it possible be removed for
transporting? If it is fixed is it difficult to get it down the road if
need be?
Thanks,
Brent Reed
Kent, WA.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
> Why have I read that you are better off not changing the plane and
> sticking with the plans with regard to the wing? Someone wrote that if
> they were going to do it over they would have built a one piece instead
> of the three piece. Why might that be? Is the one piece wing
> permanently fixed when installed or can it possible be removed for
> transporting? If it is fixed is it difficult to get it down the road if
> need be?
There is a picture in the Flying and Glider manual of a Piet built in the
30s with a _two_ piece wing, which would seem to be the most efficient
compromise between weight saving and ease of dissasembly. It uses A frame
cabanes with one joint at the middle. If you were putting the fuel tank
in the fuselage it would be little trouble. I suspect the reason it
isn't done more is that it changes the look of the airplane quite a lot and
I don't think there are any plans for that type of modification.
johnk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
John,
The reason I said I would have built a one piece wing is that it would
have been lighter and I have the space to build one. We also have a car
trailer that would haul one too, but I doubt that I will ever remove the
wing from the aircraft because it is really a pain.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | D Slade <dslade(at)ezonline.com> |
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi,
my name is Perry Morrison. I'm a management consultant/psych based in
Darwin
Australia. I fly ultralights here and own a Sorrell Hyperlite biplane. I'd
like advice on the advisability of modifying the Piet in these ways:
1. Welded chromoly or similar structure.
2. Stengthening to basic aerobatic capabilities ie +6 and -4 Gs.
3. Putting a more powerful motor in (eg Subaru EA-81).
I'm looking to build a cheap, 2 seat, simple a/c with very basic aerobatic
capabilities ie slow rolls, loops, barrel rolls.
Also, what are the characteristics of the present airfoil. A note on the
BPA
page suggests unpleasant stall characteristics.
I realise that purists would suggest I am trying to turn the Piet to
something
it wasn't intended for.
Dr. Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Skinner <jskinner(at)hurstmfg.com> |
Hello Perry,
My Pietenpol, before it was mine, was flown by someone who said it did great
loops and rolls. It is per plans except for heavy wall struts, with one
piece wing and no jury struts. These sorts of manuvers can be done smoothly
such that they stress the airframe very little. A number of people here in
the states do mild aerobatics in unmodified Cubs and the like. Note that
these are just my observations. I am not a mechanical engineer. I
recommend that you check things out fully before you try anything!
On the engine: mine has a 90 Hp Franklin aircraft engine (4 cylinder
opposed). Performance is VERY good. :)
I know of one person who was putting in a 125 Hp Lycoming GPU. And he added
flaps. Guess he really wanted a helicopter! ;) I lost track of him before
I heard how it flew.
Jim Skinner
>Hi,
>
>my name is Perry Morrison. I'm a management consultant/psych based in
>Darwin
>Australia. I fly ultralights here and own a Sorrell Hyperlite biplane. I'd
>like advice on the advisability of modifying the Piet in these ways:
>
>
>1. Welded chromoly or similar structure.
>2. Stengthening to basic aerobatic capabilities ie +6 and -4 Gs.
>3. Putting a more powerful motor in (eg Subaru EA-81).
>
>I'm looking to build a cheap, 2 seat, simple a/c with very basic aerobatic
>capabilities ie slow rolls, loops, barrel rolls.
>
>Also, what are the characteristics of the present airfoil. A note on the
>BPA
>page suggests unpleasant stall characteristics.
>
>I realise that purists would suggest I am trying to turn the Piet to
>something
>it wasn't intended for.
>
>Dr. Perry Morrison
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dean Dayton <deandayton(at)hotmail.com> |
>1. Welded chromoly or similar structure.
If you have the money, there is nothing wrong with doing this.
>2. Stengthening to basic aerobatic capabilities ie +6 and -4 Gs.
I would really discourage you from doing this. Unless you are capable
of doing a complete structural analysis and redesigning the plane from
the ground up. This plane was not designed for this kind of stress and
a half-hearted attempt to modify it will probably be deadly.
>3. Putting a more powerful motor in (eg Subaru EA-81).
I think the this is probably the same as number 2 above.
>
I am not a purist. But I think that there are better choices out there
for a low cost aerobatic platform. That was never the intent of the
Piet.
Good Luck
Dean Dayton - deandayton(at)hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Having had a ride in one lately, I can tell you the Piet's adequate but
somewhat leisurely roll rate would rule it out for aerobatics before you
even get into structural considerations. Forget about it.
The best airplane in my opinion for cheap aerobatics is a Sonerai II. Steel
tube, metal wings, stressed for about 9G. Rolls about 180deg/second.
Put a Jabiru in it.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Owen Davies <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Among other things, someone asked for:
> 1. Welded chromoly or similar structure.
Note that Bernie himself designed a steel-tube version of the
Piet fuselage. It was analyzed by a structural engineer and
declared to be more than strong enough, even in mild steel.
No reason not to build it from 4130, though. You can find the
plan in the Flying & Glider Manual. I think it was the 1932 issue.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Some new pics on my web page |
Check out
http://steve.byu.edu
Almost Done !
________________________________________________________________________________
Anyone know when we are supposed to recieve the next news letter?
Seems like it has been a long time.
Steve e.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
Whilst daydreaming the other day about build a Piet, a question poped
into my head about the Air Camper. Did Mr. Pietenpol make any
provisions for checking to see if there is any water in the fuel
tank, and if so, draining it? Perhaps this is a feature planes didn't
have till long after his time.
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Michael D Cuy wrote:
>
> I don't intend on using any radios flying my Piet, but maybe on a long
> cross-country to land at a controlled field. Before the fabric goes on
> the fuselage I'd like to string a coaxial cable and tie-wrap it.
> Anybody out there know if that's enough, or would you need to
> buy an external antenna and mount that on the belly also ??
>
> Thanks, Mike C. Clev. OH
Mike , I spent a couple hours at the airport in cleveland yesterday on
my way back to corpus christi from milwaukee and green bay. Continental
a/l has a way of sending you in the wrong direction for a couple of
hours prior to getting you on the right heading. Solid cloud deck over
the lake and not much better over cleveland. Back to your antenna
question , I have an icom a 22 that I use in my A/C as well as an elt. I
mounteed the antenna for the elt near the leading edge of the left wing
and the one for the a22 near the trailing edge of the right wing , both
being mounted on the aluminum wing to root fairingand the coax dreessed
down through the vertical struts withe the elt going under the rear seat
and the com to the right side as that iss the area I hang the a22 in
and tie it to the flightcom and head sets with a push to talk on the
rear stick . Seems to work OK for me . Also have them all tied into a
rechargeable battery pack along with my lowrance gps . Dont like to use
all of those throwaways. I have a continental a-80 so I have plenty of
power for the little extra weight and I dont care about speed but I like
to have the systems aboard when I need them. Ernie. Also a foot note to
anyone interested Quote: from EAA oshkosh 97 bulletin board; ForSale'
Pietenpol engine installation,Ford Pinto 2000 CC 86 HP 8 hours break in
time ,custom aircraft prop drive 74x56 maple prop,engine mounts and
radiator, firewwall forward, ready to go, $950.00 shipping extra .
Call217-735-3280, 5 to 8 PM.Lincoln, Il. End of quote.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
Subject: | A-65 prop options for a piet. |
Howdy Piet People.
I have been flying my A-65 powered Piet for a few hours
with a Hagy 70*40 wood prop. Although the numbers indicate
that it should be a climb prop it is very much a cruise prop!
I really need more climb for those hot Texas days on our
short tree infested runways (its 93 degrees outside!)
My number look like this:
Takeoff 1900 - 2000 rpm
80 mph 2100 rpm
93 mph 2250 rpm (maxed out)
I have seen the other wood props at about 72*42 and wonder
what the performance is like.
I would like to hear what other A-65 Piet owners are getting
out of their props either wood or metal.
Wood is a better choice for me as the metal props are $$$.
Also interested in any props for sale. If metal only interested in
yellow tagable units that can be overhauled by a certificated shop.
Thanx a bunch for any pireps!
Kevin McDonald
Austin, TX.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Richard,
The lowest point in the fuel system should be the gascolator sump drain.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Craig R. Lawler" <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: A-65 prop options for a piet. |
Kevin,
I was running a 72-43 Colver wooden prop and getting about 2,000 on
takeoff. I got them to take a inch of pitch out and am getting about
2150 now. My speed is not as high as yours. At full power I'm only
getting about 80. 1900 works out to about 65 or 70mph.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi John and others!
> Having had a ride in one lately, I can tell you the Piet's adequate but
> somewhat leisurely roll rate would rule it out for aerobatics before you
> even get into structural considerations. Forget about it.
Worth knowing!
>
> The best airplane in my opinion for cheap aerobatics is a Sonerai II.
Steel
> tube, metal wings, stressed for about 9G. Rolls about 180deg/second.
> Put a Jabiru in it.
I've flown Jabirus here in Australia and my personal opinion is that the
Jab is a
nightmare of an engine. Ours had a failure in 22 hrs. It never ran well.
Three
failures in < 100 hrs before the guy sold it. The u/light mag here is
littered
with Jab failures. Mostly upper parts of the engine- valves and guides,
cylinder
studs. That was the 1600 engine. I note the first report here of the 2200.
Same
as always. Beautiful airframe. But the engine certification here was a bit
sus in my
opinion.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
>
> Hi John and others!
>
>
> > Having had a ride in one lately, I can tell you the Piet's adequate but
> > somewhat leisurely roll rate would rule it out for aerobatics before you
> > even get into structural considerations. Forget about it.
>
> Worth knowing!
>
> >
> > The best airplane in my opinion for cheap aerobatics is a Sonerai II.
> Steel
> > tube, metal wings, stressed for about 9G. Rolls about 180deg/second.
> > Put a Jabiru in it.
>
> I've flown Jabirus here in Australia and my personal opinion is that the
> Jab is a
> nightmare of an engine. Ours had a failure in 22 hrs. It never ran well.
> Three
> failures in < 100 hrs before the guy sold it. The u/light mag here is
> littered
> with Jab failures. Mostly upper parts of the engine- valves and guides,
> cylinder
> studs. That was the 1600 engine. I note the first report here of the 2200.
> Same
> as always. Beautiful airframe. But the engine certification here was a bit
> sus in my
> opinion.
>
Now that's good intelligence! Been waiting to hear anecdotal evidence
on the Jabiru for quite a while. Cross out that option...
Now a Sonerai with a Model A... about 40lbs of ballast in the tail would
do it...
jk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike List <mlist(at)ladc.lockheed.com> |
Subject: | Change of e-mail address |
Steve,
Hope you are still making good progress towards completing your Piet. I
know you can taste it!
I am dropping AOL today as my internet provider as I can only seem to
get on between 11pm and 5am. Will contact you in a few days with a new
e-mail address so I can keep up with the chat group.
Thanks.
Mike List (formerly powracer(at)aol.com)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | William Conway <ConwayW(at)ricks.edu> |
I have a number of questions that I'd like some feedback on.
1. Aileron hinges--Can anyone see a problem with using piano hinges
which provide a gap seal at the same time?
2. Wing trailing edges--I've used a piece of folded over aluminum with
rounded TE. They are rigid, light, and with the fold and the edges
bent just a bit more for extra strength, hold up well to fabric pressure.
Any comments?
3. I'd like to confer with some other builders. Is there anyone out there
within 120 miles of Rexburg, ID? I'd also be glad to show and tell.
4. Engine--I'm using a Ford Escort with about 80 hp. I know Ed Lubitz
pioneered this installation. I have his conversion guide, but I'd like
to talk to someone else who is using this type of installation,
particularly about radiator placement/air scoop, and also distributor
conversion. I have my engine mounted and running--but I also have
some doubts, particularly about low end idle. Any comments?
I'm repainting my fusalage this weekend after some damage repair. My
plane is on the Jenny-type gear with motorcycle wheels and mechanical
brakes. I have a one piece wing which just lacks a coat of epoxy
varnish prior to recover with Polyfiber line of products.
Thanks, Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "McNarry, John" <Mcnarry(at)assiniboinec.mb.ca> |
Hi Will
I haven't any answers for you, but wondered how you are controling
you brakes and stopping the axle/backing plate rotation? I really
like the Jenny style gear but have been considering the split gear as
it is easier to anchor the brakes and it may be safer in the event of
a forced landing in tall crops etc. any comments appreciated.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | William Conway <ConwayW(at)ricks.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Piet Stuff -Reply |
I boxed each end of the axle where it sticks through the wooden gear on
each side; in other words, I squared up the axle by welding plates to the
sides. Then I made a verticle slot for them to slide in. This stops rotation
and also limits verticle travel to about 3-4 inches. I haven't flow it yet, but
know it will work. Saw similar setups at Broadhead. Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Introduction to the Pietenpol group |
Hi!
I joined the group a couple weeks ago, but I have been so busy I just haven't
found time to introduce myself until now. I've really enjoyed the discussions.
My name is J. and I live in the Bay Area of California. On weekends I help
out with the restoration of old planes at an antique aircraft museum in
San Martin. I don't know how rare female restorers are, but I am one and I
would like to become one of the best restorers around.
I was amazed to come across all this information about Pietenpols on the Web.
Very useful since at the aicraft museum, we are in the middle of a Pietenpol
restoration. I only wish there was this much information about Piper Cubs out
there, figure that one out!
I would like to restore an old discarded Cub. I am not sure of the model yet,
(J3, L-4, Super Cub) but I would like to be able to do some aerobatics in the
Cub and survive it. I looking into the pros and cons of each model, then I will
begin the hunt for my dilapidated Cub. If anyone has any suggestions re: the
Cub, since it is not Pietenpol related, email me directly. Thanks!
J. Sunlin
Sun Microsystems Inc.
email: jay@pooh-bah.eng.sun.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
perry wrote:
>
> Hi John and others!
>
>
> > Having had a ride in one lately, I can tell you the Piet's adequate but
> > somewhat leisurely roll rate would rule it out for aerobatics before you
> > even get into structural considerations. Forget about it.
>
> Worth knowing!
>
> >
> > The best airplane in my opinion for cheap aerobatics is a Sonerai II.
> Steel
> > tube, metal wings, stressed for about 9G. Rolls about 180deg/second.
> > Put a Jabiru in it.
>
> I've flown Jabirus here in Australia and my personal opinion is that the
> Jab is a
> nightmare of an engine. Ours had a failure in 22 hrs. It never ran well.
> Three
> failures in < 100 hrs before the guy sold it. The u/light mag here is
> littered
> with Jab failures. Mostly upper parts of the engine- valves and guides,
> cylinder
> studs. That was the 1600 engine. I note the first report here of the 2200.
> Same
> as always. Beautiful airframe. But the engine certification here was a bit
> sus in my
> opinion.
Perry, I am quite interested in your comments on the Jab engine . I am
about to build a Kolb Mark Three for Jim Paige overin Rockport Texas and
he does not like the rotex engines and has insisted that I hang a Jabaru
on it . He nor I know anything about the engine except from the data we
have read and talking to the dealer that sells them . It sounds like a
great engine and is 4cy. What you are saying is that is more advertising
than performance. Please elaborate on your experience with the as well
as others that you know that have had a problem with them Thanks Ernie.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi people,
> Perry, I am quite interested in your comments on the Jab engine . I am
> about to build a Kolb Mark Three for Jim Paige overin Rockport Texas and
> he does not like the rotex engines and has insisted that I hang a Jabaru
> on it . He nor I know anything about the engine except from the data we
> have read and talking to the dealer that sells them . It sounds like a
> great engine and is 4cy. What you are saying is that is more advertising
> than performance. Please elaborate on your experience with the as well
> as others that you know that have had a problem with them Thanks Ernie.
The Jab is a lovely engine to hear. It is very small, looks simple and the
Jab airframe is terrific. The engine has had a long history of failure at
the
upper end, Nothing seems to go wrong at the bottom end. It always
seems to be valve related, valve guides, springs, etc. Our club's history
was not unusual. If you really want to get the low down on the Jabiru
engine I can get the email address of the owner of our former plane.
One Jabiru owner passed by and related a saga of 5 engine failures. Again,
this engine wasn't anywhere near overhaul time. I could easily find 2 dozen
or more Jab failures detailed in our mag over the last 2 years. Probably
more, and all would have upper engine symptoms.
I would like to think it was all poor maintenance, but our guys babied the
plane. All of this was based on the Jab 1600 motor.
This is a an extract of a report form the September 1997 AUF mag:
Jabiru 2200:" Engine began to run extremely rough and exhibited substantial
loss of power, with very excessive vibration. Cause: "Inspection revealed
no. 4 cylinder 5/16 inch rocker assembly hold down screw cap ripped out
the full thread from the rocker assembly mount plate, breaking the
assembly shaft housing in half, destroying the adjuster cups in the
process."
Total engine time 132 hrs. 7 hrs since service.
I note that this a/c has 406 airframe hrs and 132 engine hrs, perhaps
indicating
that the 2200 engine is a replacement for a 1600 or another 2200.
MAybe it's too soon to tell about the 2200, but my personal opinion is that
I would not fly on a Jab 1600 of any kind. The failure rate is simply too
high.
Pity, because the airframe is a real winner, I loved flying the plane, and
it would be great to have an Oz success story.
There are probably a dozen theories about the problems with the Jabiru
1600 engine and some conspiracy ones too (like how it got certified).
My advice would be to wait until the 2200 has established a history of
good performance. If it is not substantially different from the 1600, then
the
evidence should be clear pretty soon.
Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
Subject: | Re: Introduction to the Pietenpol group |
> I joined the group a couple weeks ago, but I have been so busy I just haven't
> found time to introduce myself until now. I've really enjoyed the discussions.
>
> My name is J. and I live in the Bay Area of California. On weekends I help
> out with the restoration of old planes at an antique aircraft museum in
> San Martin. I don't know how rare female restorers are, but I am one and I
> would like to become one of the best restorers around.
>
> I was amazed to come across all this information about Pietenpols on the Web.
> Very useful since at the aicraft museum, we are in the middle of a Pietenpol
> restoration. I only wish there was this much information about Piper Cubs out
> there, figure that one out!
>
> I would like to restore an old discarded Cub. I am not sure of the model yet,
> (J3, L-4, Super Cub) but I would like to be able to do some aerobatics in the
> Cub and survive it. I looking into the pros and cons of each model, then I will
> begin the hunt for my dilapidated Cub. If anyone has any suggestions re: the
> Cub, since it is not Pietenpol related, email me directly. Thanks!
>
> J. Sunlin
> Sun Microsystems Inc.
> email: jay@pooh-bah.eng.sun.com
>
>
Marry us all J., puhleeeeeeeeezzzzzz!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Continental Motor Mount Jig |
A year or so there was a continental motor mount jig being passed
around. Does anyone know where it is and it's availability? Thanks.
Brad Schultz
brsch(at)afcon.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
It isn't much now, but I am starting a web site to follow the
progress of my Piet project (right now the only progress is me
waiting for the plans, looking for an engine, etc...).
However, I do have a very large collection of Piet photos, all/most
of which have come from the Buckeye site and others. If there is any
objections to this I will immediately remove them. I think it's
handy, though, to have 60+ photos all in one place.
For those interested:
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder/
Richard
Web Developer, www.autoeurope.com
________________________________________________________________________________
William Conway wrote:
> I have a number of questions that I'd like some feedback on.
>
> 1. Aileron hinges--Can anyone see a problem with using piano hinges
> which provide a gap seal at the same time?
Works well. Someone has plans, I think it is Vi Kapler
>
>
> 2. Wing trailing edges--I've used a piece of folded over aluminum with
>
> rounded TE. They are rigid, light, and with the fold and the
> edges
> bent just a bit more for extra strength, hold up well to fabric
> pressure.
> Any comments?
>
Works well several have used it.
> 3. I'd like to confer with some other builders. Is there anyone out
> there
> within 120 miles of Rexburg, ID? I'd also be glad to show and
> tell.
>
>
I live in provo. In laws live in Burley. I hope to fly it there next
spring/summer.
> 4. Engine--I'm using a Ford Escort with about 80 hp. I know Ed Lubitz
>
> pioneered this installation. I have his conversion guide, but I'd
> like
> to talk to someone else who is using this type of installation,
> particularly about radiator placement/air scoop, and also
> distributor
> conversion. I have my engine mounted and running--but I also have
>
> some doubts, particularly about low end idle. Any comments?
>
Can't help you here mine is a A-65
> I'm repainting my fusalage this weekend after some damage repair. My
> plane is on the Jenny-type gear with motorcycle wheels and mechanical
> brakes. I have a one piece wing which just lacks a coat of epoxy
> varnish prior to recover with Polyfiber line of products.
>
> Thanks, Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com> |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> However, I do have a very large collection of Piet photos, all/most
> of which have come from the Buckeye site and others. If there is any
> objections to this I will immediately remove them. I think it's
> handy, though, to have 60+ photos all in one place.
>
Richard,
Thanks for the supply of photos. Many times the photos answer questions
that come up. I for one hope you will leave them there.
Regards,
Dick Winkel
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
> Thanks for the supply of photos. Many times the photos answer
> questions that come up. I for one hope you will leave them there.
Your quite welcome. I should also mention that if anyone that has
Piet-related photos they would like scanned or exsisting images they
would like available on the web, I have over 550MB of server space
here (really!), so just email me with your stuff or snail mail me the
pics and I'll put 'em online. If I get enough, I'll just make a
separate image page off the main one, with photo credits where
needed. If it would help fellow builders, close shots of each of the
various components being built would be great to have online.
Email: rdecosta(at)wrld.com
Snail mail:
Richard DeCosta
238 Auburn St. #F65
Portland, ME 04103
Also, I will be visiting the Yesterday's Wings Museum in New
Hampshire on Saturday, to get a close look at their Piet, talk to the
pilots/builders, and hopefully I'll be taking along a digital camera.
Look for the photos next week.
Richard
> >
> > However, I do have a very large collection of Piet photos, all/most
> > of which have come from the Buckeye site and others. If there is any
> > objections to this I will immediately remove them. I think it's
> > handy, though, to have 60+ photos all in one place.
> >
>
> Richard,
>
> Thanks for the supply of photos. Many times the photos answer questions
> that come up. I for one hope you will leave them there.
>
> Regards,
> Dick Winkel
>
Web Developer, www.autoeurope.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Continental Motor Mount Jig |
>A year or so there was a continental motor mount jig being passed
>around. Does anyone know where it is and it's availability? Thanks.
>
>Brad Schultz
>brsch(at)afcon.net
>
Boy I need this after you are finished.
Barry Davis
bed(at)mindspring.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Piets in Atlanta? |
Any Piets in the Atlanta area (or builders?)
Barry Davis
bed(at)mindspring.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
Has an owners manual been made for the Piet, either when it was
designed or over the years? In other words, a book that lists Va, Vs,
Vne, preflight procedures, emergency procedures, mainenance, etc...?
Does one come with the plans?
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> It isn't much now, but I am starting a web site to follow the
> progress of my Piet project (right now the only progress is me
> waiting for the plans, looking for an engine, etc...).
>
> However, I do have a very large collection of Piet photos, all/most
> of which have come from the Buckeye site and others. If there is any
> objections to this I will immediately remove them. I think it's
> handy, though, to have 60+ photos all in one place.
>
> For those interested:
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder/
>
> Richard
>
> Web Developer, www.autoeurope.com
Richard, Is the addreaa correct http://www.wrld.com/w3builder/ I
have not been able to get through to your pics on this address. I may be
doing something wrong Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Owners Manual |
>Has an owners manual been made for the Piet, either when it was
>designed or over the years? In other words, a book that lists Va, Vs,
>Vne, preflight procedures, emergency procedures, maintenance, etc...?
>Does one come with the plans?
>
>Richard
Richard- Donald Pietenpol has compiled a manual of facts,
history,
and tips on Model A conversions but it is not a detailed building or
flight manual. You will find that the plans are complete but
still leave you room for solving some things on your own.
I spend alot of time just thinking thru how I'd like to do the
next step or in which order.
As some of us here have said previously we have never seen two
Pietenpols built alike. (Even Pietenpol himself didn't build two
alike.) They all look, feel, and fly just a little bit different from
each other. Pietenpol's goal in design and building was to
keep it simple and light weight. If you keep your thinking like
that you'll end up with a wonderful airplane.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
Subject: | Re: Owners Manual |
Actually, my question had more to do with flight operations than
building. Once the plane is done, has a set of flying procedures been
produced by anyone? For exemple, when I got my pilot's liscence, I
had to know every page of the Cessna 152 & 172 Owner's Manuals, which
included evrything from a Pre-Flight checklist to V-speeds to weight
and balance. I tend to be a somewhat anal, "by-the-book" kind of
pilot (my obsession with safety is famous at the flight school at
PWM) and would LOVE to see this kind of book for the Piet. If not,
well, I may just have to write my own... :)
Richard
> Richard- Donald Pietenpol has compiled a manual of facts,
> history,
> and tips on Model A conversions but it is not a detailed building or
> flight manual. You will find that the plans are complete but
> still leave you room for solving some things on your own.
> I spend alot of time just thinking thru how I'd like to do the
> next step or in which order.
> As some of us here have said previously we have never seen two
> Pietenpols built alike. (Even Pietenpol himself didn't build two
> alike.) They all look, feel, and fly just a little bit different from
> each other. Pietenpol's goal in design and building was to
> keep it simple and light weight. If you keep your thinking like
> that you'll end up with a wonderful airplane.
>
> Mike C.
>
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> Subject: Re: Owners Manual
> Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>
> >Has an owners manual been made for the Piet, either when it was
>
> >designed or over the years? In other words, a book that lists Va,
> >Vs,
>
> >Vne, preflight procedures, emergency procedures, maintenance,
> >etc...?
>
> >Does one come with the plans?
>
> >
>
> >Richard
Web Developer, www.autoeurope.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
Subject: | Re: Owners Manual |
Richard,
Because the Piet was designed so long ago, before the federal
government was so involved, and because as stated earlier each Piet is a
little different, there hasn't been an end-all performance sheet or
operations manual written. Every builder ends up creating their own.
Be it in their mind or on paper. If you write one for your ship it may
not apply to mine.
I have been told by those who have flown both that the Piet
flies more like a Jenny than any other ship and there's an old adage for
the Jenny that states "There are only three rules to flying the Jenny;
1) Keep your airspeed up. 2) Keep your airspeed up. 3) Keep your
airspeed up." When dealing with a Pietenpol, you are truly transported
back to the early days of flying. Thank heavens!
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clawler <clawler(at)Ptd.Net> |
Subject: | Re: Owners Manual |
Rich,
I have a friend that is really into performance numbers. He was asking
me what my max criuse is and I must admit that I have been having so
much fun flying I haven't been real exact about numbers. Maybe a Peit is
not a real exact aircraft? Anyway I think I am getting about 67mph at
1900rpm. 500fpm at 50 and just a little better than 75 wide open. At a
high angle of attack the AS is not accurate, but the piet gives me lots
of notice that I getting slow. Even in a drastic slip the back wing
gently start to drop if I get too slow. In fact some bugs got in the
peto(sp) tube. Didn't notice on preflight. I got several landings better
than normal without AS.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
Richard
Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com
Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
> From Steve(at)byu.edu Fri Oct 10 10:54:49 1997
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:52:52 +0000
> From: rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta)
> Subject: Climbing
> Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
> there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
>
> Richard
Ahh.. a Red Dwarf fan...
john kahn
________________________________________________________________________________
>After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
>there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
>in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
Well, I made it to Brodhead this summer and took a ride in a Piet there.
Let's just say that at 6'2", I did a fair amount of yoga to get into the
front. Kinda stepped up, worked my way through the wires so that most of
my body was sticking out under the *opposite* wing, then backed my legs in.
Not huge fun, but getting out was easier.
And, once inside, it was suprisingly roomy. At least much moreso than it
looked from outside.
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
Steve Pugh wrote:
>
> >After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
>
> >there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> >in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
>
> Well, I made it to Brodhead this summer and took a ride in a Piet
> there.
> Let's just say that at 6'2", I did a fair amount of yoga to get into
> the
> front. Kinda stepped up, worked my way through the wires so that most
> of
> my body was sticking out under the *opposite* wing, then backed my
> legs in.
> Not huge fun, but getting out was easier.
>
> And, once inside, it was suprisingly roomy. At least much moreso than
> it
> looked from outside.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Steve Pugh
Well after just putting on my struts and every other obstruction, I had
to climb in my front cockpit to fasten a bolt for the
wing diagonals. I did make it, at 210lbs and 5'10" but it wasn't
without thinking- " here I am alone, in the night, in a closed
building,
doors locked, nearly stuck." "Uhm.... Better not get stuck"
Everything was ok and I didn't even have to take off my shoes this time.
Steve e.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
Which brings me to another important question. It's one that we don't
like to think much about, but we must. Considering what must be done
to get in and out of the front cockpit, AND the fact that the gas
tank is right in your lap up there, has anyone thought about what
would happen in a crash situation? What is one to do? Does one
get out in time? This is aweful, I know, but it must be thought
about.
Richard
> Well after just putting on my struts and every other obstruction, I
> had to climb in my front cockpit to fasten a bolt for the wing
> diagonals. I did make it, at 210lbs and 5'10" but it wasn't without
> thinking- " here I am alone, in the night, in a closed building,
> doors locked, nearly stuck." "Uhm.... Better not get stuck"
> Everything was ok and I didn't even have to take off my shoes this
> time.
>
> Steve e.
> Steve Pugh wrote:
>
> >
> > >After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the
> > >Piet,
> >
> > >there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you
> > >get in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
> >
> > Well, I made it to Brodhead this summer and took a ride in a Piet
> > there. Let's just say that at 6'2", I did a fair amount of yoga to
> > get into the front. Kinda stepped up, worked my way through the
> > wires so that most of my body was sticking out under the
> > *opposite* wing, then backed my legs in.
> > Not huge fun, but getting out was easier.
> >
> > And, once inside, it was suprisingly roomy. At least much moreso
> > than it looked from outside.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Steve Pugh
>
Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com
Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
>Which brings me to another important question. It's one that we don't
>like to think much about, but we must. Considering what must be done
>to get in and out of the front cockpit, AND the fact that the gas
>tank is right in your lap up there, has anyone thought about what
>would happen in a crash situation? What is one to do? Does one
>get out in time? This is aweful, I know, but it must be thought
>about.
I wondered about that as I was flying in the front (or, more accurately, as
I was getting out..). Don't know the answer, but I do like the slow
approach to a perfectly flat grass field for all my emergencies ;-)
As for the 99% of the time where said field isn't available, I dunno.
Cheers,
Steve Pugh
Senior Systems Engineer
Foundation Imaging
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "McNarry, John" <Mcnarry(at)assiniboinec.mb.ca> |
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
Richard
Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com
Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
Its a bit of a challenge all right but I've seen some pretty big guys
do it. You can be assured that once in there it is an experience
you'll dream about!
Thanks for the pic's posted on your site they are great! Saved them
all. Even found one of me,( standing in the way) looking at Jim
Kinsella's beautiful handywork.
Any chace someone out there could make a screen saver slide show out
of this?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jimsury(at)fbtc.net (Jim Sury) |
Subject: | Drag and Antidrag wires |
I was just wondering what most builders of Pietenpols are using for drag
and anti-drag wires. I'm thinking of using 9 ga. spring steel wire. Any
comments for or against spring steel will be appreciated.
Jim Sury
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "ernest l. hagness" <ehagness(at)mail.interconnect.net> |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
> there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
>
> Richard
>
> Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com
> Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
Richard. It aint easy. I have beenhung up in that area several times and
needed an assist for in and out ,but I am 6-1 and 65 shorter younger
folks find it not so hard to do but it is worth the effort. one day I
expect that I will get stuck in there and will have to be cut out. E.H
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
Subject: | My First "In-Person" look at a Piet |
Well, it's been a very interesting day at the airfield. My wife & son
& I left at 6am this morning to go there, had a pancake breakfast at
the field to benefit the local EAA, and tehn I got my first in-person
look at the Piet. What a pretty bird! I will have about 15+ pictures
of it plus other planes that flew in there, by Monday noon-ish.
My first impression of the Piet was "Wow, its alot smaller in
person!" I was expecting a bigger plane. No matter. after a good look
at the cockpit I decided its just fine. This particular plane was in
MINT condition, an absolutely gorgeous airplane inside and out!.--
Unfortunately, it's not quite so mint anymore. Just after touchdown
on it's first flight of the day, the right bungee cord snapped, the
wheel got pushed back, rubbed against the cable, which acted as a
brake, and the poor guy flipped right over onto its back. Myself, the
pilots father, and another gentleman who were standing right next
to the runway (me with my camera) ran to the plane immediately. Turns
out the pilot had just a bloody nose and a bruised ego, but the poor
little Piet is going to need at least a winter's worth of work. :(
For a while afterwards, I started to have my doubts about the plane,
but, this is the first encounter I've had with one, and accidents
will happen. Hopefully I will be able to see it fly again in the
spring. In the meanwhile, I wait for my plans to arrive...
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta) |
For those of you who tried to access my Piet page over the weekend,
yes, it was down all weekend. :( Its back up now, and has new
pictures of the beautiful plane at Yesterday's Wings.
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder/
Richard
Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com
Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com> |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
> there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
>
I went to Brodhead '96 hoping to answer the same question. Took
photos. The pictures are on my web site at:
http://www.i2k.com/~rwinkel
Follow the link to the "Aeroplane" page.
Have not yet been in a (fully assembled) Piet. Would appreciate
comments from any more experienced than myself. Is the demonstrated
technique proper/best? The sheet metal in front of the front 'pit had
been bent by careless passengers during entry. Is that common?
Dick Winkel
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn) |
> From Steve(at)byu.edu Mon Oct 13 23:48:09 1997
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:43:22 -0400
> From: Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com>
> Subject: Re: Climbing
> Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.02 (Win95; U) (via Mercury MTS v1.31 (NDS))
> X-Listname:
> Content-Length: 699
>
> Richard DeCosta wrote:
> >
> > After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
> > there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> > in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
> >
>
> I went to Brodhead '96 hoping to answer the same question. Took
> photos. The pictures are on my web site at:
> http://www.i2k.com/~rwinkel
> Follow the link to the "Aeroplane" page.
>
> Have not yet been in a (fully assembled) Piet. Would appreciate
> comments from any more experienced than myself. Is the demonstrated
> technique proper/best? The sheet metal in front of the front 'pit had
> been bent by careless passengers during entry. Is that common?
>
>
> Dick Winkel
>
I'm 6' 195lbs and I had relatively little trouble getting in the front pit. You
basically get along side it and hike one leg over onto the seat, then put
your torso right through and out over the opposite side, at which point it
is possible to draw your other leg into the cockpit, at which point you can
now worm your way into the seat. It was just big enough for me. It wasn't
much harder than folding and spindling your way into the front of a J-3.
It's actually harder to get out than in (reverse the getting in procedure).
It would be nice to have a nice big step (like an oak plank "running board"
attached to the front and aft gear legs) because it's easy to slip and fall
and get sliced and diced by the drift wires between the struts.
The rear cockpit is almost as difficult if there is no scallop cut out of the
trailing edge.
John Kahn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary McArthur <garymc(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
John Kahn wrote:
>
> > From Steve(at)byu.edu Mon Oct 13 23:48:09 1997
> > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:43:22 -0400
> > From: Richard Winkel <rwinkel(at)i2k.com>
> > Subject: Re: Climbing
> > Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.02 (Win95; U) (via Mercury MTS v1.31 (NDS))
> > X-Listname:
> > Content-Length: 699
> >
> > Richard DeCosta wrote:
> > >
> > > After looking and looking at the photos I have collected of the Piet,
> > > there's one thing I still can't figure out: "How the smeg do you get
> > > in the front cockpit!?" Maybe it's more obvious in person...
> > >
> >
> > I went to Brodhead '96 hoping to answer the same question. Took
> > photos. The pictures are on my web site at:
> > http://www.i2k.com/~rwinkel
> > Follow the link to the "Aeroplane" page.
> >
> > Have not yet been in a (fully assembled) Piet. Would appreciate
> > comments from any more experienced than myself. Is the demonstrated
> > technique proper/best? The sheet metal in front of the front 'pit had
> > been bent by careless passengers during entry. Is that common?
> >
> >
> > Dick Winkel
>
> >
> I'm 6' 195lbs and I had relatively little trouble getting in the front pit. You
> basically get along side it and hike one leg over onto the seat, then put
> your torso right through and out over the opposite side, at which point it
> is possible to draw your other leg into the cockpit, at which point you can
> now worm your way into the seat. It was just big enough for me. It wasn't
> much harder than folding and spindling your way into the front of a J-3.
>
> It's actually harder to get out than in (reverse the getting in procedure).
> It would be nice to have a nice big step (like an oak plank "running board"
> attached to the front and aft gear legs) because it's easy to slip and fall
> and get sliced and diced by the drift wires between the struts.
>
> The rear cockpit is almost as difficult if there is no scallop cut out of the
> trailing edge.
>
> John Kahn
All:
Which brings to mind... How many are building the "flop" into the
trailing edge to facilitate entry and exit? Are some of you just leaving
the trailing edge "straight" or a permanent "cut-out"?
Gary "I've got the flop"...:)
________________________________________________________________________________
June 03, 1997 - October 14, 1997
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ab